• Can inscriptions help reconstruct how a kingdom expanded across a landscape?

King Citrasena (Chitrasen, later known as Mahendravarman) ruled Chenla in the late 6th to early 7th centuries, during a period when Chenla’s influence was extending across parts of what are now Cambodia, Laos and northeastern Thailand. His reign is known partly through inscriptions recording religious foundations, royal achievements and other acts of authority. 

Pailoplee and Khatshima map 21 inscriptions from at least 19 locations associated with Citrasena, and asked if people were moving between these places, which routes would they have taken? To explore this, they use Least Cost Path (LCP) modelling in a GIS. LCP calculates routes that minimise the “cost” of movement across terrain.

In archaeology, this can help identify plausible corridors shaped by features such as slopes, river valleys and mountain barriers. These models show how movement could have been structured by the landscape under the assumptions of the model.

Across several scenarios, the reconstructed paths repeatedly concentrate around major river systems—especially the Mun River—and particular passes through the Phnom Dong Rek (Dangrek) mountain range. The authors also compare the modelled network with archaeological sites attributed to Citrasena’s period, many of which fall along these reconstructed corridors.

Where river navigation would have been difficult (such as the Khone Phapheng Falls), the authors propose that Citrasena’s forces may instead have moved overland along riverbanks, using waterways as natural guides through the landscape.

The placement of several inscriptions near river confluences also suggests that these locations may have been important for controlling movement, communication and exchange, not simply access to water.

Reference
Pailoplee, S. & Khatshima, K. 2026. “The role of King Chitrasen (Mahendravarman) in the expansion of the Chenla Kingdom: A study of inscriptions and historical geography.” Social Sciences & Humanities Open 14, 103503.
10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.103503

#SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Cambodia #Thailand #Laos #Chenla
  • Sometimes the biggest archaeological questions depend on evidence we cannot see during excavation.

Microarchaeology investigates archaeological deposits at microscopic and microstratigraphic scales. In Southeast Asia, this can be especially valuable because monsoonal wetness, tropical weathering, intensive land use and complex depositional histories can affect how archaeological evidence survives. 

Researchers can examine the surrounding sediment for traces of past activity and later disturbance. Methods discussed in this new paper include sediment micromorphology, laboratory micro-excavation, high-resolution imaging, FTIR microscopy and SEM-EDS. Depending on the context, microscopic evidence can help identify burning, trampling, plant processing, sediment movement and environmental change. 

The importance of that context is illustrated by work in northern Laos. At Tam Ngu Hao 2, microstratigraphy was used alongside lithological observations and dating to establish the stratigraphic context of Denisovan fossil evidence. At Tam Pà Ling, it has shown potential for investigating environmental seasonality and possible patterns of early modern human presence. These methods help archaeologists understand what happened to a deposit before drawing conclusions from what it contains.
 
The paper also introduces the Australian Microarchaeology and Palaeosciences Facility (AusMAP) and argues for greater collaboration, training and locally based microarchaeological expertise across Southeast Asia. 

Reference:
Hernandez et al. 2026. Scaling down to look further back: Southeast Asia, deep-time science and microarchaeology. SPAFA Journal 10.
10.26721/spafajournal.651369a4y8 

#SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Archaeology #Microarchaeology #Geoarchaeology #ArchaeologicalScience
  • This week on Southeast Asian Archaeology: claims, contexts and careful reading.⠀
⠀
With Malaysia’s National Day, Vietnam’s National Day, Timor-Leste’s Popular Consultation Day, and International Literacy Day all close together, I’m thinking about literacy not just as reading words, but reading evidence: museum labels, old spellings, dates, maps, artefacts, archives, and the occasional viral post with a raised eyebrow.⠀
⠀
The catalyst this week is the recent controversy over historical claims in Malaysia, alongside a timely RSIS piece on how historians, archaeologists, archivists, librarians and curators can help push back against disinformation. Not by attacking people, but by helping everyone ask better questions of the past.⠀
⠀
Also in this week’s issue: Penang’s historical Malay spellings, Cambodia’s new artefact database grant, Singapore’s revised History Gallery, UNESCO’s maritime museum project, new research on Sundadonty, Roti Island, Chenla inscriptions, ancient Myanmar, and more.⠀
⠀
Link in bio.⠀
⠀
#SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Archaeology #Heritage #InformationLiteracy
  • How old are the rock paintings of Mainland Southeast Asia? 🎨🪨

