ARCHAEOLOGIA JAPONICA

Jomon Period
TANIFUJI YasuhikoOverlooking trends of Jomon period study in fiscal 2011, there is a work on the origin ofJomon culture by TANIGUCHI Yasuhiro, Jomon Bunka Kigenron no Saikochiku(Restructuring of the Origin of Jomon Culture) (Tokyo: Doseisha), which proposed
restructuring of a concept on the Jomon period. Taniguchi reevaluated transition
processes from the Palaeolithic to the Jomon period, and concluded that his concept of“the Jomon period” could be applied only after the beginning of Early Jomon(Yoriitomon-lineage pottery in Kanto region and pottery of the paralleling period in otherplaces, excluding Incipient Jomon). He stressed that this should be the framework of theJomon culture and the Jomon period.
Ikeito Doki no Deai (Encountering of
Genealogically Different Types of Potteries) (Tokyo: Doseisha), a book with a humanbehavioral viewpoint based on pottery analysis, contained theses on Jomon Pottery byIMAMURA Keiji, SUZUKI Norio, YAMAZAKI Shinji, KOBAYASHI Ken’ichi, andKAWANISHI Manabu. In Jinruishi to Jikan Joho: Kako no Keisei Katei to SenshiKokogaku (Human History and Time Information: Formation Process of “Past” andPrehistoric Archaeology) (Tokyo: Rokuichi Shobo), ABE Yoshiro discussed carbon datingand archaeology, chronology of human body formation and paleopathology, seasonality ofresource utilization and change in substances, time and unit in formation of archaeologicalsites. On dating measurement, there are TAKAKURA Hiroaki and TANAKA Yoshiyuki(eds.), AMS Nendai to Kokogaku (AMS Dating and Archaeology) (Tokyo: Gakuseisha),and KUDO Yuichiro’s Environment and Cultural History of the Upper Paleolithic and theJomon Period: High-precision Radiocarbon Dating and Archaeology (Tokyo: Shinsensha).
Also, SUZUKI Katsuhiko (ed.), Jomon Koto no Kenkyu (Study on Jomon Koto harp)(Tokyo: Rokuichi Shobo), discussed from various viewpoints a string instrument (koto)that existed in the Jomon period.
As for symposiums and various conferences, KOBAYASHI Tatsuo, professor emeritus ofKokugakuin University gave an open lecture titled “Jomon Monunents as TheatricalSpaces” at the 77th General Meeting of the Japanese Archaeological Association, as well as
1Gunma Archaeological Research Foundation, 784-2 Shimohakoda, Hokkitsu-machi, Shibukawa City,Gunman 377-0061, Japan(tanihuji@gunmai.or.jp)
JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 1 (2013): 60-63© Japanese Archaeological Association60

