Zooarchaeology of the Earliest Farming Period
YAMAZAKI Takeshi1
ABSTRACTThis paper is a summary of Nōkō kaishiki no dōbutsu kōkogaku (Zooarchaeology of the Earliest
Farming Period; Rokuichi Shobō, 2019). Part I discusses the use of animal resources in the Tokaiarea, central Japan in the earliest known farming period. Chapter 1 summarizes the ﬁndings fromand questions raised by preceding studies and introduces the aims of the present research. Subsequent
chapters analyse animal remains from the Yayoi period and investigate shellﬁsh gathering (chapter2), ﬁshing (chapter 3), and hunting (chapter 4) activities. Chapter 5 investigates conditions in the
Final Jomon period just prior to the introduction of farming. Chapter 6 examines the usage of animal
resources in the earliest farming period. Part II discusses remaining tasks and questions outlined inPart I. Chapter 7 investigates methods used in research on animal remains, chapter 8 presents themethodology of zooarchaeology, and chapter 9 considers the social contributions of the research
results. This study presents the results of real observation of approximately 53 000 animal remains
and approximately 25 000 contemporary vertebrate specimens.
KEYWORDS: use of animal resources, shell gathering, ﬁshing, hunting, earliest farming period,
zooarchaeology, Japan

Part I. Case Study of the Tokai Area
(Ise Bay Coast and Mikawa Bay Coast)
Chapter 1. Study Aims
Chapter 2. Shellﬁsh Gathering
Chapter 3. Fishing
Chapter 4. Hunting
Chapter 5. The Circumstance Prior to
the Beginning of Farming
Chapter 6. Conclusion
Part II. Future Prospects
Chapter 7. Animal remains researchmethods
Chapter 8. Zooarchaeology
methodologies
Chapter 9. Contribution to society

Figure 1. Zooarchaeology of the Earliest
Farming Period (Yamazaki 2019)

1 NaraNational Research Institute for Cultural Properties, 2–9–1 Nijo-cho, Nara 630–8577, Japan(yamazaki-t67@nich.go.jp)
Category: Original Article Received: 7 October 2021; Accepted: 4 March 2022
JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 9 (2022): 213–259

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Part I. Case study of the Tokai area (Ise Bay coast and Mikawa
Bay coast)
Chapter 1.

Study aims

The aim of the present study is to examine usage of animal resources by (prehistoric)
people during the earliest period of farming, based on analysis of animal remains from the
Final Jomon period to the Yayoi period (1300 BC–AD 300).
The Jomon period began approximately 16 000 years ago and is deﬁned by the huntergatherer society of Japan at that time. This period is divided into seven stages: theIncipient, Earliest, Early, Middle, Late, and Final. The following Yayoi period was a time
when agrarian society became dominant and rice paddy cultivation began.
Usage of plants greatly changed in the Yayoi period relative to the Jomon period andearlier. Consequently, research on subsistence in the Yayoi period has so far primarily been
based on evidence of plant usage, such as rice cultivation and dry-ﬁeld farming. Research
on animal remains from the Yayoi period is sparse in comparison to that regarding the
Jomon period (Kaneko 1980). However, since the transition from Jomon to Yayoi involved achange in the social organization from hunter-gatherer to agrarian, then animal usage could
be expected to change in addition to plant usage. Speciﬁcally, if animal usage was foundto have changed with the emergence of farming, that would mean that people living in the
Yayoi period were likely to have specialized in agriculture, and we could conclude thatsubsistence activities changed markedly in the Yayoi period. However, if animal usage did
not change along with the introduction of farming, then it is unlikely that people living in
the Yayoi period specialized in agriculture, even though they did cultivate some plants. We
could then conclude that subsistence activities did not change greatly in the Yayoi period.
Research on ﬁshing and hunting in the Yayoi period has mainly centered on the analysis
of ﬁshing and hunting tools and not on the analysis of animal remains. Researchersinvestigating the Yayoi period have presented diﬀerent interpretations of typologicalchanges in ﬁshing and hunting tools and have stated that “ﬁshing activities advanced
greatly and hunting activities did not advance in the Yayoi period.” They have determinedthat the eﬀects of typological changes in ﬁshing tools would have been an “increase involume of catch” and interpreted this as a “development in ﬁshing activities” (Wada 1982,
1988). They also thought that “ﬁshing villages appeared” at a signiﬁcant point in theevolution of ﬁshing tools and have stated that “food-collecting activities became focusedon ﬁshing” (Tanaka 1986; Shimojō 1989). On the other hand, the typological changes inhunting tools during the Yayoi period have also been interpreted as reﬂecting an increase in
killing power and diﬀerentiation between hunting tools and weapons rather than as simply
the development of hunting (Sahara 1964; Matsugi 1989). Researchers have also suggested
that ﬁghting broke out at a signiﬁcant point during the development of hunting and have
© Japanese Archaeological Association214

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

described how hunting implements changed to weapons (Sahara 1975; Matsugi 1984).
In addition, research on animal remains from the Yayoi period has focused on
domestication (Anezaki 1999, 2004, 2007; Nishimoto 1991, 1993). Zooarchaeologists havenot actively discussed hunting but have observed that hunting decreased (Nishimoto 1997).
Taking into account the inﬂuence of the standard concepts that represent the Yayoi
period—agriculture, division of labor, war, and animal domestication—researchers haveasserted that ﬁshing activities advanced but hunting activities did not advance in the Yayoi
period. However, the point may be made not that “ﬁshing advanced, while hunting did notadvance,” but rather that “research on ﬁshing advanced, while that on hunting did not.”Researchers investigating the Yayoi period have simply considered aspects that ﬁt into theexisting research framework rather than examine those that do not.
Japanese archaeologists have carefully excavated shell mounds from the huntergatherer societies of the Jomon period and have also collected micro remains. However,they often do not appropriately investigate shell mounds from the agrarian societies of the
Yayoi period onward. Research conducted in this manner is less the result of the distance[divergence] between theory and artifacts than a slighting of artifacts for the sake of theory.
That tendency has contributed to the paucity of research on animal remains from the Yayoi
period in contrast to that of the Jomon period.

Research area

In the present study, Tokai, a region that has a large distribution of shell mounds from the
Final Jomon period to the Yayoi period, was selected as the research area. The Tokai region
is located in the center of Japan’s Honshu Island and borders the Paciﬁc Ocean. In this area,
there are two bays: Ise Bay and Mikawa Bay. Chapters 2 to 4 focus on studies of the innerpart of Ise Bay, where animal remains from the Yayoi period are deposited. Five sites fromthe inner part of Ise Bay are discussed (Figures 2, 3). Micro remains have been collected bysieving sediments from these sites. Of these ﬁve, the Tamanoi site is from the Final Jomon
period, and all other sites are from the Yayoi period. Chapter 5 focuses on studies of the
Mikawa Bay coast, where remains from the Final Jomon period are deposited.

Chapter 2.

Shellﬁsh gathering

Shell mounds decreased in number and size during the Yayoi period (Iwase 2003). Clams(Meretrix lusoria) excavated from the sites became signiﬁcantly larger after the latter halfof the Early Yayoi period.

Estimated length and height of shells

For clams, this study investigates a major type of shellﬁsh that was excavated from thesites along with shell size (length and height). However, most clams found were damaged,© Japanese Archaeological Association

215

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 2. Studied areas
The Tokai area, located in the middle of Honshu
Island, faces the Paciﬁc Ocean. Ise Bay isshown on the western side of the overview, with
Mikawa Bay to the east.

Figure 3. Location of the archaeological sites(detail of inner part of Ise Bay)

thus there were very few shells for which
length and height were measurable. Of theclams that were excavated from the Asahi
site, the length of shells was measurable in
16.7% of the specimens, and the height in
14.4%. To increase the number of analyticalsamples, the length and height of shells is
estimated from excavated shell fragments.
First, the length and height of shells, andthe length of external ligaments of the intact Figure 4. Measured areas
excavated clams was measured using digital
calipers (Figure 4). Next, the correlation
between length of external ligaments, length of shells, and height of shells was calculated
and an equation was derived for estimating the length and height of shells from the lengthof external ligaments.
Regression analysis was performed on 431 samples for which measurement waspossible for the length of external ligaments and length of shells (length of shell:
26.69–114.50mm). A strong correlation was observed between the length of external
ligaments and length of shells (R2=0.958, p<0.01). The equation for estimating the lengthof shells (Y: mm) from the length of external ligaments (X: mm) of excavated clams was
Y=0.01335X2+2.68574X+9.42915.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

216

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Similarly, regression analysis was performed on 605 samples for which measurement
was possible for the length of external ligaments and height of shells (height of shell:
22.78–89.36mm). A strong correlation was found between the length of external ligaments
and height of shells (R2=0.966, p<0.01). The equation for estimating the height ofshells (Y: mm) from the length of external ligaments (X: mm) of excavated clams was
Y=0.00277X2+2.27748X+8.3817.

Changes in the size of clams

The results of estimation of the length of shells of 2354 excavated clams (Figure 5)
showed that length became signiﬁcantly greater after the ﬁrst half of the Early Yayoi period(p<0.01). Similarly, estimation of the height of shells of 2369 excavated clams also showeda signiﬁcantly greater height after the ﬁrst half of the Early Yayoi period (p<0.01) (Figure 6).

Figure 5. Changes in the length of clam shells
Signiﬁcant diﬀerences in the length of clam shells were observed between those from the end of
Final Jomon and those from the latter half of Early Yayoi; between those from the latter half of
Early Yayoi and those from the early Middle Yayoi period; and between those from early Middle
Yayoi and those from the middle of the Middle Yayoi period.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

217

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 6.

Excavated clams (Completed material)

After the ﬁrst half of the Early Yayoi period, the amount of shellﬁsh collected declined,
and so the capture pressure on clams decreased, allowing more individuals to increase insize. Clam shell remains excavated from this period became larger, so we can infer thatpeople of the Yayoi period preferred to collect large clams. I postulate that the reason
for decreased shell collecting in the Yayoi period was that the shellﬁsh-gathering season
overlapped with the farming season. Based on shell growth-line analysis, it is believed thatduring the Jomon period shellﬁsh were collected between spring and early summer (Koike
1983; Horikoshi 1984). The spring tide season is best suited for shellﬁsh gathering because
the water moves a great distance from the shore at low tide; however, this coincides
with peak season for cultivating ﬁelds. I suggest that because farming began on a large
scale during the Yayoi period, shellﬁsh gathering occurring at the same time decreased(Yamazaki & Oda 2009).

Chapter 3.

Fishing

Chapter 3 examines ﬁsh remains excavated from ﬁve sites along the inner part of Ise Bay
and discusses changes in ﬁshing activities (Figure 7). Samples of sediment from the study
sites were ﬁltered and ﬁne ﬁsh bones collected.

© Japanese Archaeological Association

218

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Figure 7.