A new study from Mangguan in Yunnan, southwestern China, provides another important piece of the puzzle.

Using uranium-thorium dating, researchers analysed tiny calcite deposits that had formed over the paintings. Because the calcite must be younger than the pigment underneath, the dates provide a minimum age for the art. One deposit covering a human figure shows that the painting was already there at least 4,220 years ago.

Mangguan is particularly interesting because it lies only about 15 km from the better-known Cangyuan rock art complex. The two have stylistic similarities and overlapping dates, suggesting they formed part of a broader regional rock art tradition, a comparison can be taken farther south.

The rock paintings at Pha Taem in Luang Prabang, Laos, have previously been compared with Cangyuan, raising intriguing questions about relationships between the rock art traditions of southwestern China and Mainland Southeast Asia.

Most rock art in Mainland Southeast Asia remains poorly dated, so dates like those from Mangguan give us increasingly useful chronological anchors for thinking about these connections.

References:
Wu, Y. et al. 2026. U-Th dating of rock paintings in southwestern China: minimum age of ~4.2 ka BP at the Mangguan site. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 74, 105987. DOI: 10.1016/j.jasrep.2026.105987.

Bo, X. 2020. On the relationship between the Cangyuan rock art in Yunnan, China, and the Pha Taem rock art in Laos. Rock Art Research 37(2).

Tan, N.H. 2018. The Cliff Paintings of Pha Taem, Luang Prabang, Lao PDR. Rock Art Research 35(1).

#RockArt #SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Yunnan #China
  • Extraordinary claims about the past can be exciting. But how do we tell an exciting new hypothesis from pseudoarchaeology?

Recent controversy in Malaysia over claims that ancient Malays taught the Romans shipbuilding provides a useful case study. Rather than piling on the person behind the claims, I think there is a more useful question to ask: how would we actually test an idea like this?

Archaeology gives us some simple tools.

Do the dates work? What is the primary evidence? Does the evidence actually demonstrate the connection being claimed? Are there better explanations? And perhaps most importantly: what evidence would make us reject the hypothesis?

Ancient Southeast Asians really were sophisticated seafarers. Srivijaya really was one of Asia’s great maritime powers. Sungai Batu really does preserve remarkable evidence for early iron production.

None of those achievements needs embellishment to make Southeast Asian archaeology extraordinary.

Swipe through for five questions you can use the next time you encounter an astonishing claim about the ancient past.

🚩 Remember: possibility is not evidence, similarity does not necessarily mean transmission, and extraordinary claims still have to survive ordinary archaeological scrutiny.

Read more about the archaeology behind these claims in this week’s Southeast Asian Archaeology Newsletter.

#SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Pseudoarchaeology #Malaysia #MaritimeArchaeology #MediaLiteracy
  • A 4,000-year-old painted stone from Wetar Island may change how we understand the Austronesian story.⠀
⠀
Archaeologists excavating Huknaur 1 in Southeast Indonesia found a painted plaque with a red sun-ray motif linked to the Austronesian Painting Tradition — a wider visual tradition known from eastern Indonesia and nearby islands.⠀
⠀
What makes this find so important is that the plaque appears to be older than the first pottery at the site. That means a shared symbolic tradition may have been present before the full Neolithic package usually associated with Austronesian expansion. This discovery suggests that ideas, symbols, and identity may have travelled ahead of pottery.⠀
⠀
It is a reminder that the spread of people goes beyond tools, crops, or ceramics, and may also have been about belief, belonging, and a shared visual language carried across the sea.⠀
⠀
Swipe through to see why this small object has such big implications.⠀
⠀
Reference:⠀
O’Connor, S., Kealy, S., Kaharudin, H.A.F., et al. (2026). 4000-year-old painted plaque from Southeast Indonesia reveals Austronesian Painting Tradition preceded Neolithic pottery. PNAS 123(34): e2611580123.⠀
⠀
#SoutheastAsianArchaeology #RockArt #Austronesian #Indonesia #Wetar #SoutheastAsia #IslandSoutheastAsia #AustronesianPaintingTradition
  • Plaques, Ponds and Provenance⠀
⠀
This week’s newsletter begins with a 4,000-year-old painted plaque from Wetar Island — a small object with a big story.⠀
⠀
The plaque carries a red sun-like motif linked to the Austronesian Painting Tradition, and it appears before pottery at the site. That suggests visual symbols and shared ideas may have moved through maritime Southeast Asia before some of the usual archaeological markers we associate with Austronesian expansion.⠀
⠀
Also this week: archaeology beneath Angkor’s Sras Srang, suspected Ban Chiang artefacts offered for return from Switzerland, and more heritage news from across the region.⠀
⠀
Link in bio.
  • How do you make a 3-metre stone stand upright for centuries?

At Hintang in northern Laos, archaeologists are beginning to answer that question.

In 2025, a Lao-Australian team excavated Site 7A — the first excavation at a Hintang standing-stone site in around 90 years. Beneath the surface, they found that the stones had been set deeply into pits, with smaller rocks packed around their bases to stabilise them. Roughly one-third of each standing stone was buried underground.

One big question remains, though — how old are the Hintang stones?

Samples were collected for dating, but those results are still being analysed. So, for now, we understand a little more about how these monuments were built.

📖 Shewan, L., O’Reilly, D., Armstrong, B. & Butphachit, A. (2026). “Surveys of Hintang standing stone sites and excavations at Site 7A, Houaphanh, Lao PDR.” Antiquity.
doi: 10.15184/aqy.2026.10408

