MALAYAN CULTIVATED RICE AND ITS EXPANSION - PART ONE

KOJI, Tanaka, (Linyanxin translation), Kyoto University Agricultural Dept., Japan

(Agricultural Archaeology 1995(3):95-107. Japanese>Chinese transl. by Lin Guangxin & Peng Shijiang, History Lab. Researcher, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, PR CHINA. OCR by Caddy, format by G. Leir; trans/ed. by Jiwu Wang, Jianming Liang & B. Gordon)

Abstract (B. Gordon): Rice field preparation, slash & burn, plowing, broadcasting, dibbling, tilling, transplanting, weeding, trampling, sickling, harvesting and processing in China, India and Malaya are compared, focussing on the latter's role and expansion to the other two areas.

Keywords: Borneo, China, Japan, India, Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaya, SE Asia, Philippines, Java, Sumatra, tilling, planting, weeding, harvesting

Table of Contents

Preface

One. Types of Asian cultivated rice

1. Three species of cultivated rice

2. Outline of rice growing techniques

(1) Methods of field preparation for tilling

(2) Rice planting

(3) Tilling and weeding

(4) Harvesting and processing

3. Three rice cultivation types

Two. Essential factors of Malayan cultivation

1. Methods of field tilling

(1) Hoof (cattle trampling)

(2) Foot (human trampling)

(3) Digging sticks (dibble) and plows

(4) Non-plowing/reverse tilling using brushhooklike tool

2. Rice planting methods

(1) Dibbling

(2) Broadcasting in irrigated field

(3) Multi-planting and dibble transplanting

(4) Casting seedlings in nursery

3. Harvesting and Processing methods

(1) Grain ear harvesting

(2) Threshing and processing

4. Other cultural essentials

Three. Expansion of Malayan cultivation

1. Cultivation in Taiwan and SW islands

(1) Taiwan

(2) SW islands

2. Madagascar cultivation

(1) Regional differences in cultivation

(2) Two cultivation types

(3) Defining a cultivation family from its properties

(4) Path of cultivation spread

Four. Finding the source of Malayan cultivation

1. Malayan cultivation essentials in mainland SE Asia and China

(1) As in slash & burn

(2) As in paddy-field

2. Finding the source of this cultivation

Conclusions

There have been many instances of trying to classify Asian cultivation systems by planting type, like direct seeding or transplanting, with much focus on irrigation. Cultivated rice traits were also considered, popularizing this method in agronomy; e.g.s, cultivation of dry and rain-fed fields, irrigated fields, deep-well fields, deep paddy cultivation, etc. (De Datta 1981:221-228).

As cultivation closely relates to topography and hydrology, agronomic classification extends to landscaping and geomorphology (Takatani 1978; Tanaka 1988; Tanaka 1991). Takatani first adopted this system, saying many paddy landscapes exist in monsoon Asia, but "only 4-5 classifiable cultivation types" - fan-shaped land, delta, plain and wetland, linking cultivation traits within the family of each of them (Takatani 1978:5).

This report stresses cultural factors: choice of water control, paddy or dry field, rice planting technique, post-harvest processing and cooking. It is reasonable to consider them directly related to planting and rice usage, plus other aspects like rice origin, belief system, etc. This paper summarizes and differentiates Asian cultivation types while considering their historic relationships.

This paper divides Asian rice cultivation into Chinese, Indian and Malayan types, focussing on the latter's expansion. Past research covered the mainland (Watabe 1977, 1983; Sasaki 1983), with Okinawa and SE Asia mentioned only when discussing its spread to Japan (Shengyong 1969; Guofen 1970; Watabe, Ikuta 1984; Anxi 1987). What is its mainland origin? Some said the E Indian lowlands, some the lower Yangtze River or in-between, like Yunnan, China, Assam, India, etc. It is reasonable that mainland origin and later spread to Japan is stressed.

Considering such comments, this report revisits all Asian cultivation systems, focussing on little-studied SE Asian island cultivation, classifying it as Malayan, while generalizing overall Asian cultivation.