TRENDS IN ARCHAEOLOGY IN JAPANresearch presentations and poster sessions where Jomon study was actively verified anddiscussed. In June, the 28th Conference of Japan Society for Scientific Studies on
Cultural Properties was held at Tsukuba University. In July, Kyushu Jomon Kenkyukai
and Korean Neolithic Society held “The 9th Nikkan Shinsekki Jidai Kenkyukai(Japan-Korea Neolithic Study),” and the second regular meeting of Kyushu Jomon
Kenkyukai was held. In October, there were the fiscal 2011 Ibaraki Convention of theJapanese Archaeological Association, Shinshu Obsidian Forum 2011, “Kokuyoseki noIkkatu Maino wa Nani wo Katarunoka (What a Large Obsidian Burial Tells Us),” asymposium, “Toyama no Kaizuka: Kaizuka kara Mietekuru Jomonjin no Sugata toSeikatsu (Shell Midden in Toyama: Jomon People and Life Seen in Shell Middens),” andan international symposium “Jomon Bunka to Yurashia no Yoso (Jomon Culture andAspects of Eurasia). In November, the 26th Convention of Japanese Association ofHistorical Botany was held, and an open symposium was held under a theme, “Hiba,Gosennen no Rekishi to Bunka (Hiba, 5,000 Years of History and Culture).” InDecember, an open symposium “Jomon Soki wo Kangaeru (Thoughts on Early Jomon)”was held at Tohoku University of Art and Design, as well as Hakko Kenkyukai’s 2011
Convention under the theme, “Higashi Nihon no Jomon Kaizuka: Tohoku to Kanto noHikaku kara Mita Tayosei (Jomon Shell Middens in East Japan: Variability between
Tohoku and Kanto),” a symposium by Nerima Ward Board of Education, “Jomon Shuraku
Kenkyu no Soten (Issues on Jomon Settlement Study),” The 12th Conference of Kansai
Jomon Bunka Kenkyukai “Oshigatamon Dokiki no Shoso (Various Aspects ofOshigatamon Pottery Phase),” and “the 25th Tohoku Nihon no Kyusekki wo Katarukai(Talks on the Palaeolithic in Northeast Japan).” In 2012, the 25th Jomon Senimar,“Jomon Koki Doki Kenkyu no Genjo to Kadai (Situations and Issues of Late Jomon
Pottery Study)” and the 22th Kyushu Jomon Kenkyukai, “ Jomon Jidai ni Okeru Kyushu
no Seishin Bunka (Spiritual Culture of Jomon Period in Kyushu)” were held in February.
In March, Jomon Kenkyu no Chihei (Horizon of Jomon Study) 2012 was held under thetheme, “Musashino/Tama Chiiki no Shuraku Chosa ga Toikaketamono (Questions fromSettlement Research in Musashino/Tama Regions)”, as well as the 8th and 9th Joint Dogu
Kenkyukai held at Iwate Prefectural Museum.
Outstanding theses on settlement composition and structure were: SUZUKI Yasuhiko,“Minami Kanto ni Okeru Jomon Shuraku no Nishi to Higashi: Ogata Shuraku ni Miru
Shuraku Kozo no Sai (West and East of Jomon Settlement in South Kanto: Difference inSettlement Structures in Large Settlements)”, Jomon Jidai, 22:1-28, KOBAYASHI
Kenichi, “Jomon Shuraku ni Okeru Jikan (Time in Jomon Settlement)”, Tokyo no iseki, 95:
1-4, which tried to reconstruct processes of village formation using dating measurement
results; ABE Akinori, “Tohoku Hokubu ni Okeru Kanjo Resseki no Juyo to Shuraku Kozo:‘Keikanron’ no Kakuritsu ni Mukete (Acceptance of Stone Circle and Village Structure in© Japanese Archaeological Association61

ARCHAEOLOGIA JAPONICA

Northern Tohoku: for the Establishment of ‘Scenery Theory’),” Kodai Bunka, 63(1): 24-44
striving for a new development; SATO Masakazu, “Achiyadaira Isaki Chudan Chiten kara
Chobo Suru Jomon Jidai Zenki no Katsudo: Kankyo Hendo to Iseki Keisei wo Kangaeru(Activities of Early Jomon Viewed from Achiyadaira Chudan Site: Thoughts on
Environmental Change and Site Formation)”, Miomo-gawa no kokogaku, 9: 5-22 that
discussed site formation process with detailed analysis of specific region; and SHIBUYA
Masahiko, “Katsuzakashikiki no ‘Tsuki no Sankakkei’ to ‘Taiyo no Sankakkei’ (‘MoonTriangle’ and ‘Sun Triangle’ in Katsuzaka Style Phase)”, In Sendanrin no Kokogaku:
OTAKE Noriharu sensei kanreki-kinen ronbun-shu, pp. 117-128 that touched on spiritualbeliefs.
On artifact study, there was WATADA Hiromi, “Kitashinano Jomon Chuki Kohan noAkkon Ryutaimon Doki (Ryutaimon Pottery with Pressed Marks in the Latter Half ofMiddle Jomon in Northern Shinano)”, Doyo Koko, 34: 1-24 that handled Middle Jomon
pottery theory. Also, there were two special journal issues: Saku Koko Tsushin, No. 107,
“Kyodoshiki wa Seiritsu Suruka (Could Local Style Be Valid?);” and Shimousa Kokogaku,
22, “Boso Hanto oyobi Shuhen Chiiki ni Okeru Taibokushokeishiki (7b Shiki – 8b Shiki)
no Kenkyu [Study on Taiboku Types (7b Style to 8b Style) in Boso Peninsula andSurroundings]”. There were many theses including MASUKO Yasumasa, “Aichiken
Tobu no Jomon Kokimatsu-Banki Shoto Deki no Hennen: Ikawazu 1972-nen no Hokoku
no Saikento wo Kiso Toshite (Chronology of End of Late Jomon to Beginning of FinalJomon Potteries in Eastern Aichi Prefecture: Based on Reexamination of Ikawazu 1972
Report)”, Jomon Jidai, 22: 95-118 that discussed the end of Late Jomon to the beginningof Final Jomon and OTSUKA Tatsuro, “Kamegaokishiki Doki Kenkyo no Konnichiteki
Kiso (Today’s Basis on Kagegaoka Style Pottery Study)”, Jomon Jidai, 22: 119-140 that
discussed Final Jomon.
As for stone tool study, TAMURA Takashi, “Kyusekki Jidai kara Jomon Jidai no Kari noDogu (Hunting Tools of Palaeolithic to Jomon Period)”, Kaizuka, 67: 1-31 gavetransitional understanding to hunting and hunting tools, as well as seeking reevaluation offunction and usage of stone arrowheads and daggers. On the other hand, after asymposium “Jomonjin no Sekisin; Ogata Sekibo ni Miru Saigi Koui (Stone God of Jomon
People: Rituals Seen in Large Stone Rods)” held at Kokugakuin University, many theses
were published on stone rods, such as SHIBUYA Masahiko, “Sekibo no Yoto to Keishiki
Kenkyu (Study on Usage and Typology of Stone Rods)”, Jomon Jidai, 22: 163-184,HOSAKA Yasuo, “Sakenomiba Isaki no Ishizara to Sekibo (Stone Dish and Rod atSakenomiba Site)”, Yamanashi-kenritsu hakubutsukan・Yamanashi-ken maizo-bunkazai
senta kenkyu-kiyo, 28: 19-28, NOSAKA Tomohiro, “Namie Machi Shicchanomiya Isekini Okeru Sekibo Saishi no Shoso (Various Aspects of Stone Rod Ritual at Shicchanomiya
Site in Namie Town)”, Fukushima Koko, 53: 139-144; TODA Tetsuya, “Jomon Bunkaron© Japanese Archaeological Association62