Composition of ﬁsh remains

Fishing grounds

Fishing grounds at each site were investigated with regard to the habitat of ﬁsh whose
remains were excavated from these sites. The ﬁsh remains excavated from Ise Bay wereﬁrst categorized based on the habitat and ecology of the ﬁsh (Table 1). Excavated ﬁsh were
sorted into three large categories (Classes I, II, and III) based on horizontal distribution;subsequently, these groups were further subdivided based on ecology (Classes a, b, and c).
Fishing activities at each site reﬂected geographical conditions (Figure 8). From the
Asahi site, Isshiki-aokai site, and Nishishiga (Hirate-cho) site, located in alluvial lowlands,
freshwater ﬁsh (Group I) and migratory ﬁsh distributed in the coastal mid to lower layers(Group IIb) were excavated in great numbers. Among these sites, freshwater as well as
coastal areas were utilized as ﬁshing grounds. In particular, small carp (Cyprinus carpio)
were excavated in abundance (Nakajima et al. 2010). For this reason, I suggest that peopleof the Yayoi period living in lowlands actively used ﬁsh that were farmed in shallow local
freshwater areas such as paddy ﬁelds.
In contrast, ﬁsh that migrate within the coastal surface layers (Group IIa) were excavatedin abundance from the Tamanoi and Takakura sites located in highland areas. Among thesesites, mainly coastal regions were used as ﬁshing grounds, whereas freshwater areas wererelatively unused.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

219

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Table 1.

Fish types

Fish groups
Ia
Ib
IIa
IIb
IIc
III
IV

Living Environment and Ecology
Genuine freshwater ﬁsh
Diadromous ﬁsh
Migratory ﬁsh that swim in the coastal surface layers
Migratory ﬁsh that live in the intermediate to basal layers of the coast
Fish that live permanently within the bay
Fish that live in the bay entrance to outer sea
Fish that do not fall in the above categories

Fish remains were categorized into groups depending on living environment and ecology in Ise Bay.

Figure 8.

Comparison between ﬁsh types

Fishing seasonsFishing seasons were determined by analyzing Japanese pilchards (Sardinops
melanostictus), a major species found in coastal ﬁsheries. Groups of ﬁsh that seasonallymigrate along the inner part of Ise Bay are Groups IIa and IIb. In particular, ﬁsh ofGroup IIa migrate in schools within the coastal surface layer; therefore, they were likely
to have been caught together by net ﬁshing. At each site, the Group IIa family that wasmost abundantly excavated was Clupeidae spp. Japanese pilchard and dotted gizzard
shad (Konosirus punctatus) were identiﬁed based on bones of the head, ﬁrst vertebrae,© Japanese Archaeological Association

220

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

and second vertebrae. Clupeidae spp. was found more abundantly during excavationin comparison to other seawater ﬁsh; among them, the pilchard comprised the majority
belonging to the Clupeidae spp. excavated from the sites. The ﬁshing season of thepilchards was therefore made the focus of this study.
First, an equation for estimating body length from measurements of the abdominal
vertebrae was created using present-day Japanese pilchard specimens. Next, the abdominal
vertebrae of pilchards excavated from the sites were measured and body lengths were
estimated using the equation. Finally, the pilchard ﬁshing season at each site was estimatedbased on the timing of the Japanese pilchard migration within Ise Bay.
Regression analysis was performed by measuring the body length and abdominal
vertebrae of present-day Japanese pilchard specimens (Figure 9). A strong correlation

Figure 9.

Measured parts of the abdominal vertebrae

Figure 10.

Estimated body length of the excavated Japanese pilchard© Japanese Archaeological Association

221

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

was observed between body length andthe transverse diameter of the centrum(R2=0.947, p<0.01). The equation for
estimating body length (Y: mm) fromthe transverse diameter of the abdominal
vertebrae centrum of pilchards was:
Y =0.453X 2+3.59X +4.541. The bodylength of pilchards excavated from thestudy sites was estimated using thisequation. The estimated body lengthof pilchards excavated at the Tamanoisite was between 11 and 13cm, and theestimated body length of those excavatedat the Takakura site was between 18 and19cm (Figure 10). The body length of thepilchards excavated at the Asahi site was
widely distributed between 14 and 20cm.
The Japanese pilchard spawns outside
Ise Bay between January and May andsubsequently migrates to Ise Bay to feed
(Funakoshi & Yanagibashi 1983). Pilchards
are born in the winter-spring season
and migrate between July and October(Japan Fisheries Resource Conservation
Association 2002). Large pilchards (bodylength approximately 18–20cm) migrate
during the winter-spring season, whereas
small pilchards (body length approximately
10–15cm) migrate during the summer orfall (Figure 11). Therefore, the pilchardﬁshing season at the Tamanoi site in the
Final Jomon period is thought to have beensummer or fall. In contrast, the pilchardﬁshing season at the Takakura site in the
Early Yayoi period is thought to have been
winter or spring. Species of the Clupeidae
spp. family, primarily the Japanese pilchard,
were excavated in great abundance at

Figure 11. Body length composition by month(1952–2011) for the Japanese pilchard in Ise Bay
This graph shows the body length composition
by month for the Japanese pilchard (approx.
60 000 individuals) that migrated to Ise Bay.
This information was created from 60 years ofdata presented within the business report of the
Aichi Fisheries Research Institute.

© Japanese Archaeological Association222

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

the Tamanoi and Takakura sites. For this reason, the estimated pilchard ﬁshing season
represents the overall ﬁshing season at these sites. By comparing the Tamanoi site (Final
Jomon period) and the Takakura site (Early Yayoi period), located in the Atsuta Plateau, theﬁshing season was found to have switched from summer-fall to winter-spring.

Changes in ﬁshing activities

In sites in alluvial lowlands, both coastal and freshwater areas were used for ﬁshing. On
the other hand, at highland sites, the coast was a major ﬁshing area and freshwater areas
were rarely used. Based on comparison between the Final Jomon period and the Yayoi
period, the ﬁshing season at the highland sites changed from summer-fall to winter-spring. I
suggest that the people of the Yayoi period spent time previously devoted to ﬁshing on othersubsistence activities, resulting in this change in ﬁshing season (Yamazaki 2015; Table 2).

Chapter 4.

Hunting

In chapter 4, sika deer (Cervus nippon) remains were analysed to estimate the season ofdeath on the basis of observed tooth development. It was discovered that the main deerhunting season was during the winter at the Asahi site in the Yayoi period. In this chapter, I
also show that people at the Asahi site acquired deer antlers by methods other than hunting.

Animal resource use at the Asahi site

The Asahi site is a valuable site from which a large volume of vertebrate remains was
excavated; these can be used to comprehensively investigate animal resource use in the
Yayoi period. Approximately 94% of the mammalian remains excavated from the Asahi

Table 2.

Fishery activities at each site

Site

Alluvial
lowlandDate of Fish remains

Fishing Area
(Major Fishing Method)

Mainly ﬁsh remains

Fishing Season(The pilchard ﬁshing)

Asahi

The latter half of the Early Yayoi period The latter portion of the Middle Yayoi period

Cyprinidae spp. andAcanthopagrus sp.

Coastal and freshwater area
(Spear and pole ﬁshing)

Year-roundNishishiga(Hirate-cho)

The latter half of the Early Yayoi period/The
middle portion of the Middle Yayoi period

Cyprinidae spp. andAcanthopagrus sp.

Coastal and freshwater area
(Spear and pole ﬁshing)

Unknown(lack of samples)Isshiki-aokai

The latter portion of the middle Yayoi period

Cyprinidae spp. andAcanthopagrus sp.

Coastal and freshwater area
(Spear and pole ﬁshing)

Unknown(lack of samples)

Tamanoi

The early Final Jomon period

Clupeidae spp.
(Mainly Japanese pilchard)

Coastal area (Net ﬁshing)

Summer and Fall

Takakura

The latter half of the Early Yayoi period

Clupeidae spp.
(Mainly Japanese pilchard)

Coastal area (Net ﬁshing)

Winter and Spring

Highland© Japanese Archaeological Association

223

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

site were of boar (Sus scrofa), sika deer (C. nippon), and dogs (Canis lupus familiaris)(Figure 12). Very few other mammals were discovered. In particular, boar was the mostabundant of the mammalian remains found, and most were piglets or young boars (Figure13). For this reason, I conclude that boar domestication was at an early stage at the Asahi
site.
People living at the Asahi site, which is located in the alluvial lowlands, actively ﬁshed
for carp (C. carpio), catﬁsh (Silurus sp.) or other ﬁsh in lowland swamps around the site,and hunted wild birds such as duck (Anatinae spp.) or goose (Anserinae spp.) as well.
Boar, the most abundant mammal present, also prefers lowland swamps as their habitat.
In addition, people living at this site selectively hunted deer in forests some distance fromthe site. Remains of hardly any other forest mammals, such as raccoon dog, fox, or weasel,
were excavated. Accordingly, the study discusses hunting activities on the basis of deer
excavated from the Asahi site.

Sika deer hunting season

I conducted X-ray imaging on the mandibles of 144 present-day sika deer skeletons (74male, 66 female, 4 unknown), whose ages in months were apparent, in order to observe
tooth-development stages. Tooth development was classiﬁed into ten stages, referring to
the text by Brown & Chapman (1991a, 1991b). The correlation between tooth development
stage and age in months was determined by regression analysis. In all 42 cases in whichmore than three lower teeth remained, a strong correlation was observed between toothdevelopment stage and age in months (Table 3). This information was used to formulate
an equation and estimate the season of death of deer excavated from the study sites, evenfrom damaged samples.

Figure 12. Composition of the mammalianremains excavated from the Asahi site

Figure 13. Ages of boar excavated from the
Asahi site

© Japanese Archaeological Association

224

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Table 3.

Equation used for age estimation (X: total score, Y: estimated age in months)

Remaining teeth in mandible
P2+P3+P4
P2+P3+M1
P2+P3+M2
P2+P3+M3
P2+P4+M1
P2+P4+M2
P2+P4+M3
P2+M1+M2
P2+M1+M3
P2+M2+M3
P3+P4+M1
P3+P4+M2
P3+P4+M3
P3+M1+M2
P3+M1+M3
P3+M2+M3
P4+M1+M2
P4+M1+M3
P4+M2+M3
M1+M2+M3
P2+P3+P4+M1
P2+P3+P4+M2
P2+P3+P4+M3
P2+P3+M1+M2
P2+P3+M1+M3
P2+P3+M2+M3
P2+P4+M1+M2
P2+P4+M1+M3
P2+P4+M2+M3
P2+M1+M2+M3
P3+P4+M1+M2
P3+P4+M1+M3
P3+P4+M2+M3
P3+M1+M2+M3
P4+M1+M2+M3
P2+P3+P4+M1+M2
P2+P3+P4+M1+M3
P2+P3+P4+M2+M3
P2+P3+M1+M2+M3
P2+P4+M1+M2+M3
P3+P4+M1+M2+M3
P2+P3+P4+M1+M2+M3

Range oftotal score
1<x<253<x<270<x<260<x<253<x<270<x<260<x<254<x<283<x<270<x<263<x<270<x<260<x<254<x<273<x<270<x<264<x<283<x<270<x<264<x<284<x<350<x<340<x<334<x<363<x<350<x<344<x<363<x<350<x<344<x<36
4<x<363<x<350<x<344<x<36
4<x<364<x<443<x<43
3<x<434<x<444<x<444<x<44
4<x<52