One. Types of Asian rice cultivation

1. Three species of cultivated rice

There are two cultivated rice subspecies, indica and japonica (Kato et al. 1928) or Indian and Japanese (Oka 1953), distinguishable by appearance and inherited traits, but their intermediate appearance and properties may only classifiable on combined traits. Oka and others accepted this, saying Asian cultivated rice includes mainland Indian and temperate and tropical island types in three major communities (the last two part of Japanese type). Oka (1953, 1958) also suggested adding discriminant function analysis (Morishima & Oka 1981).

Alternately, Morinaga & Kuriyama (1955) found 6 ecospecies - Aus, Aman, Boro, Bulu, Tjereh and japonica subject to subspecies classification. If Oka's man-made classification based on appearance and inherited traits is compared, Aus, Aman, Boro and Tjereh match Indian mainland type, while Bulu and japonica match various tropical island types and the temperate Japanese type.

After comparing appearance and inherited traits (straw & grain shape), Matsuo (1952) classified them as A (round), B (large grained) & C (long). A distribution is Japan, Korea, N China and Africa, plus central Chinese nonglutinous rice. B distribution is Java, Sumatra, Philippines, Europe and the Americas, plus Japanese uplands. C nonglutinous distribution is India, Vietnam, Taiwan and central China. Comparing these types with Oka's, most A is temperate Japanese, most B is tropical Japanese and most C is Indian mainland type.

Shengyong classifies Bulu as a Matsuo B ecospecies. Indonesian Bulu and SE Asian island B share SE island traits, their divergence depending on distance from indica and japonica. Oka calls them Japanese type tropical subspecies, while other's list them as so-called javanica ecospecies (Chang 1976; Takahashi 1987) on mid-SE island javanica distribution, although they overlap with indica and japonica, hybrid affinity and eco-traits.

Following neither genetics nor taxonomy, I classify Asian cultivated rice into 3 subspecies, using Matsuo & Shengyong's classification of javanica, which simplifies correlating differentiation and planting technique (to be discussed). Matsuo's B type includes not only SE island subspecies, but many Japanese upland subspecies, while Indonesian Bulu has some upland rice traits (Shangye 1988). Sato's recent genetic polymorphism (1900) promotes the possibility of tropical Japanese rice spread from the SE islands to Japan. Their synthesis is a base for classifying a subspecies (i.e. javanica) other than indica and japonica.

Hereafter, I use all three, with javanica including Shengyong's Bulu ecospecies and central SE Asian island Matsuo B subspecies, whose traits are big plants, thick stem, big grain, long awn, etc. It is the subspecies generally called Bulu in India.

2. Outline of rice growing techniques

Given my tripartite classification, do systematic subspecies ties link to their cultivation? As stated, little systematic discussion of planting technique or cultivation has occurred, although detailed analysis has been done in genetic breeding. Regarding rice spread to Japan, comparative archaeological research on cultivation technique has recently become popular, especially excavated material in Japan, Korea and lower Yangtze River (Sasaki 1987, 1989). Asian cultivation culture may have spread with laurilignosa culture (Sasaki 1987b, 1989; Watabe 1985), but considering the wide area, it's insufficient.

I suggest first learning current Asian cultivation techniques, then study their ties. As current rice subspecies studies becomes our object, one must synthesize planting techniques, focussing on cultural factors.

Cultivation distribution is noted; e.g.s, paddy plowing; 1-2 oxen plows in various areas, different plow shape. Simultaneously, direct seeding and breeding-transplanting occur in paddy cultivation, with regionally different trends. My theme tries to typify Asian cultivation according to different essential techniques.

(1) Methods of field preparation for tilling

Plowing is discussed before planting

Soil-turning comprises plowing or non-plowing (slash & burn which expands and softens soil for immediate dibbling). As the latter is widespread from SE China to SE Asia and islands, plowing tools are superfluous for burnt fields, while axes and brushhooklike tools used to cut dibble sticks for digging holes become pre-sowing tools.

For paddy fields in year-round irrigated wetlands along SE island shores, people finish tilling by collecting water weeds. Plowing and soil-turning are absent, with brushhooks for grass-cutting (to be discussed).

Unlike widespread Asian plowing and soil-turning, non-plowing is limited in SE Asia and includes either tools (shovels, dibbles, hoes) or trampling by men or cattle.

