Symposium Maritime Network and Cultural Heritage -People and Relics Connected by Oceans-

SSy ymmp po os si ui umm

Maritime
Maritime Network
Network
andandCultural
CulturalHeritage
Heritage-People-PeopleandandObjects
ObjectsConnected
ConnectedbybyOceansOceans-

FY2021
FY2021Symposium
SymposiumreportreportJapan Consortium for International Cooperation in Cultural Heritage

Japan
Japan
Consortium
Consortium
forforInternational
International
Cooperation
Cooperationin in
CulturalCultural
Heritage
HeritageSymposium

Maritime Network
and Cultural Heritage-People and Objects Connected by Oceans-

FY2021 Symposium reportJapan Consortium for International Cooperationin Cultural Heritage

Preface
This report records the contents of the FY2021 symposium “Maritime Network and Cultural HeritagePeople and Objects Connected by Oceans” held by the Agency for Cultural Affairs and the Japan Consortiumfor International Cooperation in Cultural Heritage ( JCIC-Heritage) on November 28, 2021. The
manuscript was based on transcriptions of sound recordings, with editorial additions and revisions toimprove the presentation of the report. All photographs used without sources cited were provided by thepresenter in question.
This symposium was held in line with the international cooperation survey “Maritime Network andCultural Heritage” conducted by JCIC-Heritage from FY2020 to FY2021, comprising members selectedfrom each regional subcommittee of JCIC-Heritage and external experts, who discussed the content of thesymposium. The members of the working group are as follows (in arbitrary order).
- ABE Masashi(Senior Researcher, Japan Center for International Cooperation in Conservation, Tokyo- ISHIMURA Tomo(Head of the Audio-Visual Documentation Section, Department of Intangible Cultural

National Research Institute for Cultural Properties)

Heritage, Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties)*- ITO Nobuyuki(Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya University)- KIMURA Jun(Associate Professor, School of Marine Science and Technology, Tokai University)*- SAOTOME Masahiro (Emeritus Professor, The University of Tokyo)- SASAKI Randall(Representative, Marine Archaeology Lab)*- SUZUKI Hideaki(Associate Professor, School of Global Humanities and Social Sciences, National
Museum of Ethnology)*- SUTO Yoshiyuki(Professor, Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya University)- FUNO Shuji(Visiting Professor, College of Industrial Technology, Nihon University)- YAMAUCHI Kazuya (Professor, Research Institute of Cultural Properties, Teikyo University)- MAKINO Mariko(Assistant Professor, Research Institute of Cultural Properties, Teikyo University)- Related organizations (Agency for Cultural Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan International
Cooperation Agency)*External experts
Organizer: Agency for Cultural Affairs, JCIC-Heritage
Auspices: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan International Cooperation Agency, The Japan Foundation
Japan Consortium for International Cooperation in Cultural Heritage
Editorial Board
TOMODA Masahiko (Secretary General)
KANAI Ken
(Assistant Secretary General)
FUJII Ikuno(Planning, Main Editor, Poster design)
CHIU Chunni(Editor)
MAEDA Koki
(Editor)
HIRONO Satomi(Editor)Contents
Objectives

・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

Opening Remarks

・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

4
6

TOMODA Masahiko (Secretary General, Japan Consortium for International Cooperation in Cultural Heritage)

Statement of Purpose

・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

7

ISHIMURA Tomo (Head of the Audio-Visual Documentation Section, Department of Intangible Cultural Heritage,
Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties)

The Appeal and Significance of Research on Sunken Ships:
Time Capsules of the Ocean
SASAKI Randall (Representative, Marine Archaeology Lab)・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

Opening the Sea Route: Voyages, and Shipbuilding

・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

11

19

KIMURA Jun (Associate Professor, School of Marine Science and Technology, Tokai University)

Glass Beads Brought Across the Oceans: East-West Trade and the Road of Glass・・・・・・・・

27

・ ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

37

TAMURA Tomomi (Principal Researcher, Imperial Palace Sites Investigation Department,
Nara National Research Institute for Cultural Properties)

People Crossing the Maritime World:

Islamic Merchants, Including the Merchants of Hormuz
YOKKAICHI Yasuhiro (Associate Professor, Graduate School of Arts, Rikkyo University)