Cubic regression equation
y=0.002x3 − 0.078x2+1.423x+7.953
y=0.003x3 − 0.194x2+4.399x − 17.435
y=0.002x3 − 0.081x2+1.838x+1.007
y=0.002x3 − 0.071x2+1.398x+7.932
y=0.003x3 − 0.188x2+4.248x − 16.641
y=0.002x3 − 0.084x2+1.836x+1.049
y=0.001x3 − 0.061x2+1.277x+8.015
y= − 0.001x3+0.027x2+0.581x − 3.003
y=0.002x3 − 0.132x2+3.504x − 14.041
y=0.001x3 − 0.053x2+1.542x+1.459
y=0.003x3 − 0.188x2+4.196x − 16.262
y=0.002x3 − 0.088x2+1.851x+1.052
y=0.001x3 − 0.053x2+1.189x+8.075
y=0.002x3 − 0.071x2+1.906x − 8.378
y=0.002x3 − 0.129x2+3.417x − 13.562
y=0.001x3 − 0.055x2+1.540x+1.494
y=0.001x3 − 0.036x2+1.435x − 6.427
y=0.002x3 − 0.132x2+3.391x − 13.249
y=0.001x3 − 0.063x2+1.575x+1.471
y= − 0.0002x3+0.019x2+0.564x − 2.461
y=0.002x3 − 0.134x2+3.403x − 12.827
y=0.001x3 − 0.064x2+1.616x+1.552
y=0.001x3 − 0.033x2+0.914x+8.334
y=0.0004x3 − 0.033x2+1.530x − 7.224
y=0.002x3 − 0.118x2+3.175x − 12.205
y=0.001x3 − 0.051x2+1.462x+1.719
y=0.0005x3 − 0.038x2+1.603x − 7.477
y=0.002x3 − 0.115x2+3.080x − 11.675
y=0.001x3 − 0.052x2+1.450x+1.770
y=0.0001x3 − 0.015x2+1.173x − 5.321
y=0.001x3 − 0.044x2+1.692x − 7.831
y=0.002x3 − 0.112x2+3.010x − 11.285
y=0.001x3 − 0.052x2+1.438x+1.814
y=0.0002x3 − 0.020x2+1.240x − 5.560
y=0.0004x3 − 0.029x2+1.370x − 6.097
y=0.0005x3 − 0.044x2+1.700x − 7.866
y=0.001x3 − 0.080x2+2.451x − 8.572
y=0.001x3 − 0.041x2+1.289x+2.192
y=0.0003x3 − 0.032x2+1.462x − 6.595
y=0.0004x3 − 0.034x2+1.484x − 6.639
y=0.0004x3 − 0.036x2+1.497x − 6.655
y=0.0003x3 − 0.033x2+1.443x − 6.284

R2

P

0.893
0.943
0.968
0.937
0.944
0.968
0.940
0.969
0.945
0.964
0.946
0.969
0.946
0.940
0.950
0.967
0.973
0.952
0.968
0.962
0.945
0.966
0.943
0.972
0.951
0.966
0.972
0.952
0.966
0.969
0.974
0.953
0.967
0.972
0.973
0.973
0.950
0.964
0.972
0.973
0.974
0.973

<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01

© Japanese Archaeological Association

225

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 14.

X-ray images of mandible of a sika deer excavated from the Asahi site

© Japanese Archaeological Association

226

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Figure 15. Period of death of sika deer excavated from the Asahi site■: Predicted age in months, ■: The 95% prediction interval.

Using the derived equation, I estimatedthe season of death of deer excavated fromthe Asahi site (Figure 14). I found that thedeaths of deer excavated from the Asahi
site were concentrated in winter (Yamazaki
et al. 2012, Figure 15).

Reconstruction of sika deer hunting

The sixth lumbar vertebrae of a deer with astone arrowhead stuck inside was excavatedfrom the Asahi site (Figures 16, 17). I Figure 16. Sixth lumbar vertebra of the sika
performed an X-ray computed scan image to deer with embedded stone arrowhead
accurately determine the angle of incidenceof the stone arrowhead and determined that the Yayoi hunter shot the arrow almost horizontally
towards the lower abdomen of the deer diagonally from the right side. The stone arrowhead
had not reached the spinal cord of this deer. Proliferation of bone was observed surrounding theembedded stone arrowhead, thereby leading to the conclusion that it did not inﬂict a fatal wound
and that the deer escaped with the arrowhead stuck in its body. However, this deer was excavatedfrom the Asahi site, so it is understood that it was later captured by the people living at this site.
Next, I created a replica of this specimen for exhibitions using a 3D printer on the basisof the X-ray computed scan data obtained from the analysis (Yamazaki et al. 2014; Figure18). Bones in this replica were made from transparent materials and the stone arrowhead
was made from colored materials, so it was possible to clearly see and touch the replica tounderstand that the stone arrowhead did not reach the spinal cord.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

227

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 17. Angle of incidence of the stone arrowhead

Figure 18.

Replica created with a 3D printer© Japanese Archaeological Association

228

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Figure 19.

The skeleton of a deer

Trade of antlers

Deer antlers and bones were the main materials used for making bone and antler
implements, so I investigated the acquisition of these materials.
Antler, mandible, scapula, ulna, metacarpal, and metatarsal were the parts of the deerused as material for making tools found at the Asahi site (Figure 19). In examining therate of usage of materials for bone and antler implements, it was evident that in the caseof mandibles, scapulas, and ulnas only part (approximately 10%–20%) of the available
resources was utilized. In contrast, antlers were completely utilized (100%) and most
(more than 94%) of the metacarpals and metatarsals were utilized (Figure 20).
I investigated the volume of excavated parts that were used for bone and antler
implements and discovered that the method of acquisition was diﬀerent for antlers andparts other than antlers (Figure 21). Parts other than antlers were obtained from thecarcasses of hunted deer at the Asahi site. The people living at this site also used antlers
attached to bone from the carcasses, obtained by breaking the cranium (Figures 22, 23),© Japanese Archaeological Association

229

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 20.

Parts used as materials for instruments, and their usage rate

Figure 21. Excavated volume of parts used as materials for tools (Asahi site)
Out of the parts that became tools, ● indicates parts that are greater in number than the number ofremains of the hunted individual, and ○ indicates the parts that are equal in number to the numberof remains of the hunted individual.
© Japanese Archaeological Association230

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Figure 22. Examples of usage of “bone-attached antlers” at the Asahi site
This ﬁgure shows the remains of cut-oﬀ antlers excavated from the Asahi site.
1: the frontal bone and pedicle of the sika deer. Traces in the pedicle suggest that it was cracked by
impact.
2: the frontal bone, pedicle, and burr of the sika deer. There are traces of dividing by grooving in theantlers.
3: the left frontal bone, pedicle, and burr. The traces on the antler stem and tine suggest that it was
cracked by impact.

Figure 23.

Bone-attached antlers (restoration from contemporary specimen of sika deer)© Japanese Archaeological Association

231

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

but this was not the only source of antlers. Since we were unable to ascertain whether they
themselves collected the naturally shed antlers themselves or whether they acquired themthrough trade, I examined antlers attached to bone, rather than shed antlers. The resultof this study revealed that antlers were acquired by various methods of trade (Yamazaki2007).
Deer antlers are shed in spring, and they regrow every year. The velvet antler grows
rapidly in the summer and becomes stiﬀ in the fall. I have already revealed that deer were
hunted primarily in winter. I hypothesize that deer were hunted in winter for two reasons:subsistence during the farming oﬀ-season and acquisition of antlers.

Chapter 5. The circumstances prior to the beginning of farming

The situation in the Final Jomon period just prior to the beginning of farming is discussed inchapter 5. Just before farming began, the people of the Jomon period lived dispersed amongsmall sites. They moved among multiple sites, staying in each for short periods of time.
Speciﬁc resources were excavated in large quantities from sites of the latter half of the Final
Jomon period. The study investigated the large-scale production of shell bracelets in the
Atsumi Peninsula and determined that a network spread over quite a wide area was formed.

Changes in the latter half of the Final Jomon period

Chapters 2, 3, and 4 discuss the usage of animal resources in the earliest farming period
in the inner part of Ise Bay. Due to the small amount of remains/artifacts from the
Final Jomon period in that area, however, the book could not suﬃciently discuss thecircumstances of the earliest farming period in detail.
Chapter 5 takes up the Mikawa Bay coast, where a large number of vertebrate remains
from the Final Jomon period have been reported. I discovered that a signiﬁcant change
occurred in the latter half of the Final Jomon period (Yamazaki 2013a). A large site wascreated in the ﬁrst half of the Final Jomon period, but in the latter half of the Final stage,people had dispersed to smaller-scale sites. Shell midden layers also decreased in number
and size.
Furthermore, shell midden layers no longer contained vertebrate bones. A multilateral
study on animal remains found the Ikawazu shell mound to be a settlement where people
lived permanently throughout the year in the ﬁrst half of Final Jomon (Niimi 1991;
Toizumi 1991). However, at that site in the latter half of Final Jomon, vertebrate bones
were no longer deposited in the shell midden layers. People living at the Ikawazu shellmound still deposited shells there but began to deposit ﬁsh and mammalian bones in
diﬀerent locations. I suggest that there was a change from a settlement morphology inwhich people resided year-round and deposited shells, ﬁsh, and mammals in the sameplace to a settlement morphology in which people migrated among multiple sites, one at© Japanese Archaeological Association232

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

which shells were deposited and others at which ﬁsh and mammals were deposited.

Concentration of speciﬁc remains/artifacts

In the latter half of the Final Jomon period, sites emerged from which over 5000 items
such as stone arrowheads and polished stone axes have been excavated. Within the innerpart of Mikawa Bay, a shell midden layer with a maximum height of 2.5m was formed
within an area of 185×40m in the Onishi shell mound (Iwase ed. 1995, 1996). The volumeof this shell midden is 5877m3, and is mainly comprised of clam shells, with hardly any
soil. The Onishi shell mound is described as a workspace for opening and processing clamshells in the coastal area (Toizumi 2000, 2008).
I hypothesize that a network spread over quite a wide area was formed. Many of thesites along the Mikawa Bay coast were reduced in scale in the latter half of the Final stage;
only sites at the mouth of Mikawa Bay reached their developmental peaks in the latter halfof the Final stage. The people of the Hobi shell mound, located at the tip of the Atsumi
Peninsula, had humeri that were among the strongest in the Japanese archipelago; for thatreason, these people are thought to have worked actively on transportation of materials bysea (Kaifu & Masuyama 2018).

Large-scale production of shell bracelets

Shell bracelets made from bittersweet clams (Glycymeris albolineata) are widelydistributed in the Tokai area. However, the Atsumi Peninsula is the only site from whichthese shell bracelets have been excavated in large quantities (Figure 24, 25).
Shellﬁsh for food were collected from areas diﬀerent from those for materials forshell bracelets. Jomon people of the Atsumi Peninsula collected shellﬁsh for food on
the Mikawa Bay side of the peninsula, near the study sites. In addition, they collected
shellﬁsh to use as material for shell bracelets in the open sea side of the Atsumi Peninsula.
Collection of material for shell bracelets was an independent activity carried out separatelyfrom food gathering.
Excavated shell bracelets exhibit two kinds of marks: traces of abrasion by water
currents and signs of predation by other species. Because of the marks of predation, it issuggested that the materials used for shell bracelets were from empty shells, buﬀeted by
the waves (Figure 26). Therefore, I conclude that the materials used for shell bracelets
were shells that washed up on the beach (Yamazaki & Oda 2007a). The bittersweet clams
that were used as materials for shell bracelets live at depths of 5–10m in the open sea.
There is a big diﬀerence between the collection of live clams and empty shells: if thepeople of the Jomon period collected bittersweet clams by diving into the sea, they would
have needed to acquire specialized skills. However, collecting beached shells on the shore
requires no special equipment or skill.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

233

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 24.