Walter (1968:29) subdivided mainland farming into two zones: plow or shovel tilling in India, SE Asia, S China; and plowing in E Asia (central to N China, Korea, Japan). But shovels were even used in SE Asia's plow zone. Due to diverse plowing/soil-turning methods, Walter's division is inapplicable. The shovel is also widely used, its variation unrelated to zone. Rather, the plow is essential for distinguishing cultivation types, as seen below.

One must focus not only on the plow, but cattle traction and harness, as soil-turning needs all (Yingdi 1987:174). The first trait is plow shape, walled or unwalled. The latter is widespread from India through China, but changed to walled in NE and SE China. In S Asia, the Indian unwalled and Chinese walled plow co-exist where mutual cultural traits interconnect (Yingdi 1987:176-184).

The Indian unwalled and Walter's (1968:133-135) Malayan plow are alike in single bed, body and tip, the shaft fixed to the body. In SE Asia, it occurs in the Alagan region of Burma, Malay Peninsula and Indonesia's Sumatra, Java, Bali and Sulawesi. The Chinese wide rectangular framed plow has typical bed, tip, shaft and tip, but a triangular body (bed), tip and shaft also occur. The former has mid-China distribution, the latter S China. In SE Asia, the central China type is in the Philippines, Java, Burma and Thailand, while the S China type is in N Vietnam, N Thailand and Burma.

Plough shape and distribution suggests cattle tilling spread from both India and China. After clarifying Chinese wall and Indian unwalled-plow distribution, Yingdi (1987:209) inferred the wall-plow displaced the earlier Indian plow before expanding in late 12th century. I agree. In terms of essential cattle tilling harnesses, instances of their dual use occur throughout the mainland. Now let's discuss cattle tilling and harness.

Central and S Chinese framed wall plows or flexible plows have yokes detached from the shaft, their front connected to cattle with tow ropes on each side of the yoke, while Indian unwalled plows are towed by two cattle with dual yoke and central shaft. The dual yoke is valid for comparing Chinese and Indian cattle tilling.

While the Indian dual yoke concentrates in SE Asia, especially the mainland, it links to the Chinese framed-wall plow when the shaft surpasses the flexible yoke; i.e., mixed status of Chinese plow replacing Indian one. NE Thailand and Burma's Xian Province also use the Chinese flexible plow towed by one beast; i.e., Chinese plowing influence is strong on the mainland, but Indian plow traces remain. Where the Indian dual-yoked unwalled plow and harrow exist, Thai and Burmese "sacrificial offering for cultivation onset" occur according to Hindu protocol (Ito 1984; Takatani 1987:64), proving dual mainland tilling.

Deficient data clouds the introduction of dual tilling and framed plow supremacy direct from central and S China or via an intermediary or externally. But a notable exception is a plow (Fig. 1) painted in Nanchao Zhongxing National Historical Picture Volume in W Yunnan Province. Its rectangular long bed, body and tip are 1-piece, a long shaft fixed to the body and stabilized by a tip on the bed. This plow with wall behind the huge head differs from the wall plow because its head favors an unwalled plow. It is worth adding that its shaft is free from the double yoke but connected by a pull rope.

Other instances are current plows; e.g.s, Bai minority in Dali area and Yi minority W of Kunming. Both are framed wall plows with front tip, the triangular frame formed by body, shaft and tip. But shaft shapes differ. Bai type is longer, Yi type shorter and bent, meaning Bai type resembles that in the Picture Volume, while Yi type resembles S China type. Also, their yokes are indirectly connected, both are pulled by two cattle with a chain to the front end of the shaft, identical to the Picture Volume .

The above shows several SE Asian frame plow introductions from China. Yingdi (1987:208) noted long bed Tibetan plows transforming to frame plows in SW China. It's also possible the flexible frame transformed SW China's plowing before its spread to SE Asia. The existence of these possibilities is ignored here, but SW China cattle plowing raises an interesting question about plow spread from China to SE Asia.

Compared to dual mainland plowing, SE island cattle tilling looks simple because it is dominated by the Indian or Chinese plow. Perhaps the recently introduced Chinese flexible plow was towed by one beast in the Phillipines and parts of Java. As Sumatra, Java, Bali and Sulawesi show the spread of Indian cattle plowing from Malaya to Burma, it seems there are only 2 island plowing systems, Chinese and Indian, with no complicated mainland duality. Simpler plowing systems can also be found.