#Archaeology #SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Laos #Megaliths #Hintang #AncientTechnology #ArchaeologicalResearch #Heritage #NewResearch
  • Angkor’s water system is famous for its scale: enormous reservoirs, long canals, and monumental engineering.⠀
⠀
New research by archaeologist Sarah Klassen highlights how Angkor’s agricultural system also depended on more than 1,000 local temple communities spread across the Greater Angkor Region. These communities helped organise labour, manage local water systems, and coordinate rice production - and suggests that Angkor’s success was built through a combination of top-down and bottom-up management.⠀
⠀
The state created the large hydraulic framework. Local communities adapted to it, expanded around it, and helped make the wider agricultural landscape function.⠀
⠀
Over time, however, this balance changed. Land and resources became increasingly concentrated, the system became more centralised, and some of the flexibility that had helped Angkor cope with earlier environmental stress may have been lost.⠀
⠀
Beyond its temples and kings, Angkor
  • New Evidence from the Southeast Asian Borderlands⠀
⠀
This week in Southeast Asian Archaeology: new dates, new methods, and some wonderfully untidy timelines.⠀
⠀
🪨 Uranium-thorium dating pushes the Mangguan rock paintings in Yunnan back to at least 4,220 years ago⠀
 🥁 AI-assisted restoration takes on damaged imagery on Guangxi bronze drums⠀
 🌾 New work at Angkor asks how infrastructure, local communities and water management shaped resilience⠀
 🗿 Lao-Australian fieldwork maps and excavates the enigmatic Hintang standing stones⠀
⠀
Plus archaeology and heritage news from across Southeast Asia, new research, opportunities, and more.⠀
⠀
I’ve also started experimenting with short visual explainers of new archaeology papers here on Instagram — so follow along if you like your archaeology with fewer footnotes and more pixels.⠀
⠀
Read the latest SEAArch newsletter via the link in bio.⠀
⠀
#Archaeology #SoutheastAsianArchaeology #SoutheastAsia #RockArt #Angkor #Laos #Yunnan #Heritage #ArchaeologicalResearch #DigitalHeritage
Saturday, September 5, 2026
Southeast Asian Archaeology
  • News
  • Resources
  • Countries
    • Southeast Asia
    • Mainland Southeast Asia
      • Cambodia
      • Laos
      • Malaysia
      • Myanmar
      • Thailand
      • Vietnam
    • Island Southeast Asia
      • Brunei
      • Indonesia
      • Malaysia
      • Philippines
      • Singapore
      • Timor Leste
    • Peripheral Southeast Asia
  • Topics
    • Artifact Type
      • Architecture
      • Bones and Burials
      • Ceramics
      • Intangible Cultural Heritage
      • Lithics
      • Megaliths
      • Rock Art
      • Sculpture
    • Field
      • Anthropology
      • Bioarchaeology
      • Epigraphy
      • General Archaeology
      • Metallurgy and Metalworking
      • Paleontology
      • Underwater Archaeology
      • Visual Art
      • Zooarchaeology
    • Other Themes
      • Animism
      • Buddhism
      • Christianity
      • Disaster Risk Management
      • Hinduism
      • Islam
      • Archaeological Tourism in Southeast Asia
  • Visit
    • Virtual Archaeology
    • Unesco World Heritage
  • Jobs
  • Subscribe
  • About
    • About
    • Supporters
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact
No Result
View All Result
Southeast Asian Archaeology
  • News
  • Resources
  • Countries
    • Southeast Asia
    • Mainland Southeast Asia
      • Cambodia
      • Laos
      • Malaysia
      • Myanmar
      • Thailand
      • Vietnam
    • Island Southeast Asia
      • Brunei
      • Indonesia
      • Malaysia
      • Philippines
      • Singapore
      • Timor Leste
    • Peripheral Southeast Asia
  • Topics
    • Artifact Type
      • Architecture
      • Bones and Burials
      • Ceramics
      • Intangible Cultural Heritage
      • Lithics
      • Megaliths
      • Rock Art
      • Sculpture
    • Field
      • Anthropology
      • Bioarchaeology
      • Epigraphy
      • General Archaeology
      • Metallurgy and Metalworking
      • Paleontology
      • Underwater Archaeology
      • Visual Art
      • Zooarchaeology
    • Other Themes
      • Animism
      • Buddhism
      • Christianity
      • Disaster Risk Management
      • Hinduism
      • Islam
      • Archaeological Tourism in Southeast Asia
  • Visit
    • Virtual Archaeology
    • Unesco World Heritage
  • Jobs
  • Subscribe
  • About
    • About
    • Supporters
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact
No Result
View All Result
Southeast Asian Archaeology
No Result
View All Result
ADVERTISEMENT

Related Posts

[Paper] Investigating the Risk of Violence During the Neolithic to the Late Iron Age in Northeast Thailand (c. 1400 B.C. – A.D. 800)

31 July 2024
0
64

...

[Paper] Intangible maritime heritage protection in Malaysia: The need for a revision of the National Heritage Act of 2005

26 July 2024
0
39

...

Source Taninai 2024

[Paper] International Coordinating Committee for Angkor (ICC-Angkor): Reflections from Diplomatic Perspectives

24 July 2024
0
33

...

Source: Koad and Deesamutara 2024

[Paper] Examining trade routes through the Thai–Malay Peninsula: A simulation analysis

23 July 2024
0
199

...