Distribution of shell bracelets made from bittersweet clams in the Tokai region.

I studied present-day beached shells at 22 locations along the coast of the Atsumi
Peninsula (Yamazaki & Oda 2006). Of the 3672 beached shells, the most abundant wereof bittersweet clams, the same kind used to make shell bracelets. At one location on
the seaward side of the Atsumi Peninsula, bittersweet clams were washed up in large
quantities (Figures 27, 28). Based on the study as well as an additional 10 years ofprevious investigation, I conﬁrmed that bittersweet clams wash up on the seaward sideof the Atsumi Peninsula. Similarly, bittersweet clams are known to have been washed
up in various other locations in Japan near sites from which a large volume of shellbracelets made of bittersweet clams have been excavated. During the Jomon period, there
were several locations scattered along the seaward side of the Atsumi Peninsula wherebittersweet clams washed up in large numbers.
Furthermore, shell bracelets from the latter half of the Final Jomon period have been
excavated in greater volume. The ratio of incomplete to complete shell bracelets also
© Japanese Archaeological Association

234

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Figure 25.

Process of making a shell bracelet from bittersweet clams

Figure 26. Traces of predation observed on
the inner side of the shell

Figure 27. Distribution of shellﬁsh washed up
on the shore of the Atsumi Peninsula© Japanese Archaeological Association

235

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 28.

Bittersweet clams seen washed up on the shore

increased. The study therefore concludes that the transport of shell bracelets out of the area
increased during the latter half of the Final stage.

Chapter 6.

Conclusion

During the earliest farming period (from Final Jomon to Yayoi) along the Ise Bay and
Mikawa Bay coasts, animal resource usage changed in the following manner.

Communities prior to the beginning of farming

During the latter half of the Final Jomon period, before the farming of crops began,communities that had formed at large sites gave way to relatively smaller, more dispersed
sites. Such communities moved among multiple locations, staying in each for short periodsof time.
Chapter 5 discusses the changes that took place in deposited shells versus animal
remains along the Mikawa Bay coast, but it is highly likely that changes of a similar nature© Japanese Archaeological Association

236

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

took place during the latter half of Final Jomon in the inner parts of Ise Bay. Shell middens
decreased in number and in size within this area and vertebrate bones were no longer
deposited in shell middens.

Shellﬁsh gathering

The number of shell mounds as well as the size of shell middens decreased in the
Yayoi period. After the latter half of the Early Yayoi period, the size of excavated clams
signiﬁcantly increased. I suggest that shellﬁsh gathering, which occurred during thefarming season, decreased.

Fishing

At sites located in alluvial lowlands, coastal as well as freshwater areas were major ﬁshinggrounds. People of the Yayoi period living in lowlands proactively ﬁshed for species that
reproduced in shallow freshwater areas such as paddy ﬁelds.
In contrast, coastal areas were the main ﬁshing grounds of sites located in higher areas.
In the Yayoi period, people living in higher areas used the time and energy previously
spent on ﬁshing for other subsistence activities. The ﬁshing season changed from summerfall to winter-spring in the Early stage of the Yayoi period.

Hunting

At the Asahi site, where the use of vertebrate resources can be comprehensively studied,vertebrates that came close to the lowlands near the site were used proactively. Boar
domestication was at an early stage.
People living at the Asahi site hunted deer in forests at some distance from the site. The
main deer hunting season was winter. Antlers were acquired by hunting and through trade.
Deer were hunted in winter for two reasons: subsistence during the farming oﬀ-season andacquisition of antlers.

Timing of changes in subsistence

In the inner parts of Ise Bay, such changes in vertebrate resource usage occurred in thelatter half of the Early Yayoi period. In contrast, this change was likely to have occurred
after the middle portion of the Middle Yayoi period along the Mikawa Bay coast, where
the size of clams did not change between the Final Jomon period and the Early Yayoi
period. Large clams from after the middle portion of the Middle Yayoi period have been
excavated.
The cultivation of plants began at the same time in the Ise Bay and Mikawa Bay coastal
areas. Millet appeared in the late Final Jomon period, and rice in the ﬁrst half of the
Early Yayoi period (Nakazawa 2017). Both were brought into Japan from the Eurasian© Japanese Archaeological Association

237

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Continent via the Korean Peninsula together with farming technology. However, there
was a diﬀerence in timing of the change of vertebrate resource usage between the Ise Bay
coast and the Mikawa Bay coast. The change occurred early on the inner part of Ise Bay
and later on the Mikawa Bay. Even though rice was grown on the Mikawa Bay coast, there
was a period lasting for several hundred years in which overall subsistence activity did notchange.

Part II.

Future prospects

Chapter 7. Animal remains research methods
Burnt vertebrate bones

Animal remains are greatly aﬀected by the sites’ decompositional environment. In Japan,
animal remains are diﬃcult to preserve because of the high temperatures, pluvial climate,and soil acidity caused by volcanic ash, which cause them to decompose and eventuallydisappear from most sites. However, the presence of shells reduces the surrounding acidity,
helping to preserve the remains. For this reason, zooarchaeology research on the Jomon
period is concentrated on the Paciﬁc coast, along which shell mounds are distributed.
Shell gathering decreased with the start of farming during the Yayoi period. Shell moundformation consequently decreased, and animal remains became even harder to preserve.
When burnt, vertebrate bones are less aﬀected by the depositional environment;
therefore, they can also be excavated from sites other than shell mounds. Burnt vertebratebones were investigated in chapter 7 and the subject of analysis was from Niigata
Prefecture, which is located on the Sea of Japan coast where shell mounds are distributed
sparsely.
The book collectively studies sites from the Jomon period in Niigata Prefecture where
animal remains were excavated (Yamazaki 2013b). Burnt bones were discovered themost frequently in that area. Shell mounds were located in coastal areas, cave sites in themountainous areas, and wetland sites in lowland areas. The sites from which burnt bones
were excavated were, in contrast, more widely distributed throughout what is now Niigata
Prefecture (Figure 29). Burnt bones are not aﬀected by site environment, which constitutes
a signiﬁcant advantage for research on animal remains that are otherwise easily aﬀected by
the depositional environment.
I analyzed 8826 (66.93g) burnt bone items from the Rokutanda-minami site andidentiﬁed 34 taxonomical groups of ﬁsh (Yamazaki 2012a, 2018; Figure 30). Remainsof salmon (Salmonidae sp.), carp (Cyprinidae sp.), and sweet ﬁsh (Plecoglossus altivelis
altivelis) that live in freshwater areas were excavated from this site. Salmon in particular
was found in abundance, indicating that people from this region ﬁshed for salmon© Japanese Archaeological Association

238

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Figure 29.

Jomon period sites from which animal remains were excavated (Niigata Prefecture)

intensively. Remains of saltwater ﬁsh found at this site included the Japanese pilchard
and mackerel (Scomber sp.), which swim in the surface layers; the bastard halibut(Paralichthyidae sp.) and righteye ﬂounder (Pleuronectidae sp.), which reside in the lower
layers; and the black seabream (Acanthopagrus sp.) and Japanese seabass (Lateolabraxsp.), which prefer brackish waters. Inhabitants of this site not only ﬁshed for salmon but
also undertook multiple ﬁshery activities in the sea. Thus, burnt bone analysis enabled us
to investigate the usage of animal resources.

What archaeologists should do at the excavation site

Japan has few zooarchaeologists, so they are often requested to analyse animal remains
by other archaeologists. Although many high-quality books have been publishedon the subject of zooarchaeology, such literature is often written speciﬁcally forzooarchaeologists, with few works treating the subject from the archaeologists’ point© Japanese Archaeological Association

239

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 30.

Burnt ﬁsh remains excavated from the Rokutanda-minami site (Jomon period)© Japanese Archaeological Association

240

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

of view. They may not provide information on “what archaeologists should do at the
excavation site” based on the assumption that zooarchaeologists will be asked to performthe analysis of animal remains. This chapter summarizes points that archaeologists should
consider when requesting analysis of excavated animal remains.
When zooarchaeologists are not permanently present at the excavation site,archaeologists should accurately record the information that is lost at the excavationsite and be responsible for informing the zooarchaeologist. Information that is lost at
the excavation site includes sediments of the excavated layer of animal remains [thesedimentary soil of the layer from which the animal remains were excavated] and the stateof the animal remains when excavated. Insuﬃcient records at the excavation site will limit
productive research on animal remains.
When animal remains are found in quantity, archaeologists should draw a sketch
showing the state of the animal remains. It is recommended that a digital photo be taken
and printed out prior to removal of the bones (Figure 31). Archaeologists should then write
numbers on the printed photo and identify the bones according to these numbers so thatzooarchaeologists can match the photos with the bones later. Archaeologists should notwash the bones too thoroughly, as it may aﬀect DNA analysis. Species identiﬁcation andage estimation are based on cranium and limb diaphysis. Therefore, archaeologists shouldpick up these parts carefully so as to avoid damage.
Wet sieving is required for detailed zooarchaeological study. Samples are collectedfrom certain shell middens during large-scale excavations. Poorly planned shell midden
sample collections represent a huge burden for the subsequent steps. Wet sieving shouldbe performed on limited shell midden soil, and the workload that ﬁts within the budget
and time period should be realistically estimated. Burnt bones are sometimes found inkilns/furnaces, waste disposal holes, and burnt dwellings. Although the cost-eﬃciency of
unplanned wet sieving sediments is low, to record the site feature in cross-section, only

Figure 31.

Numbering items on the printed photo before removing the bones© Japanese Archaeological Association

241

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 32.

Test by sieving excavated soil

half of the sediments in the feature should be dug, and sieving should be tried in the partof the soil that was dug (Figure 32). The remaining half of the sediment in each strata fromwhich burnt bones were excavated should be sieved in oﬃcial method. The use of ﬂotation
along with wet sieving is recommended. In addition to burnt bones, this method allows thecollection of carbonized nuts and seeds from the soil of the same site feature.
When non-specialists in zooarchaeology extract micro-artifacts from the sieve’s remaining
materials, only the materials judged as bone are delivered to zooarchaeologists. In otherwords, material that they were unable to recognize as bone do not reach zooarchaeologists
for analysis. To prevent this limitation, it is desirable that zooarchaeologists be allowed topreliminarily extract micro-artifacts from un-sieved material.

Chapter 8.

Zooarchaeology methodologies

Age evaluation

Among the most often excavated mammals in Japan (boar, sika deer, cow, horse, and dog),
the sika deer is the only species whose bone age has not been previously studied. Chapter 8
presents the ﬁndings of a basic study on the age of present-day sika deer bones.
The whole body anatomy of sika deer was studied using skeletal specimens of 219
present-day individuals (68 males, 108 females, and 43 unknown) in the collection of the
Tochigi Prefectural Museum. The state of epiphysiodesis was observed in 92 parts, which
comprised 10 front limbs, 8 hind limbs, 20 phalanges, and 54 vertebrae (Figure 33). Agingassociated changes in epiphysiodesis were then divided into the following three stages:
epiphysis and diaphysis are unfused and dissociated (score 0), epiphysis and diaphysis are
fused but an epiphyseal line is present (score 1), and epiphysis and diaphysis are fused andan epiphyseal line is absent (score 2). The status of the diaphysis fusion was evaluated via
the quantiﬁcation of each of the three stages (Yamazaki 2016; Table 4).
© Japanese Archaeological Association

242

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Figure 33.