Plowing is not widely distributed on the islands, unlike hoe and shovel tilling with its special si or spade-shaped plow with tip cut from a dibble to resemble a paddle. Island tilling diversity includes human or cattle trampling; e.g.s, plow in one area to cultivate but si to tidy the fields; plow ox to trample the fields. Non-plowing paddy tilling is an island trait at Strait of Malacca, Malay Peninsula, and wetland of E Sumatra, Borneo and Sulawesi. Tools used are brushhooklike and long knife-shape with long handle for cutting weeds.

Plow distribution can be approximated: cattle plowing over Asian cultivation zone, plus Indian and Chinese systems: Indian from its subcontinent to SE Asia mainland and some islands; Chinese from China to SE Asian mainland, Philippines and some islands.

(2) Rice planting

Area differences (direct seeding vs. transplanting) appear after tilling. Table 1 is a pre-1970 approximation of direct seeding and mostly transplanting in the Asian cultivation zone. Asian cultivation divides into S Asia direct seeding zone; SE Asia mixed direct seeding & transplanting zone; plus E Asia transplanting zone, of which SE Asia is further classified by direct seeding; e.g.s, 1960's Thai direct seeding ratios in Data column; dominant transplanting in N and NE Thailand; direct seeding in 1/4 to ¹/₃ of upper Chao Phraya River and Delta and S Thailand paddy fields (Watabe 1968:93). While direct seeding is ignored, broadcasting is in upper Menan River and Delta, with point planting in the penisula. Like the Thai example, transplanting leads in north SE Asia, transplanting and broadcast in the Delta and point planting on the islands. Methods divide SE Asia into 4 zones: S Asia direct seeding, SE Asia mainland mixed transplanting/direct seeding, island point planting/transplanting and E Asia transplanting.

Table 1 Direct seeding and transplanting proportions of countries in the Asia cultivation zone

S Asian direct seeding is called dry field broadcasting. After the first monsoon rain came plowing, harrowing to pulverize soil and tidy the field, broadcasting; replowing or harrowing around sprouts, thinning and weeding. This applies to all S Asia, including mainland SE Asia, Burma, Thailand, Cambodia and the Mekong, Yiluowadi and Chao Phraya Deltas. Mainland SE Asia direct seeding with broadcasting and tilling traits were introduced coevally with Indian cattle plowing through "Indianizing" (Takatani 1978; 1987).

Another S Asia direct seeding is seed drilling with cattle after plow or harrow; e.g.s, S Indian Degan Plateau paddy and dry fields; N and NE China and N Korea (Table 1). Dry fields are flooded as rice grows. After drilling in Korea the dry mixing method involved seeding, then overturning and compacting soil. The aforementioned S Asia, N China and Korea dry field broadcasting and drilling show strong dry field planting influence. By planting wheat and other grain here, dry field planting became direct broadcasting and drilling. The dry field technique at both ends of the Asian cultivation zone interests students of cultivation families and is explained later.

Excluding N China and Korea dry field cultivation, E Asia is almost entirely transplanting. Seedling types and methods vary, but seeding occurs at a fixed time, then transplantion to paddies. As transplanting spread from E Asia to SE Asia and islands, and to India, it is not an inherent E Asian technique. But if we include dominant Indian direct seeding, transplanting originated between the N mainland of SE and S Asia in the laurilignosa zone, then went to India because individual rice planting cannot rise from Indian broadcasting which absorbed dry field planting. As to transplanting deriving from planting of roots (Saure1952:25-28) or miscellaneous grain (esp. 4-state barnyard grass (Nakao1967:419; Sasaki 1970:68-72) or independently, there is no proof, but transplanting distribution shows broadcasting spread from India to mainland SE Asia is another system.

SE Asia rice planting varied more than India and China: N and S mainland transplanting and transplanting-broadcasting, respectively; and island transplanting-point planting. But the islands also had dry field transplanting and wet field direct seeding, explaining why planting varied more here. Point planting is most common in Asian slash & burn, while the islands also had paddy and dry fields. When dry, paddy point planting used dibbles, sowing a few to several dozen seeds, and involving 1-2 men (1 digs hole, other sows, or 1 does both). Sometimes, seedlings were grown in dry fields before transplanting, using several in a dibble hole, then pressed to hold the roots. Seedlings also involved broadcast in dry fields.