Places where the Sea and Land Meet:

・ ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

48

Port Cities of Asian Waters: Shophouses & Courtyard Houses
FUNO Shuji (Visiting Professor, College of Industrial Technology, Nihon University)

The World Connected Through the Oceans

・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

55

Moderator:
ISHIMURA Tomo
Commentators: SUTO Yoshiyuki (Professor, Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya University)

ITO Nobuyuki (Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya University)
SASAKI Randall / KIMURA Jun / TAMURA Tomomi /YOKKAICHI Yasuhiro / FUNO Shuji

Closing Remarks

・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

YAMAUCHI Kazuya (Professor, Research Institute of Cultural Properties, Teikyo University)

69

Objectives
The azure oceans, with their endlessly crashing waves, occupy about 70% of the Earth’s surface. Whatview might we obtain if we were to look at the interactions of people and objects from the perspective of
the oceans?
The oceans bring us abundant blessings and have been a stage and a confluence of “roads” for people
and objects to come and go since ancient times. Undoubtedly, the “ocean roads” have been a stage for theinteraction of people and objects, much akin to “roads” on land. Despite knowing the danger that awaits,
humans have ventured boldly forth into the oceans, seeking other worlds that lie beyond. The encountersamong different cultures facilitated via the oceans have given rise to new cultures, civilizations, and theworld we live in today.
The global legacy of our maritime cultural heritage remains as a testament to the existence of this stage
for the interaction of people and objects, the deeds of peoples nurtured along with the ocean roads, and thesocieties, histories, and cultures of those times. This cultural heritage ranges from tangible items such as
trade items (glass, ceramics, and so on), the port towns that are the points of contact between the oceans andthe land, and the sunken ships lying on the seabed to intangible items such as fishing techniques, navigation,and beliefs about the oceans. Recent progress in research on underwater cultural heritage has yielded
cutting-edge technologies and analytical methods that help clarify the origins of objects transported via theoceans.
A major current in the history of the world has been to focus on the role played by “the oceans” andreconsider this at a global scale as an overall picture of the interrelationships among regions. Accordingly,
new perspectives are required in the context of researching, investigating, and protecting the cultural
heritage, which demonstrate exchange via the oceans.
In this context, the Japan Consortium for International Cooperation in Cultural Heritage has been
conducting an international cooperation survey “Maritime Network and Cultural Heritage” since FY2020
to address maritime cultural heritage.
Coincidentally, 2021 is the first year of the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable
Development. Adopting new perspectives in re-examining the ancient relationship between humanity andthe oceans as well as the cultural heritage that stands as a testament to that relationship will play a key rolein considering how we can make a sustainable use of the oceans in the future.
To reconsider “the oceans” as a stage for interactions among people and objects, this symposium provides
an introduction to international research and conservation trends related to marine cultural heritage andexamples of worldwide initiatives related to marine cultural heritage, as well as the involvement of Japanese
researchers therein. In addition, the symposium provides a space to consider the role of Japan in international
cooperation in the field.

4

文化遺産国際協力コンソーシアム

シンポジウム海 が 繋ぐヒト と モノ( )参加無料

オンライン開催( Zoom ウェビナー )

3

接続開始

要事前登録

詳細 ・ 登録は HP をご覧ください ▶ https://www.jcic-heritage.jp/

Program
14:00-14:05
Opening Remarks
	
TOMODA Masahiko(Secretary General, Japan Consortium for International Cooperation in Cultural
Heritage)

14:05-14:20
Statement of Purpose
	
ISHIMURA Tomo(Head of the Audio-Visual Documentation Section, Department of Intangible
Cultural Heritage, Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties)

14:20-14:40	The Appeal and Significance of Research on Sunken Ships:
Time Capsules of the Ocean
SASAKI Randall(Representative, Marine Archaeology Lab)
14:40-15:00

Opening the Sea Route: Voyages, and Shipbuilding
KIMURA Jun(Associate Professor, School of Marine Science and Technology, Tokai University)

15:00-15:20	
Glass Beads Brought Across the Oceans: East-West Trade and the Road of Glass	
TAMURA Tomomi(Principal Researcher, Imperial Palace Sites Investigation Department, Nara
National Research Institute for Cultural Properties)