State of epiphysiodesis (front leg) of a contemporary sika deer
© Japanese Archaeological Association

243

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Table 4.

Period of epiphysiodesis of the sika deer
Element

Forelimbs

Score 1

N

Score 2Tuberculum infraglenoidale

212

0–0.5

129 0.5–1.5

7

1–2

76

Humerus

Proximal end
Distal end (Condylus humeri, Epicondylus medialis)
Distal end (Epicondylus lateralis)

212
183
183

0–2
0–0.5
0–0.5

163 1.5–4
6
3–5
14 0.5–1.5 113
1–2
86 0.5–1.5 42 1.5–2

43
56
55

Radius

Proximal end
Distal end

213
213

0–0.5
0–2

12
162

0–0.5
2–3

44 0.5–1
5
2–4

157
46

Ulna

Proximal end (Olecranon)
Distal end

210
210

0–2
0–2

161
163

2–4
2

5
1

3–5
2–5

44
46

Proximal end
Distal end

200
199

0–0.5
0–1.5

7
156

—
2

0
1

0–1
2–3

193
42

N

N

Acetabulum

212

0–0.5

107 0.5–1.5

30

1–2

75

Femur

Proximal end
Distal end

210
211

0–1.5
0–1.5

156
158

2–4
2–3

9
9

3–5
3–4

45
44

Tibia

Proximal end
Distal end

212
212

0–1.5
0–1.5

160
146

2–4
1–2

8
3–5
9 1.5–3

44
57
37

Tuber calcanei

197

0–1.5

154

2–4

6

3–5

Proximal end

201

0

5

—

0

0–0.5 196

Distal end

201

0–1.5

156

2–3

4

2–4

41

Proximal phalanx

Proximal end
Distal end

195
195

0–0.5
—

128 0.5–1.5
0
—

15
0

1–2
0

52
195

Middle phalanx

Proximal end
Distal end

195
195

0–0.5
—

128 0.5–1.5
0
—

7
0

1–2
0

56
195

4

Metatarsals

VertebralcolumnScore 0PelvisCalcaneus

Phalanges

Age (95% prediction intervals)

ScapulaMetacarpals

Hindlimbs

N

Distal phalanx

Proximal end

195

0

5

0–1

186

Atlas

Dorsal tubercle
Ventral tubercle

189
189

0
0

8 0.5–1.5 147
2–4
8 0.5–1
126 0.5–2

0.5

34
55

Axis

Head of vertebra (dens, cranial articular process)Foosa of vertebra

185
187

0
0–2

9
0–1
76 0.5–4

51 0.5–1.5 124
90
5–6
21

Cervical vertebrae Head of vertebra(C3–C7)
Foosa of vertebra

943
932

0–2
0–2

276 0.5–4
505 0.5–5

493
337

4–6
5–10

174
90

Thoracic vertebrae

Head of vertebra
Foosa of vertebra

2423
2424

0–3
0–3

994 0.5–5
1220 0.5–6

1161
974

4–13
5–13

268
230

Lumber vertebrae

Head of vertebra
Foosa of vertebra

1142
1143

0–2
0–3

361 0.5–2
430 0.5–4

638
582

3–6
3–6

143
131

Sacral vertebra(S1)

Head of vertebra
Foosa of vertebra

189
187

0–2
0–2

86 0.5–2
53 0.5–3

78
113

3–4
4–6

25
21

Score 0: Epiphysis and diaphysis are unfused and dissociated.
Score 1: Epiphysis and diaphysis are fused but an epiphyseal line is present.
Score 2: Epiphysis and diaphysis are fused and an epiphyseal line is absent.

To date, age estimation of sika deer was only possible using a teeth-based procedure,
thereby requiring jaw bones excavated in good condition from speciﬁc sites. The results ofthe present study allow age estimation of sika deer excavated from a wide range of sites.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

244

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Ethnoarchaeology and experimental archaeology

As part of a study on the middle range theory, which allows studying the relationshipbetween human activities related to usage of vertebrate resources and its evidence, I
conducted a study on experimental archaeology and ethnoarchaeology.
Currently in Japan, only food resources (meat) are obtained from hunted boar andsika deer. Therefore, it is hard to obtain a model of vertebrate resource usage that does
not involve food resource use. Furthermore, in contemporary Japan, it is hard to study
ethnoarchaeology in a manner similar to Binford and Brain’s work (Binford 1978, 1981;
Brain 1976, 1981) because the Japanese law prohibits abandoning the remnants of hunted
or butchered vertebrates.
Therefore, the study of vertebrate resource usage was performed by accompanying
people living a nomadic lifestyle in the Zavkhan Province of Mongolia (Yamazaki 2012b).
Mongolia is an area where several vertebrate resources are used and the vertebrate remains
can be researched after disposal. The process of formation of animal remains can bedivided into the following stages: hunting, carving, usage, disposal, and post-disposal. For
each stage, the relationship between human activities related to vertebrate resource usage
and traces left on bones as a result was observed, and the artefactual and non-artefactual
factors related to the formation of animal remains was recorded (Figure 34). In addition,
the adequacy of Brain’s model (Brain 1976, 1981), which represents the eﬀect of dogs on
animal remains and has been frequently used in Japan, was veriﬁed (Figures 35, 36).
Next, animal carcasses were carved according to traditional Mongolian procedures.
Skeletal specimens of butchered goats were prepared, and the relationship between
human activities related to vertebrate resource usage and traces left on bones as a result
was recorded (Figure 37). Studies in the ﬁelds of ethnoarchaeology and experimentalarchaeology complement each other. Ethnoarchaeological studies aim to record the overall
formation processes. Overlapping traces from multiple activities are often observed
on vertebrate bones, thereby preventing a full understanding of the traces left fromcarving alone. To tackle this limitation, I conducted a study in the ﬁeld of experimentalarchaeology and revealed the relationship between vertebrate carving and traces left onbones.

Chapter 9.

Contribution to society

Most archaeological excavations conducted in Japan are urgent pre-excavation
investigations associated with construction works. Whenever archaeological sites haveto be destroyed for the sake of development of land, Japanese archaeologists conduct
excavation investigations prior to construction to record information in an archaeologicalsite that will disappear. Approximately 8000 excavation investigations per year are
performed in Japan. Archaeologists are expected to contribute to society by providing the© Japanese Archaeological Association

245

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 34.

Slaughter and ﬁeld dressing of sheep using traditional procedures© Japanese Archaeological Association

246

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Figure 35.

Sheep and goat bones found disposed of around the yurt

Figure 36. Comparison between “sheep and goat bones gathered in Mongolia” and “goat bones
gathered in Southern areas of Africa”© Japanese Archaeological Association

247

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

Figure 37.

Traces left on bone from ﬁeld carving experiments© Japanese Archaeological Association

248

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

results obtained from excavation investigations.
Chapter 9 presents information pertaining to the use of those results (Yamazaki 2010).
Results of studies on animal remains and plant remains excavated from archaeological sites
were used for nature restoration projects, with the aim of restoring natural environmentsthat disappeared in the past.
The literature on nature restoration projects states that the projects should aim to restore
natural environments of the Jomon or Yayoi periods. However, actual nature restoration
projects have not regenerated the nature of the Jomon or Yayoi periods but have insteadregenerated the state of nature from the time period of approximately 50–60 years ago.
The reason why the nature from 50–60 years ago has been regenerated is that this period
corresponds to the childhood of the people who took part in the projects. Childhood
memories of the authors are described in the literature related to nature restoration
projects, which share the following common logic: there was plenty of beautiful nature
in my childhood, and that nature had existed, without changing, from the past (the Jomonor Yayoi period). However, that nature has been destroyed in association with modern
economic growth, so we must take action to regenerate that nature.
Such authors have assumed that the natural landscape from their childhood had notchanged since the Jomon or Yayoi periods. However, they have not presented academic
arguments to support that assumption. Diverse nature existed in Japan, and diﬀerent typesof relationships were formed between nature and the people living in the archipelago.
Authors of the literature on nature restoration projects have over-simpliﬁed the history ofsuch human-nature relationships. Although they are using the past as evidence, they are
actually disregarding history.
Our investigation into “How are our study results being used?” led us to an answer toanother question that it raised, “How should we present the results of our study?” Some
environmental archaeologists have also made statements similar to those made by theauthors of the nature restoration project. Today, we are strongly expected to contributeto society through the results of our archaeological study; however, people are mainlyinterested in study results with which modern society can easily empathize. Whenpresenting our results, we must ask ourselves, “Have we changed the past so that it ﬁts theideal of the present? Have we neglected the past that is not ideal from the point of view ofthe present?” Further discussion is necessary to explore ways in which archaeology cancontribute to society.

Notes
Figure 7 created from data in Kubo (1998, 2008), Kōketsu & Yamazaki (2005), Yamazaki(2003), Yamazaki & Oda (2007b), Yamazaki & Miyakoshi (2005), Watanabe (1987,© Japanese Archaeological Association

249

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

2003), Watanabe & Isotani (1982), Watanabe & Tanaka (1986, 1992, 2000), Watanabe
et al. (2002).
Figure 9 created from Ochiai ed. (1994) and Suzuki et al. (1980).
Figure 12 and 13 created from Niimi (2000), Nishimoto (1992, 1994), Nishimoto et al.
(1992), Toizumi et al. (2009), Yamazaki & Oda (2007b).
Figure 16 and 17 created from Miyakoshi et al. (2011).
Figure 19 created from Suto ed. (1995) and Nishimoto (1999).
Figure 24 created from data in Kawazoe (2005, 2006).