Cast and point sowing was also in island wet fields, draining, harrow-pulverizing and seed casting on their muddy surface resembling transplanting. Seeds were also dibbled singly in prepared paddy, which was waterlogged year-round, tilled with shovel and trampled without plowing.

It is an island trait that various planting methods had limited topographic control; e.g., E Sumatran dibbling in burnt mountain fields, then in paddy and dry fields. While dibbling and transplanting occur in low paddy fields, transplanting is in the lowest after harrow plowing. From dibbling in burnt fields to paddy transplanting does not describe rice cultivation stages because either is chosen by field conditions. They are thought to vary technically, but are basically alike in terms of rice cultivation.

Island planting is detailed later, but if we consider pan-Asian planting, the rice subspecies and plowing/soil-turning methods can be summed in 3 technical schools: transplanting from China to mainland SE Asia; broadcasting from India to mainland SE Asia; and dibbling in SE Asia islands. Doubtless, transplanting is now pan-Asian, with mixed SE Asian planting methods.

(3) Tilling and weeding

Tilling and transplanting involve weeding, which is widely practiced in S Asia direct seeding zones. Tilling and weeding can be classed by cattle traction usage, which occurs from India to mainland SE Asia. When cast dry field rice sprouts reach 10-20 cm, the field is tilled with a harrow towed by two cattle to weed and thin. Tilling and weeding is also done when fields are rain-soaked; e.g., a plow weeds (biasi) and thins seedlings 3-4 weeks after sowing when rice is 30 cm in India's Madiye and Buladexiu states. This is done perpendicular to plow direction. After sprouts mature, a log kopar towed by a bull is used to compact soil, compressing rice roots into the earth to keep them alive and burying weeds in the flattened surface (Randhava et al. 1963:44-45). Tilling and weeding also occur in mainland SE Asia where seeds are cast; e.g., Cambodian dry fields are tilled and weeded with harrow 2 months after sowing. Where rice grows rapidly, water buffalo eat rice sprouts and trample weeds (Batian 1968:43), an operation also in southern SE Asia. Weeds are controlled in paddies by slow flooding.

Hand-weeding is popular in E Asia transplanting zone and SE Asia island transplanting/dibbling zone Adjusting sprout density after broadcast is unnecessary because rice is cultivated by fixed number of sprouts. Weeds are removed in both areas while raking, with efficient tools added, esp. in S Asia: Chinese weeding harrow, toss and claw; Japanese weeding and wild goose claw, plowing cart, etc. Analogous to paddy flood-weeding is the SE Asia island sickle and wall-shaped weeders in dibble-sowed and dibble/transplanted dry fields. Using the handle, they plow and flatten the surface. Widely used in dry fields, they apply to rice cultivation like dibbling and plowing.

Differences in cattle and human tilling and weeding closely relate to regional planting. Transplant-dibbling uses people; broadcast uses cattle tilling. If we review the latter from tilling preparation to weeding, we see the following correspondances: a) direct sowing with cattle from plowing/soil-turning to tilling; b) transplanting with cattle only for tilling; and c) dibbling without cattle. Thus, the Asian zone can be roughly devided into 3 cattle cultivation areas.

(4) Harvesting and Processing

Harvested rice is dried, threshed, hulled and husked by two methods: reaping whole plant (common over Asia) or cutting ears with regionally different sickles. Erping's (1943:74-150) mainland SE Asia surveys mentions big half-moon and less curved "new moon" sickles (Yawata 1965:207-215), and specialized Cambodian γ-shaped and Burmese S-shaped sickles. Disregarding the latter's special traits, all are curved.

Mainland SE Asian moon-shaped sickle distribution is undetailed. The S has half-moon, the N new moon. Chancellor's (1961:18) Thai traditional agricultural study mentions both, the latter mainly N. Dumont (1935:350-352) describes new moon sickles in Vietnam's Red River Delta. Both are in N & S mainland SE Asia; the half-moon in India but not China (Yawata 1965:216). Like plows, mainland SE Asian sickles comprise Indian and Chinese types in 2 systems: Chinese new moon and Indian curved.