Popular This Week

  • Southeast Asian Archaeology memes that will tickle your funny bone and also make you ponder

    Southeast Asian Archaeology memes that will tickle your funny bone and also make you ponder

    68 shares
    Share 68 Tweet 0
  • The most influential books on Southeast Asian Archaeology (a crowdsourced list)

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Southeast Asian Archaeology from a Rock Art Perspective (with annotations)

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • [Paper] Early Metal Age Settlement at the Site of Palemba, Kalumpang, Karama Valley, West Sulawesi

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Negritos or Malays: Who are the original inhabitants of the Philippines?

    2 shares
    Share 2 Tweet 0
Buy me a coffeeBuy me a coffee

If you found this site useful, you can help support it by buying me a coffee!

[Paper] Early ground axe technology in Wallacea: The first excavations on Obi Island

21 August 2020
in Indonesia
Tags: Austronesian (peoples)axebeadslithicsNorth Maluku (province)Obi (island)obsidianPleistocenePLOS One (journal)prehistoryresearch papersSue O'Connor (person)
6
SHARES
1.6k
VIEWS
Edge ground stone tools from Obi Island. Source: Shipton et al. PloSOne/ANU

Edge ground stone tools from Obi Island. Source: Shipton et al. PloSOne/ANU

via PLoSOne: A new Open Access paper by Shipton et al. about the archaeology of Obi Island in northern Maluku, revealing prehistoric habitation between 18,000-10,000 years ago.

The first excavations on Obi Island, north-east Wallacea, reveal three phases of occupation beginning in the terminal Pleistocene. Ground shell artefacts appear at the end of the terminal Pleistocene, the earliest examples in Wallacea. In the subsequent early Holocene occupation phase, ground stone axe flakes appear, which are again the earliest examples in Wallacea. Ground axes were likely instrumental to subsistence in Obi’s dense tropical forest. From ~8000 BP there was a hiatus lasting several millennia, perhaps because increased precipitation and forest density made the sites inhospitable. The site was reoccupied in the Metal Age, with this third phase including quadrangular ground stone artefacts, as well as pottery and pigs; reflecting Austronesian influences. Greater connectivity at this time is also indicated by an Oliva shell bead tradition that occurs in southern Wallacea and an exotic obsidian artefact. The emergence of ground axes on Obi is an independent example of a broader pattern of intensification at the Pleistocene-Holocene transition in Wallacea and New Guinea, evincing human innovation in response to rapid environmental change.

Source: Early ground axe technology in Wallacea: The first excavations on Obi Island

See also:

  • Stone tools from a remote cave reveal how island-hopping humans made a living in the jungle millennia ago | The Conversation, 20 August 2020

Stone tools from a remote cave reveal how island-hopping humans made a living in the jungle millennia ago

ANU, Author provided
Shimona Kealy, Australian National University and Sue O’Connor, Australian National University

Prehistoric axes and beads found in caves on a remote Indonesian island suggest this was a crucial staging post for seafaring people who lived in this region as the last ice age was coming to an end.

Our discoveries, published today in PLOS ONE, suggest humans arrived on the tropical island of Obi at least 18,000 years ago, successfully making a living there for at least the next 10,000 years.

It also provides the first direct archaeological evidence to support the idea these islands were crucial for humans’ island-hopping migration through this region millennia ago.

In early April 2019, we and our colleagues in Indonesia became the first archaeologists to explore Obi, in Indonesia’s Maluku Utara province.

We found the oldest example from east Indonesia of edge-ground axes, made by grinding a piece of stone to a sharp blade against a rough material such as sandstone. These were likely used for clearing the forest and making dugout canoes.

Hand holding a prehistoric stone axe
Stone axes were vital tools for clearing forest and making canoes. ANU, Author provided

Our discoveries suggest the prehistoric people who lived on Obi were adept on both land and sea, hunting in the dense rainforest, foraging by the sea, and possibly even making canoes for voyaging between islands.

Our research is part of a project to learn more about how people first dispersed from mainland Asia, through the Indonesian archipelago and into Sahul, the prehistoric continent that once connected Australia and New Guinea.