References
Japanese
ANEZAKI Tomoko 1999. Yayoi jidai no Kantō chihō ni okeru buta no sonzai—
Kanagawa-ken Zushi-shi Ikego isekigun no shutsudo shiryō no kentō [Pigs in the
Kantō region in the Yayoi period—an examination of materials excavated from theIkego site in Zushi City in Kanagawa Prefecture]. Dōbutsu Kōkogaku 12: 39–53. 姉崎
智子 1999「弥生時代の関東地方におけるブタの存在—神奈川県逗子市池子遺跡群の出土資料の検討—」『動物考古学』12, pp. 39–53.
ANEZAKI Tomoko 2004. Yayoi jidai no inoshishirui ni mirareru chiriteki tayōsei[Regional variation in the Yayoi pig population]. Dōbutsu Kōkogaku 21: 1–15. 姉崎
智子 2004 「弥生時代のイノシシ類にみられる地理的多様性」『動物考古学』21, pp.
1–15.
FUNAKOSHI Shigeo and YANAGIBASHI Shigeaki 1983. Enshūnada engan no
Atsumigaikai iki ni okeru maiwashi sanranjō oyobi sanranki no kankyō tokusei[Environmental characteristics during the spawning period and in the spawning areaof the Japanese sardine, Sardinops melanosticta (T. and S.) in the coastal waters oﬀ
Enshū-nada, the Paciﬁc coast of central Honshu]. Suisan kaiyō kenkyū kaihō 44:
29–43. 船越茂雄・柳橋茂昭 1983「遠州灘沿岸の渥美外海域におけるマイワシ産卵場
および産卵期の環境特性」『水産海洋研究会報』44, pp. 29–43.
HORIKOSHI Masayuki 1984. Hamaguri kara mita seigyō no kisetsusei [Seasonality ofsubsistence in the analysis of clams]. Shikan 16: 1–20. 堀越正行 1984「ハマグリからみた生業の季節性」『史館』16, pp. 1–20.
IWASE Akitoshi 2003. Aichiken ni okeru Yayoi kaizuka ni tsuite—kaizuka no tokusei togyoryō katsudō no suisoku [Shell middens of the Yayoi period in Aichi Prefecture—
inferring the characteristics of shell mounds and ﬁshing activities]. Ritsumeikan
Daigaku kōkogaku ronshū 3-2: 587–604. 岩瀬彰利 2003 「愛知県における弥生貝塚について— 貝塚の特性と漁撈活動の推測—」『 立命館大学考古学論集 』3–2, pp.
587–604.
IWASE Akitoshi (ed.) 1995. Ōnishi kaizuka [Ōnishi shell mound]. Toyohashi, Aichi
Prefecture: Toyohashi Municipal Board of Education. 岩瀬彰利 (編) 1995『大西貝塚』© Japanese Archaeological Association

250

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

愛知県豊橋市：豊橋市教育委員会．

IWASE Akitoshi (ed.) 1996. Ōnishi kaizuka 2 [Ōnishi shell mound, Vol. 2]. Toyohashi,
Aichi Prefecture: Toyohashi Municipal Board of Education. 岩瀬彰利 (編) 1996
『大西貝塚 2』愛知県豊橋市：豊橋市教育委員会．
Japan Fisheries Resource Conservation Association 2002. Ise wankō dōro ni kakawaru
gyogyō jittai chōsa hōkokusho [Report on the survey of ﬁshery conditions related to
the Ise Bay shore road]．日本水産資源保護協会 2002『伊勢湾口道路に係る漁業実態
調査報告書』.
KAIFU Yōsuke and MASUYAMA Tadayuki 2018. Jōmon jidaijin no jōwankotsu wanaze futoi noka?—Iseki kan hen’i ga shisa suru sono gen’in [Why are the humeriof the Jomon people so thick?—Causes suggested by variations in remains].
Anthropological Science (Japanese Series) 126-2: 133–155. 海部陽介・増山禎之
2018「 縄文時代人の上腕骨はなぜ太いのか？— 遺跡間変異が示唆するその原因—」『Anthropological Science (Japanese Series) 』, pp. 133–155.
KANEKO Hiromasa 1980. Yayoi jidai no kaizuka to dōbutsu izontai [Shell mounds andfaunal remains of the Yayoi period], in MORI Kōichi (ed.) Sanseiki no kōkogaku, jō[Archaeology in the 3rd century, Vol. 1]: 86–141. Tokyo: Gakuseisha. 金子浩昌 1980
「弥生時代の貝塚と動物遺存体」森浩一 (編)『三世紀の考古学』上巻, pp. 86–141. 東
京：学生社．

KAWAZOE Kazuaki 2005. Tōkai chiiki ni okeru kaiwa ni tsuite—sono seisaku, shiyō,
haiki no nagare [Shell bracelets in the Tōkai area—their production, use, anddisposal]. Kōkogaku Forum 18: 60–77. 川添和暁 2005「東海地域における貝輪について—その製作・使用・廃棄の流れ—」『考古学フォーラム』18, pp. 60–77.
KAWAZOE Kazuki 2006. Tōkai chiiki Jōmon jidai kōbanki no benkeigai-sei kaiwa [ Shell
bracelets made from Glycymeris albolineata in the Late and Final Jōmon period in the
Tokai area]. Kenkyū Kiyō 7: 1–20. 川添和暁 2006「東海地域縄文時代後晩期のベンケ
イガイ製貝輪」『研究紀要』7, pp. 1–20.
KOIKE Hiroko 1983. Kairui bunseki [Analysis of shellﬁsh], in KATŌ Shinpei et al. (eds.)
Jōmon bunka no kenkyū 2 [Jomon culture, Vol. 2]: 221–237. Tokyo: Yūzankaku. 小池
裕子 1983「貝類分析」加藤晋平ほか (編)『縄文文化の研究』2, pp. 221–237. 東京：雄山閣．

KŌKETSU Shigeru and YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2005. Tamanoi iseki shutsudo no gyorui
izontai [Fish remains excavated from the Tamanoi site]. Nagoya-shi Miharashidai
Kōko Shiryōkan kenkyū kiyō 7: 21–32. 纐纈茂・山崎健 2005「玉ノ井遺跡出土の魚類遺存体」『名古屋市見晴台考古資料館研究紀要』7, pp. 21–32.
KUBO Teiko 1998. Isshiki-aokai iseki no dōbutsu itai to seigyō keitai [Faunal remains
and subsistence in Isshiki-aokai site], in KITŌ Tsuyoshi and HORIKI Mamiko (ed.)
Isshiki-aokai iseki 1 [Report of archaeological excavations at the Isshiki-aokai site,Vol.1]: 57–68. Aichi Prefecture: Aichi Archaeology Centre. 久保禎子 1998「一色青海遺跡の動物遺体と生業形態」鬼頭剛・堀木真美子 (編)『一色青海遺跡 (自然科学・考察編) 』, pp. 57–68. 愛知県：愛知県埋蔵文化財センター．
© Japanese Archaeological Association

251

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

KUBO Teiko 2008. Isshiki-aokai iseki no dōbutsu itai to seigyō keitai [Faunal remains
and subsistence in the Isshiki-aokai site], in HIGAMI Noboru (ed.) Isshiki-aokai iseki
2 [Report of archaeological excavations at Isshiki-aokai site, Vol. 2]: 72–73. Aichi
Prefecture: Aichi Archaeology Centre. 久保禎子 2008「一色青海遺跡の動物遺体と生業形態」樋上昇 (編)『一色青海遺跡 II』, pp. 72–73. 愛知県：愛知県埋蔵文化財セン
ター．

MATSUGI Takehiko 1984. Genshi kodai ni okeru yumi no hattatsu—tokuni yuhazu no
keitai o chūshin ni [Development of the bow in primitive and ancient times—with
focus on the shape of the nocks (the ends of the bow where the strings are attached)].
Machikaneyama ronsō 18: 1–22. 松木武彦 1984「原始・古代における弓の発達—とくに弭の形態を中心に—」『待兼山論叢』18, pp. 1–22.
MATSUGI Takehiko 1989. Yayoi jidai ni okeru sekisei buki no hattatsu to chiikisei—
tokuni dasei sekizoku ni tsuite [Development and regional characteristics of stone
weapons in the Yayoi period—with focus on stone arrowheads made by lithic
reduction]. Kōkogaku Kenkyū 35–4: 69–96. 松木武彦 1989「弥生時代における石製武器の発達と地域性—とくに打製石鏃について—」『考古学研究』35–4, pp. 69–96.
MIYAKOSHI Kenji, YAMAZAKI Takeshi, OKŌCHI Takayuki, HARADA Motoki 2011.
Asahi iseki kara shutsudo shita sekizoku no sasatta shika yōtsui ni tsuite [Lumbar
vertebrae of deer pierced with a stone arrowhead]. Kenkyū kiyō 12: 9–18. 宮腰健司・
山崎健・大河内隆之・原田幹 2011「朝日遺跡から出土した石鏃の刺さったシカ腰椎について」『研究紀要』12, pp. 9–18.
NAKAZAWA Michihiko 2017. Nihon rettō ni okeru nōkō no denpa to teichaku [Thespread and establishment of agriculture in the Japanese archipelago]. Kikan Kōkogaku『季刊考古学』138,
138: 26–29. 中沢道彦 2017「日本列島における農耕の伝播と定着」
pp. 26–29.
NIIMI Michiko 1991. Aichi-ken Ikawazu iseki shutsudo nihon inoshishi no nenrei oyobishibō jiki satei ni tsuite [Determination of the age and mortal season of wild boars
excavated from the Ikawazu Site, Aichi Prefecture]. Kokuritsu Rekishi Minzoku
Hakubutsukan kenkyū hōkoku 29: 123–148. 新美倫子 1991「愛知県伊川津遺跡出土ニ
ホンイノシシの年齢及び死亡時期査定について」『国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告』29,
pp. 123–148.
NIIMI Michiko 2000. Asahi iseki shutsudo no dōbutsu itai [Faunal remains excavatedfrom Asahi site], in MIYAKOSHI Kenji (ed.) Asahi iseki 6 [Report of archaeologicalexcavations at Asahi site, Vol. 6]: 438–457. Aichi Prefecture: Aichi Archaeology
Centre. 新美倫子 2000「朝日遺跡出土の動物遺体」宮腰健司 (編)『朝日遺跡 VI』, pp.
438–457. 愛知県：愛知県埋蔵文化財センター．
NISHIMOTO Toyohiro 1991. Yayoi jidai no buta ni tsuite [Pigs in the Yayoi period].
Kokuritsu Rekishi Minzoku Hakubutsukan kenkyū hōkoku 36: 175–194. 西本豊弘
『国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告』36, pp. 175–194.
1991「弥生時代のブタについて」NISHIMOTO Toyohiro 1992. Asahi iseki no Yayoi jidai no buta [The Yayoi pigs excavatedfrom the Asahi site], in MORI Yūichi (ed.) Asahi iseki 2 [Report of archaeological© Japanese Archaeological Association

252

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

excavations at Asahi site, Vol. 2]: 213–242. Aichi Prefecture: Aichi Archaeology, pp.
Centre. 西本豊弘 1992「朝日遺跡の弥生時代のブタ」森勇一 (編)『朝日遺跡 II』
213–242. 愛知県：愛知県埋蔵文化財センター．
NISHIMOTO Toyohiro 1993. Yayoi jidai no buta no keishitsu ni tsuite [The physicalcharacteristics of the pigs in the Yayoi period]. Kokuritsu Rekishi Minzoku
Hakubutsukan kenkyū hōkoku 50: 49–62. 西本豊弘 1993「弥生時代のブタの形質について」『国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告』50, pp. 49–62.
NISHIMOTO Toyohiro 1994. Asahi iseki shutsudo no inu to dōbutsu itai no matome[Dogs and animal remains excavated from the Asahi site, a summary], in
MIYAKOSHI Kenji (ed.) Asahi iseki 5 [Report of archaeological excavations at the
Asahi site, Vol.5: 329–338]. Aichi Prefecture: Aichi Archaeology Centre. 西本豊弘
1994「朝日遺跡出土のイヌと動物遺体のまとめ」宮腰健司 (編) 『朝日遺跡 V』, pp.
329–338. 愛知県：愛知県埋蔵文化財センター．
NISHIMOTO Toyohiro 1997. Yayoi jidai no dōbutsushitsu shokuryō [Meat consumption
in the Yayoi period]. Kokuritsu Rekishi Minzoku Hakubutsukan kenkyū hōkoku 70:『国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告』
255–265. 西本豊弘 1997「弥生時代の動物質食料」
70, pp. 255–265.
NISHIMOTO Toyohiro 1999. Honyūrui no hone no bunrui [Classiﬁcation of mammalianbones], in NISHIMOTO Toyohiro and MATSUI Akira (ed.) Kōkogaku todōbutsugaku [Archaeology and zoology]: 21–36. Tokyo: Dōseisha. 西本豊弘 1999「哺乳類の骨の分類」『考古学と動物学』, pp. 21–36. 東京：同成社．
NISHIMOTO Toyohiro, SATŌ Osamu, NIIMI Michiko 1992. Asahi iseki no dōbutsu
itai [Faunal remains excavated from the Asahi site], MORI Yūichi (ed.) Asahi iseki
2 [Report of archaeological excavations at the Asahi site, Vol. 2]: 207–212. Aichi
Prefecture: Aichi Archaeology Centre. 西本豊弘・佐藤治・新美倫子 1992「朝日遺跡の動物遺体」森勇一 (編)『朝日遺跡 II』, pp. 207–212. 愛知県：愛知県埋蔵文化財セン
ター．