Sickles also occur in SE Asian islands, esp. new moon, but the main method was picking ears individually, widespread in mainland slash & burn cultivation, and since replaced by sickles. Island hand-picking is in slash & burned fields and paddies, the universal in almost all zones, with sickle spread late in SE Asia islands. Big-eared island javanica is still cultivated, a reason why hand picking still survives.

Area differences also occur in threshing: beating ripened ears, cattle or human trampling and extracting ears by hand, the former the most common, their differencies varying mechanically:

Stalks are thrashed by beating against a threshing platform or hard object, or beaten, the former throughout the Asian cultivation zone, the latter from E Asia to mainland SE Asia.

Trample threshing is by cattle or man, the former in casting and drilling zones in NE China, S Asia and S mainland SE Asia. Buffalo or bulls trample or pull a stone roller, the latter in wheat and other grain areas in NE China and central and N India. Hoof threshing is widespread from S Asia to S mainland SE Asia. It is associated with dryland cultivation in W Asia. The Indian plow, casting, tilling and cattle use were introduced to mainland SE Asia as a unit, its hoof threshing method its trace.

Manpower threshing with feet, mainly on SE Asia islands, is less developed than beating and hoof threshing, while reaping and island-unique mortar-and-pestle threshing for polishing rice is slowly spreading.

Asian rice cultivation has 3 harvesting-processing areas: (1) new moon sickling and beat threshing; (2) new moon sickling and hoof threshing, and (3) ear-picking and human trampling or mortar-and-pestle threshing.

Although these methods also overlap, their distributions generally match the 3 areas of Asian cultivation, implying the existence of a typical rice cultivation combining their essentials, as seen below:

3. Three rice cultivation types

The following 3 cultivation systems summarize rice tilling, harvesting and processing: (1) cattle plowing > broadcasting > cattle weeding > curved sickling > hoof threshing; (2) cattle/shovel-plowing > transplanting > human weeding > new moon sickling > beat threshing; (3) human plowing/trampling > dibbling/transplanting > human weeding > ear picking > trampling or mortar-and-pestle threshing. They are distributed in (1 ) India to S mainland SE Asia; (2) E Asia to mainland SE Asia, and (3) SE Asian islands.

Cultivated rice subspecies also have the above distribution: (1) mainly indica; (2) mainly indica and japonica (cultivated in ancient China) and (3) mainly indica and javanica. (2) N is mainly japonica; indica and japonica co-exist in S. (3) away from mainland or near E or highland is mainly javanica, while (3) Indonesian indica is called tjereh (cereh), introduced after javanica, according to distribution. It may have been brought with Indian culture, like cattle plowing. In sum, indica corresponds to (1) & (2), and javanica correspond to (3).

Technical essentials of the 3 rice cultivation types are in Table 2. Considering regional distribution and technical derivation, they are called: (1) Indian, (2) Chinese and (3) Malayan - Indian because dry field cultivation was introduced from the W or India in SE Asia's Indianization; Chinese because human plowing-transplanting spread before cattle plowing from China to SE Asia, with transitional spread of dry field cattle plowing to N China. Thought to originate in Yangtze Basin, it spread to Asia, then mainland SE Asia and islands; and Malaya because it is mostly on SE Asian islands.

Table 2. Technical Essentials of 3 Asian Cultivation Types

The islands have mixed methods: tilling by cattle plowing, non-soil-turning and trampling; planting by transplanting, direct & dibbling, etc., in wet and dry fields under all conditions. The islands have Indian and Chinese traces, with uncertain Malayan technique. Ethnically, I include old and new Malays, linguistically they are S island language family and live in the W part, and biologically the rice subspecies is javanica because Java cultivation is most influenced by India. Malayan here is not so-called Mulayou people in the Strait of Malacca, but a general Malay island term, so cultivation is called "Malayan Type".

Malayan and slash & burn cultivation differ, but have similar operations. Like Malayan cultivation, slash & burn occurs in mountains from S China to mainland SE Asia and islands and include dibbling, manual weeding and ear picking after logging and burning. When rice cultivation spread to the islands, slash & burn and paddy cultivation likely co-existed in the valleys before spreading. Later, Indian and Chinese methods formed. While island slash & burn is part of Malayan cultivation, they are inequal, with different history than mainland Asia. Malayan is slash & burn and paddy cultivation combined over 2-3,000 years.