An island stepping-stone

Recent models by CABAH researchers identified the collection of small islands in northeast Indonesia – and Obi in particular – as the most likely “stepping-stones” used by humans on their very first journey east towards northern Sahul (modern-day New Guinea), about 65,000-50,000 years ago.

Map of Obi and surrounding islands
Map of the region showing the location of Obi island and the sites excavated by the team, and the previous geography of the region when sea levels were lower.

Migrating through this region, which is named Wallacea after the explorer and naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace, would have required multiple sea crossings. This enormous archipelago thus has a unique significance in human history, as the region where people first set out on deliberate long sea voyages.

Our earlier research suggested the northern Wallacean islands, including Obi, would have offered the easiest migration route. But to back this theory, we need archaeological evidence for humans living in this remote area in the ancient past. So we travelled to Obi to look for cave sites that might reveal evidence of early occupation.


Read more: Island-hopping study shows the most likely route the first people took to Australia


Tools and treasure

We found two rock shelter sites, just inland from the village of Kelo on Obi’s northern coast, that were suitable for excavation. With the permission and help of the local people of Kelo, we dug a small test excavation in each shelter.

We found numberous artefacts including fragments of edge-ground axes, some dating to about 14,000 years ago. The earliest ground axes at Kelo were made using clam shells. Axes made from shells have also been found elsewhere in this region from roughly the same time, including on the nearby island of Gebe to the northeast. Traditionally, they were used by people in the region for the construction of dugout canoes. It is highly likely that Obi’s axes were also used for making canoes, thus allowing these early peoples to maintain connections between communities on neighbouring islands.

People walking among coconut trees
The research team treks through coconut groves on Obi. ANU, Author provided

The oldest cultural layers from the Kelo 6 site, containing a combination of shell and stone tool flakes, provided us with the earliest record for human occupation on Obi, dating back around 18,000 years. At this time the climate was drier and colder the today, and the island’s dense rainforests would likely have been much less impenetrable than they are now. Sea levels were about 120 metres lower, meaning Obi was a much larger island, encompassing what is today the separate island of Bisa, as well as several other small islands nearby.

Roughly 11,700 years ago, as the most recent ice age ended, the climate became significantly warmer and wetter, no doubt making Obi’s jungle much thicker. It is perhaps no coincidence this is the time we see the first evidence of axes made from stone rather than sea shells, likely in response to their increased, heavy-duty use for clearing and modification of the increasingly dense rainforest. While stone takes about twice as long to grind into an axe compared to shell, the harder material also keeps its sharp edge for longer as well.

Various views of stone axes
Stone axes found on the ground near Kelo village. Scale bar represents 1cm. Shipton et al. 2020

Judging by the bones we found in the Kelo caves, people living there mainly hunted the Rothschild’s cuscus, a possum-like animal that still lives on Obi today. As the forest grew more dense, people probably used axes to clear patches of forest and make hunting easier.

Again, it’s probably no coincidence axes made of volcanic stone – which would have stayed sharp for longer, and are known to have been used for this purpose in New Guinea – first appearing in the archaeological record at around the time the climate was changing.

We also found obsidian, which must have been brought over from another island as there is no known source on Obi, and particular types of shell beads in the Kelo caves, similar to those previously found on islands in southern Wallacea. This again supports the idea that Obi islanders routinely travelled to other islands.

Selection of ancient sea shell pieces
Sea shell fragments on the cave floor. ANU, Author provided

Moving out, or moving on?

Our excavations suggest people successfully lived at the Kelo caves for about 10,000 years. But then, about 8,000 years ago, both sites were abandoned.

Did the residents leave Obi completely, or move elsewhere on the island? Perhaps the jungle had grown so thick human axes (even stone ones!) were no longer a match for the dense undergrowth. Perhaps people simply moved to the coast and became mainly fishers rather than hunters.