OCHIAI Akira (ed.) 1994. Gyorui kaibō dai zukan [Encyclopedia of ﬁsh anatomy]. Tokyo:
Midori Shobō. 落合明 (編) 1994『魚類解剖大図鑑』東京：緑書房．
SAHARA Makoto 1964. Sekisei buki no hattatsu [Development of stone weapons],
Shiude: Kagawa-ken Mitoyogun Takumachō Shiudeyama Yayoi-shiki iseki no kenkyū[Report of Yayoi-type archaeological excavations at the Shiudeyama site in Takumachō, Mitoyo-gun, Kagawa Prefecture]: 131–145. Takuma, Kagawa Prefecture:
Takuma Cultural Properties Protection Committee. 佐原真 1964「石製武器の発達」『紫雲出—香川県三豊郡詫間町紫雲出山弥生式遺跡の研究—』, pp. 131–145. 香川県詫間町：香川県三豊郡詫間町文化財保護委員会．

SAHARA Makoto 1975. Katsute sensō ga atta—sekizoku no henshitsu [There was war in
the past—the transformation of stone arrowheads]. Kodaigaku Kenkyū 78: 26–30. 佐
原真 1975「かつて戦争があった—石鏃の変質—」『古代学研究』78, pp. 26–30.
SHIMOJŌ Nobuyuki 1989. Yayoi jidai no Genkai-nada kaijin no dōkō: gyoson no
shutsugen to yakuwari [Movements of ﬁshermen on the Genkai Sea in the Yayoi© Japanese Archaeological Association

253

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

period: the emergence and role of ﬁshing villages], in Yokoyama Kōichi Sensei
Taikan Kinen Jigyōkai [The Committee for Celebrating Dr. Yokoyama’s Retirementfrom Kyushū University] (ed.) Seisan to ryūtsū no kōkogaku [Archaeology of
production and distribution]: 107–123. Fukuoka: The Committee for Celebrating Dr.
Yokoyama Kōichi’s Retirement from Kyushu University. 下條信行 1989「弥生時代の玄海灘海人の動向—漁村の出現と役割—」横山浩一先生退官記念事業会 (編)『生産と流通の考古学』, pp. 107–123. 福岡：横山浩一先生退官記念事業会．
SUTŌ Takashi (ed.) 1995. Nakasawame kaizuka 2 [Report of archaeological excavations
at Nakasawame shell mounds, Vol. 2]. Sendai, Miyagi Prefecture: Department ofArchaeology, Graduate School of Arts and Letters, Tōhoku University. 須藤隆編 1995
『中沢目貝塚』2, 宮城県仙台市：東北大学文学部考古学研究室．
SUZUKI Kimio, ABE Tokiharu, HASEGAWA Yoshikazu, UENO Teruya, HAYASHI
Kensaku, HATTORI Jin, AKAZAWA Takeru 1980. Senshi jidai iseki ni okeru gyorui
hyōhon no sosei ni kansuru kiso kenkyū [Basic research on the composition ofﬁsh remains in the prehistoric age], in Editorial Board of Cultural Properties (ed.)
Kōkogaku to bijutsushi no shizenkagaku teki kenkyū [Natural scientiﬁc approaches
in archeology and art history]: 261–284. Tokyo: Japan Society for the Promotion of
Science. 鈴木公雄・阿部宗明・長谷川善和・上野輝弥・林謙作・服部仁・赤沢威
1980「先史時代遺跡における魚類標本の組成に関する基礎研究」古文化財編集委員会(編)『考古学・美術史の自然科学的研究』, pp. 261–284. 東京：日本学術振興会．
TANAKA Yoshiaki 1986. Yayoi jidai ikō no shokuryō seisan [Food production from the
Yayoi period onward], in KONDŌ Yoshirō, YOKOYAMA Kōichi, AMAKASU Ken,KATŌ Shinpei, SAHARA Makoto, TANAKA Migaku, TOZAWA Mitsunori (eds.)
Iwanami kōza Nihon kōkogaku 3 [Iwanami series in Japanese archaeology, Vol. 3]:
57–119. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. 田中義昭 1986「弥生時代以降の食料生産」近藤義郎・横山浩一・甘粕健・加藤晋平・佐原眞・田中琢・戸沢充則 (編)『岩波講座日本考古学』3, pp. 57–119. 東京：岩波書店．
TOIZUMI Takeji 1991. Kaisō no taiseki kisetsu o riyō shita seigyō kisetsu sukejūru no
fukugen hōhō to sono igi—jirei bunseki: Ikawazu kaizuka ni okeru gyorō katsudōno kisetsu-sei [A method of seasonality estimation based on seasonal cycles ofrefuse deposition observed in shell middens—a case study: the seasonality of ﬁshingactivities in the Ikawazu shell midden]. Kokuritsu Rekishi Minzoku Hakubutsukan
kenkyū hōkoku 29: 197–233. 樋泉岳二 1991「貝層の堆積季節を利用した生業季節ス
ケジュールの復元方法とその意義—事例分析：伊川津貝塚における漁撈活動の季節
性—」『国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告』29, pp. 197–233.
TOIZUMI Takeji 2000. Atsumi hantō to sono shūhen-iki ni okeru Jōmon banki no gyorō
katsudō no tokushoku [Characteristics of prehistoric ﬁshery in the Final Jōmon periodaround Atsumi Peninsula]. Dōbutsu Kōkogaku 14: 23–38. 樋泉岳二 2000「渥美半島とその周辺域における縄文時代晩期の漁労活動の特色」『動物考古学』14, pp. 23–38.
TOIZUMI Takeji 2008. Dōbutsu itai: kai, hone [Faunal remains: shells and bones], in
Executive Committee of Japanese Archaeological Association 2008 Meeting in© Japanese Archaeological Association254

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

Aichi Prefecture (ed.) Nihon Kōkogaku Kyōkai 2008 nendo Aichi taikai kenkyū
happyō shiryō shū [A collection of research publications of Japanese Archaeological
Association 2008 meeting in Aichi Prefecture]: 69–76. 樋泉岳二 2008「動物遺体 (貝・骨) 」日本考古学協会 2008 年度愛知大会実行委員会 (編)『日本考古学協会 2008 年度
愛知大会研究発表資料集』, pp. 69–76.
TOIZUMI Takeji, NAKAMURA Kentarō, KONG Ji Hyun 2009. Dōbutsu itai [Faunal
remains], in AKATSUKA Jirō (ed.) 2009 Asahi iseki 8 [Report of archaeologicalexcavations at Asahi site 8]: 248–262. Aichi Prefecture: Aichi Archaeology Centre. 樋
泉岳二・中村賢太郎・孔智賢 2009「動物遺体」赤塚次郎 (編)『朝日遺跡 VIII』, pp.
248–262. 愛知県：愛知県埋蔵文化財センター．
WADA Seigo 1982. Yayoi-Kofun jidai no gyogu [Fishing tools in the Yayoi and Kofun
periods], in Dr. Yukio Kobayashi Commemorative Papers Publishing Committee (ed.)
Kōkogaku ronkō [Archaeological study]: 305–339. Tokyo: Heibonsha. 和田晴吾 1982
「弥生・古墳時代の漁具」小林行雄博士古希記念論文集慣行委員会 (編) 『考古学論考—小林行雄博士古稀記念論文集—』, pp. 305–339. 東京：平凡社．
WADA Seigo 1988. Gyoryō [Fishing], in KANASEKI Hiroshi and SAHARA Makoto(eds.) Yayoi bunka no kenkyū 2 [Research on Yayoi culture, Vol. 2]: 153–161. Tokyo:
Yūzankaku. 和田晴吾 1988「漁撈」金関恕・佐原眞 (編) 『弥生文化の研究』2, pp.
153–161. 東京：雄山閣．
WATANABE Makoto 1987. Asahi iseki 61B ku kaisō no burokku sanpuringu [Blocksample of shell layer at 61B region in Asahi site]. Nenpō (Shōwa 61 nendo) : 87–94.
渡辺誠 1987「朝日遺跡 61B 区貝層のブロック・サンプリング」『年報 昭和 61 年度』
, pp. 87–94.
WATANABE Makoto 2003. Takakura iseki shutsudo no shizen ibutsu [Faunal remains
Natural remains excavated from the Takakura site], in MURAKI Makoto (ed.)
Takakura iseki (Dai 1-ji) [Report of archaeological excavations at Takakura site (1st)],99–106. Nagoya, Aichi Prefecture: Nagoya Municipal Board of Education. 渡辺誠
2003「高蔵遺跡出土の自然遺物」村木誠 (編)『高蔵遺跡 (第 1 次) 』, pp. 99–106. 愛知
県名古屋市：名古屋市教育委員会．

WATANABE Makoto and ISOTANI Kazuaki 1982. Asahi iseki no dōbutsu itai [Reportof archaeological excavations of faunal remains at Asahi site, Vol. 1], in KATO
Yasunobu (ed.) Asahi iseki 1 [Excavation research report of the Asahi site, Vol. 1]:
257–264. Aichi Prefecture: Aichi Prefectural Board of Education. 渡辺誠・磯谷和明
1982「朝日遺跡の動物遺体」加藤安信 (編)『朝日遺跡 I (本文篇 1) 』, 257–264. 愛知
県：愛知県教育委員会．

WATANABE Makoto, OKADA Ken, RI Kōki, YANASE Takanobu 2002. Nishishiga
iseki (Hiratechō chiku) no shizen ibutsu [Natural remains excavated from
Nishishiga (Hiratechō area) site], in NAGAI Hiroyuki (ed.) Hiratechō iseki [Reportof archaeological excavations at Hiratechō site]: 59–74. Aichi Prefecture: Aichi
Archaeology Centre. 渡辺誠・岡田賢・李浩基・簗瀬孝延 2002「西志賀遺跡 (平手町地区) の自然遺物」永井宏幸 (編)『平手町遺跡—西志賀遺跡北東地点の調査—』, pp.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