TRENDS IN ARCHAEOLOGY IN JAPANMizube no Sekibo (Jomon Culture Theory: Stone Rods on Watersides)”, ArchaeologicalJournal, No. 612: 34-37, KURISHIMA Yoshiaki, “Ryokudeihengansei Sekibo ni Miru
Juyo Sisutemu: Jomon Jidai Kobanki no Sekibo Seihin no Seisan to Koiki Ryutsu (SupplySystems of Chlorite-schist Stone Rods: Production and Wide Area Distribution of Stone
Rods in Late and Final Jomon)”, Saitama-kenritsu shiseki-no hakubutsukan kiyo, 6: 1-24
and so on.
Outstanding theses on ornaments were: YOSHIDA Yasuyuki, “Jomon Banki Mimikazari
no Monyoron (Theory on Designs of Earrings in Final Jomon)”, In Sendanrin nokokogaku: OTAKE Kenji sensei kanreki-kinen ronbun-shu, pp. 77-82, KANEKO Akihiko,“Kita Nihon Jomon Banki no Sankakugyoku Hokano Soshokuhin; Sankakugyoku,Tsubagata, Naimen Uzujo Seihin (Triangle Bead and Other Ornaments of Final Jomon inNorthern Japan: Triangle Bead, Sword Guard Shaped Ornament, and Inside Curl Objects)”,
Iwate Kokogaku, 22: 1-36, and “Kitanihon Jomon Banki no Kabenmarutama, Hiragyoku(Round Flower Petal Beads and Flat Beads of Final Jomon in Northern Japan)”, Jomon
Jidai, 22: 141-162, and TANIFUJI Yasuhiko, ‘Kanto Nairikubu ni Okeru Jomon Jidai
Chukimatsu/Kokishoto no “Dosei Kaiwagata Udewa” (“Clay Shell-shaped Bracelets”
from Final Middle Jomon to Beginning of Late Jomon in Inland Kanto)’, In Sendanrin nokokogaku: OTAKE Kenji sensei kanreki-kinen ronbun-shu, pp. 43-56.
As for theses on plant/animal remains, HORIKAWA Kumiko, “Nihon ni Okeru Iseki
Shutsudo Kagorui no Kisoteki Kenkyu (Fundamental Research on Baskets Excavatedfrom Archaeological Sites in Japan)”, Shikusei-shi Kenkyu, 20(1): 13-26 compiled andclassified baskets from the Jomon period to Muromachi period.
Thus, looking back the Jomon period study in the past year, various research wasconducted, and many symposia and study conferences were actively held as well as many
theses published. It can be said many old subjects are being discussed again such as theissue on the concept of the Jomon period, social/structural theory, and scenery theory, andso on. On the other hand, issues on vegetation are being focused, and there are various
studies on analysis of stone materials, and studies and issues on dating measurements.

© Japanese Archaeological Association63