As mainland slash & burn is neither Indian nor Chinese, to what system does it belong? Where it and paddy cultivation co-existed, the mainland adopted Indian and Chinese systems. Paddy transplanting overwhelmed slash & burn cultivation and spread, but island cultivation is independent and passed mixed original slash & burn and paddy cultivation to new generations. As mainland and Malayan slash & burn are technically alike with different history, one may assume the latter derived from the former.

Condensing Indian, Chinese and Malayan systems and itemizing the latter, I will explain mutual ties. Before their formation, an "original" system from N mainland SE Asia to S China and lower Yangtze Basin included paddy and slash & burn cultivation and mid-valley wetland or "sky paddy" (Sasaki 1983:308-311; 1989:367), like the Malayan system. This original became Chinese cultivation in NE Yangtze Basin through dry field plowing, while N India formed its own dry-field cultivation in the SW. The original spread separately to the islands from mainland SE Asia or S China to form Malayan cultivation. Original island traits survive despite some later spread of Chinese and Indian elements. Thus, Malayan cultivation includes slash & burn and original, but is not limited to these. Its independent growth resulted in what we see today.

Takatani's classes of Asian rice growing is relevant because he also differentiated 3 types and their history, clarifying Indian, Chinese and Malayan types: mainland dry-field planting (India to S mainland SE Asia, N China & Korea), laurilignosa valley transplanting (E Himalaya to N mainland SE Asia, S & mid-China to Japan laurilignosa zone), and tropical slash & burn (north SE Asia & islands; Takatani 1990:4-42).

Takatani also explained their growth. Ca. 5000 BC, "incipient cultivation" began in lower Yangtze Basin, spreading to dry laurilignosa valleys and tropical mountains. Incipient rice introduced to dry mainland became a dry-crop with local irrigation, forming upper Yangtze Basin transplanting in valleys and slash & burn on hillsides. Transplanting was later influenced by oasis agriculture and irrigation, forming irrigation-transplanting cultivation (Takatani 1990:100-101). A summary of the 3 types follows:

(1) a common error is assuming cultivation type before differentiating the 3 types, calling it "original" or "incipient" cultivation. Takatani considered its place of origin as lower Yangtze Basin, while I consider it to be wider, the first difference in our thoughts. While lower Yangtze Basin 5000 BC Hemudu shows the earliest Asian cultivation, it was not a place of origin. Earlier material is undug, but if we add botanical data about wild rice and cultivated rice mutation, the wide area from S China to N mainland SE Asia may also be the place of origin.

(2) difference is the way to handle mainland dry field cultivation. Takatani said N China/Korea and Indian dryland cultivation is similar, but I treat the latter separately. He thought N China/Korean dryland agriculture was the earliest to accept rice-like crops, but I think lower Yangtze Basin became N China dryland cultivation. Han Dynasty cultivation, which absorbed cattle dryland plowing, originated in Yangtze Basin, spread quickly N onto the existing dryland system. Considering the vastness of the Asian cultivation zone, N China/Korea is small, and Indian cultivation didn't spread there. That is why I don't legitimize N China dryland cultivation.

(3) Takatani considered SE Asian slash & burn cultivation occurred on hillsides with long fallow period, dryland cultivation with short fallow, lowland non-soil-turning tilling and paddy cultivation with hoof tilling. Is it reasonable to summarize this "mixed cultivation" (Takatani 1990:72) as slash & burn cultivation? He also thought original slash & burn cultivation was distinct from paddy cultivation spread to SE Asia, with its many secondary forms (Takatani 1990:70-84), but I think paddy and slash & burn cultivation spread over SE Asia, its combinations still strong. As island or Malayan cultivation grew independently, it is a transformation of slash & burn cultivation.

Although dry upland technological influence cannot be overlooked, I disagree with Takatani that it is fully influenced by slash & burn cultivation that spread rice cultivation. This is a big difference, but is off topic in a report explaining Malayan cultivation. So it is only introduced, followed by the main topic. (to be cont'd.)