255

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

59–74. 愛知県：愛知県埋蔵文化財センター．
WATANABE Makoto and TANAKA Teiko 1986. Asahi iseki kaisō burokku sanpuringu nochōsa hōkoku [Research report of block sample from shell layers in the Asahi site].
Nenpō (Shōwa 62 nendo): 92–117. 渡辺誠・田中禎子 1986「朝日遺跡貝層ブロック・
サンプリングの調査報告」『年報 昭和 62 年度』, pp. 92–117.
WATANABE Makoto and TANAKA Teiko 1992. Asahi iseki kaisō burokku sanpuringu nochōsa hōkoku [Research report of block sample from shell layers in the Asahi site], in
MORI Yūichi (ed.) Asahi iseki 2 [Report of archaeological excavations at the Asahi
site, Vol. 2]: 159–182. Aichi Prefecture: Aichi Archaeology Centre. 渡辺誠・田中禎子
1992「朝日遺跡貝層ブロック・サンプリングの調査報告」森勇一 (編) 『朝日遺跡 2』,
pp. 159–182. 愛知県：愛知県埋蔵文化財センター．
WATANABE Makoto and TANAKA Teiko 2000. Asahi iseki kaisō burokku sanpuringu nochōsa hōkoku [Research report of block sample from shell layers in the Asahi site], in
MIYAKOSHI Kenji (ed.) Asahi iseki 6 [Report of archaeological excavations at the
Asahi site, Vol. 6]: 413–430. Aichi Prefecture: Aichi Archaeology Centre. 渡辺誠・田中禎子 2000「朝日遺跡貝層ブロック・サンプリングの調査報告」宮腰健司 (編) 2000
『朝日遺跡 6』, pp. 413–430. 愛知県：愛知県埋蔵文化財センター．
YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2003. Takakura iseki burokku sanpuru saishuchiten igai no
dōbutsu izontai [Faunal remains other than the block sample at the Takakura site],in MURAKI Makoto (ed.) Takakura iseki 1 [Report of archaeological excavations at
Takakura site, Vol. 1]: 131–134. Nagoya, Aichi Prefecture: Nagoya Municipal Boardof Education. 山崎健 2003「高蔵遺跡ブロックサンプル採取地点以外の動物遺存体」
村木誠 (編)『高蔵遺跡 (第 1 次) 』
, pp. 131–134. 愛知県名古屋市：名古屋市教育委員
会．

YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2007. Tsuno no aru shika—Aichi-ken Asahi iseki ni okeru nihonjika
no shigen riyō [Deer with antlers—the use of sika deer resources at the Asahi site in
Aichi Prefecture], in Executive Committee for the Commemoration of Prof. Sutō (ed.)
Kōkogaku dansō [The wealth of topics in archaeology]: 389–407. Tokyo: Rokuichi
Shobō. 山崎健 2007「角のある鹿—愛知県朝日遺跡におけるニホンジカの資源利用—」須藤隆先生退任記念論文集刊行会 (編)『考古学談叢』, pp. 389–407. 東京：六一
書房．

YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2010. “Jōmon jidai” no tsukawarekata—ko kankyō fukugen to
shizen saisei jigyō no setten [A study on the use of “Jomon period”—the connection
between paleoenvironmental restoration and nature restoration projects]. Isekigaku
Kenkyū 7: 112–121. 山崎健 2010「「縄文時代」の使われ方—古環境復元と自然再生事業の接点—」『遺跡学研究』7, pp. 112–121.
YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2012a. Rokutanda-minami iseki kara shutsudo shita dōbutsu izontai[Faunal remains excavated from Rokutanda-minami site]. in YAMAMOTO Yuki(ed.) Rokutanda-minami iseki 4 [Report of archaeological excavations at Rokutandaminami, Vol. 4]: 76–87. Niigata Prefecture: Niigata Prefectural Board of Education.
山崎健 2012「六反田南遺跡から出土した動物遺存体」山本友紀 (編) 『六反田南遺跡© Japanese Archaeological Association

256

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

IV』, pp. 76–87. 新潟県：新潟県教育委員会．
YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2012b. Dōbutsu izontai no keiseikatei o meguru minzoku kōkogaku
to jikken kōkogaku—Mongoru ni okeru dōbutsu shigen riyō o jirei to shite[Ethnoarchaeology and experimental archaeology in connection with the formation
process of faunal remains—a case study of animal resource utilization in Mongolia].
Dōbutsu Kōkogaku 29: 19–44. 山崎健 2012「動物遺存体の形成過程をめぐる民族考古
学と実験考古学—モンゴルにおける動物資源利用を事例として—」『動物考古学』29,
pp. 19–44.
YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2013a. Tōkai chihō ni okeru Jōmon jidai banki no seigyō henka—chiiki-sei to kyōtsū-sei [Subsistence change in the Final Jomon period in the Tōkai
region—regional characteristics and commonality], in Tōkai Jōmon Kenkyūkai[Study group on the Jomon period in the Tōkai region] (ed.) Tōkai Jōmon Ronshū 1[A collection of papers on the Jomon period in the Tōkai region, Vol. 1]: 25–35. 山崎
健 2013「東海地方における縄文時代晩期の生業変化—地域性と共通性—」東海縄文研究会 (編)『東海縄文論集』1, pp. 25–35.
YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2013b. Seigyō kenkyū to shiteno shōkotsu no kanōsei—Niigata-ken
iki o jirei to shite [Possibility of using burnt bones to study subsistence—a case studyof the Niigata Prefecture area]. Dōbutsu Kōkogaku 30: 49–66. 山崎健 2013「生業研究としての焼骨の可能性—新潟県域を事例として—」『動物考古学』30, pp. 49–66.
YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2015. Nōkō kaishiki ni okeru gyorō katsudō no henka—Isewan
okubu o jirei to shite [Changes to ﬁshing activities during the period of incipient
agriculture—a case study of the inner Ise Bay]. Nihon Kōkogaku 39: 1–14. 山崎健『日本考古2015「農耕開始期における漁撈活動の変化—伊勢湾奥部を事例として—」学』39, pp. 1–14.
YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2016. Nihonjika no kottan yugō jiki [Epiphyseal fusion time of sika
deer (Cervus nippon)]. Dōbutsu Kōkogaku 33: 35–48. 山崎健 2016「ニホンジカの骨端癒合時期」『動物考古学』33, pp. 35–48.
YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2018. Rokutanda-minami iseki kara shutsudo shita dōbutsu izontai[Faunal remains excavated from Rokutanda-minami site], in TAKAHASHI Tamotsu
and TAKAHASHI Yasuo (eds.) Rokutanda-minami iseki 6 [Report of archaeologicalexcavations at Rokutanda-minami, Vol. 6]: 268–276. Niigata Prefecture: Niigata
Prefectural Board of Education. 山崎健 2018「六反田南遺跡から出土した動物遺存体」高橋保・高橋保雄 (編)『六反田南遺跡 VI』, pp. 268–276. 新潟：新潟県教育委員
会．

YAMAZAKI Takeshi 2019. Nōkō kaishiki no dōbutsu kōkogaku [Zooarchaeology of theearliest farming period]. Tokyo: Rokuichi Shobō. 山崎健 2019『農耕開始期の動物考
古学』東京：六一書房．
YAMAZAKI Takeshi, ŌKŌCHI Takayuki, HARADA Motoki, MIYAKOSHI Kenji 2014.
X-sen CT tōei dēta o mochiita fukuseihin no seisaku: Aichi-ken Asahi iseki kara
shutsudo shita sekizoku no sasatta dōbutsukotsu o jirei to shite. [A replica made from
X-ray CT projection data: A case of animal bone with a stone arrowhead embedded© Japanese Archaeological Association

257

YAMAZAKI Takeshi

from the Asahi site]. Bunkazai no Tsubo 3: 22–26. 山崎健・大河内隆之・原田幹・宮腰健司 2014「X 線 CT 投影データを用いた複製品の製作—愛知県朝日遺跡から出土した石鏃の刺さった動物骨を事例として—」『文化財の壺』3, pp. 22–26.

YAMAZAKI Takeshi and ODA Sen’ichi 2006. Atsumi hantō ni okeru uchiage kairui no
kenkyū [Research on beached shells at the Atsumi Peninsula]. Tahara no Bunka 32:『田原の文
13–30. 山崎健・織田銑一 2006「渥美半島における打ち上げ貝類の研究」
化』32, pp. 13–30.
YAMAZAKI Takeshi and ODA Sen’ichi 2007a. Jōmon jidai kōbanki ni okeru kaiwa sozai
no kakutoku to han’nyu ni kansuru kenkyū—Aichi-ken Ikawazu kaizuka shutsudo no
tamakigaika-sei kaiwa no bunseki kara [Research on the acquisition and delivery ofmaterials for shell bracelets—from an analysis of shell bracelets made of Glycymeris
asiatica excavated from the Ikawazu shell midden in Aichi Prefecture]. Kodai 120:
63–86. 山崎健・織田銑一 2007「縄文時代後晩期における貝輪素材の獲得と搬入に関する研究—愛知県伊川津貝塚出土のタマキガイ科製貝輪の分析から—」『古代』120,
pp. 63–86.
YAMAZAKI Takeshi and ODA Sen’ichi 2007b. Dōbutsu izontai [Faunal remains], in
KAGEYAMA Seiichi (ed.) Asahi iseki 7 [Report of archaeological excavations at
Asahi site, Vol. 7]: 264–291. Aichi Prefecture: Aichi Archaeology Centre. 山崎健・織田銑一 2007「動物遺存体」蔭山誠一 (編)『朝日遺跡 VII』pp. 264–291. 愛知県：愛知
県埋蔵文化財センター．

YAMAZAKI Takeshi and MIYAKOSHI Kenji 2005. Asahi iseki shutsudo no gyorui
izontai [Fish remains excavated from the Asahi site]. Kenkyū kiyō 6: 34–45. 山崎健・
宮腰健司 2005「朝日遺跡出土の魚類遺存体」『研究紀要』6, pp. 34–45.
EnglishANEZAKI T. 2007. Pig exploitation in the southern Kanto region, Japan. International
Journal of Osteoarchaeology 17-3: 299–308.
Binford, L. R. 1978. Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology. New York: Academic Press.
Binford, L. R. 1981. Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths. New York: Academic Press.
Brain, C. K. 1976. Some Principles in the Interpretation on bone accumulations associatedwith man. Human Origins: Louis Leakey and the East African Evidence.: 96–116.
California: W. A. Benjamin.
Brain, C. K. 1981. The Hunters or the Hunted? An Introduction to African Cave
Taphonomy. London: The University of Chicago Press.
Brown, W. A. B. and Chapman, N. G. 1991a. Age assessment of fallow deer (Dama dama):
from a scoring scheme based on radiographs of developing permanent molariform
teeth. Journal of Zoology 224: 367–379.
Brown, W. A. B. and Chapman, N. G. 1991b. Age assessment of red deer (Cervus
elaphus): from a scoring scheme based on radiographs of developing permanentmolariform teeth. Journal of Zoology 225: 85–97.
NAKAJIMA T., NAKAJIMA M., and YAMAZAKI T. 2010. Evidence for ﬁsh cultivation
during the Yayoi period in western Japan. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology© Japanese Archaeological Association

258

ZOOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE EARLIEST FARMING PERIOD

20-2: 127–134.
YAMAZAKI T. and ODA S. 2009. Changes in shell gathering in an early agriculturalsociety at the head of Ise Bay, Japan. Journal of Archaeological Science 36-9:
2007–2011.
YAMAZAKI T., JOGAHARA T., KOYASU K., and ODA S. 2012. Estimation ofage at death of sika deer (Cervus nippon) from an archaeological site based onradiographs of mandibular molariform tooth development. International Journal of
Osteoarchaeology 22-2: 185–193.

© Japanese Archaeological Association259