Read more: An incredible journey: the first people to arrive in Australia came in large numbers, and on purpose


Whatever the reason, we have no evidence for use of the Kelo shelters after this time, until about 1,000 years ago, when they were reoccupied by people who had pottery and metal items. It seems likely, in view of Obi’s location in the middle of the Maluku “Spice Islands”, this final phase of occupation saw the Kelo shelters used by people involved in the historic spice trade.

We will hopefully find the answers to some of these questions when we return to Obi next year, COVID permitting, to excavate some coastal caves.The Conversation

Shimona Kealy, Postdoctoral Researcher, College of Asia & the Pacific, Australian National University and Sue O’Connor, Distinguished Professor, School of Culture, History & Language, Australian National University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Subscribe to the weekly Southeast Asian Archaeology news digest

Latest Books

The following are affiliate links for which I may earn a commission if you click and make a purchase. Click here for more books about Indonesian archaeology.
Sale Patterned Splendour: Textiles Presented on Javanese Metal and Stone Sculptures; Eighth to Fifteenth Century
Patterned Splendour: Textiles Presented on...
Amazon Prime
$30.54
Buy on Amazon
Sale Majapahit: Sculptures from a Forgotten Kingdom
Majapahit: Sculptures from a Forgotten Kingdom
$44.08
Buy on Amazon
Sale Little Species, Big Mystery: The Story of Homo Floresiensis
Little Species, Big Mystery: The Story of Homo...
Amazon Prime
$26.53
Buy on Amazon
Sale Majapahit: Intrigue, Betrayal and War in Indonesia’s Greatest Empire
Majapahit: Intrigue, Betrayal and War in...
Amazon Prime
$15.74
Buy on Amazon
Seaways and Gatekeepers: Trade and State in the Eastern Archipelagos of Southeast Asia, c.1600–c.1906
Seaways and Gatekeepers: Trade and State in the...
Amazon Prime
$46.00
Buy on Amazon
Heroes, Gods and Guardians: Hilts and Keris of Indonesia, Huntington Miller Collection
Heroes, Gods and Guardians: Hilts and Keris of...
Buy on Amazon

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Southeast Asian Archaeology

© 2019

Navigate Site

  • News
  • Resources
  • Countries
  • Topics
  • Visit
  • Jobs
  • Subscribe
  • About

Follow

Never Miss a Discovery
Subscribe for Exclusive Southeast Asian Archaeology News!

Stay connected with the latest breakthroughs, research, and events from across Southeast Asia’s archaeology scene. Sign up today for exclusive weekly updates, trusted by over 2,000 subscribers.

×
No Result
View All Result
  • News
  • Resources
  • Countries
    • Southeast Asia
    • Mainland Southeast Asia
      • Cambodia
      • Laos
      • Malaysia
      • Myanmar
      • Thailand
      • Vietnam
    • Island Southeast Asia
      • Brunei
      • Indonesia
      • Malaysia
      • Philippines
      • Singapore
      • Timor Leste
    • Peripheral Southeast Asia
  • Topics
    • Artifact Type
      • Architecture
      • Bones and Burials
      • Ceramics
      • Intangible Cultural Heritage
      • Lithics
      • Megaliths
      • Rock Art
      • Sculpture
    • Field
      • Anthropology
      • Bioarchaeology
      • Epigraphy
      • General Archaeology
      • Metallurgy and Metalworking
      • Paleontology
      • Underwater Archaeology
      • Visual Art
      • Zooarchaeology
    • Other Themes
      • Animism
      • Buddhism
      • Christianity
      • Disaster Risk Management
      • Hinduism
      • Islam
      • Archaeological Tourism in Southeast Asia
  • Visit
    • Virtual Archaeology
    • Unesco World Heritage
  • Jobs
  • Subscribe
  • About
    • About
    • Supporters
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact

© 2019

This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are giving consent to cookies being used. Visit our Privacy and Cookie Policy.