15:20-15:40

P eople Crossing the Maritime World: Islamic Merchants, Including theMerchants of Hormuz
YOKKAICHI Yasuhiro (Associate Professor, Graduate School of Arts, Rikkyo University)

15:40-16:00	
Places where the Sea and Land Meet:Port Cities of Asian Waters: Shophouses & Courtyard Houses
FUNO Shuji(Visiting Professor, College of Industrial Technology, Nihon University)
16:00-16:50

The World Connected Through the Oceans
Moderator:
ISHIMURA Tomo
Commentators: 	SUTO Yoshiyuki (Professor, Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya University)
ITO Nobuyuki (Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya
University)

		
SASAKI Randall / KIMURA Jun / TAMURA Tomomi /YOKKAICHI Yasuhiro / FUNO Shuji
16:50-17:00
Closing Remarks
YAMAUCHI Kazuya (Professor, Research Institute of Cultural Properties, Teikyo University)
5Opening Remarks
TOMODA Masahiko (Secretary General, Japan Consortium for International Cooperation in Cultural
Heritage)

Hello, everyone. Thank you for attending the symposium, “Maritime Network
and Cultural Heritage-People and Objects Connected by Oceans.” I am Tomoda
Masahiko, Secretary General of the Japan Consortium for International
Cooperation in Cultural Heritage ( JCIC-Heritage), and I will be hosting thesession today. Let me make some opening remarks on behalf of the organizer,
JCIC-Heritage.
For the promotion and effective implementation of Japan’s international
cooperation in the field of cultural heritage protection, primary role of the JCICHeritage is to facilitate mutual cooperation among the various parties andorganizations, both public and private, that are engaged in the collaborative

activities.
As one of its regular programs, the JCIC-Heritage organizes a yearly symposium, open to the public,
which addresses a wide range of topics related to the protection of cultural heritage in the world as well as
the relevant cooperation from Japan. However, we were unable to hold a symposium in FY2020 due to the
COVID-19 pandemic. We are very happy to resume the symposium this year online, having so many
people to join.
The topic of this symposium is “Maritime Network and Cultural Heritage-People and Objects
Connected by Oceans”, through which we aim to reconsider “the ocean” as a stage for interactions amongpeople and objects, including the various aspects of cultural heritage associated therewith. Since FY2020,
the JCIC-Heritage has been implementing an international cooperation survey, “Maritime Network andCultural Heritage.” This symposium has been planned in tandem with that survey.
The oceans bring us abundant blessings and have been a stage and a confluence of “roads” for people
and objects to come and go since ancient times, much akin to the “roads” on land. Various forms of maritime
cultural heritage remain around the world as witnesses telling the stories of these interactions among people
and objects, with a range of related research conducted in this regard employing diverse perspectives andmethods. The role of “the oceans” in world history has also come into focus recently, with research going
beyond the framework of regional history to more widely encompass views that re-examine the history ofhumans, cultures, and civilizations at a global scale.
Adopting new perspectives in re-examining the long-lasting relationship between humanity and theoceans, together with the cultural heritage that stands as a testament to that relationship, will play a key rolein considering how we can achieve a peaceful international society and make sustainable use of the oceansin our future.
The symposium will introduce international research and conservation trends related to maritime
cultural heritage, examples of worldwide initiatives, and the involvement of Japanese researchers therein.
Hopefully, the five presentations and subsequent forum will provide a good opportunity to reconsider “theoceans” as a stage for interaction among people and objects, and to think about the role of Japan ininternational cooperation in related fields going forward. I look forward to your active participation until
the end of the program.

6

Statement of Purpose

Statement of Purpose
ISHIMURA Tomo (Head of the Audio-Visual Documentation Section, Department of Intangible Cultural
Heritage, Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties)

ABD at Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University (2004). PhD in literature, specializing inarcheology and cultural heritage. After working as a research fellow at the Japan Society for
the Promotion of Science and a researcher at the Nara National Research Institute for Cultural
Properties, he has been involved in research on intangible cultural heritage at the Tokyo
National Research Institute for Cultural Properties since 2015. He also contributed to theWorld Heritage registration (2016) of the Nan Madol archaeological site in the Federated
States of Micronesia. He is interested in the cultural heritage of the oceans and has conductedinvestigations via scuba diving and sea kayaking.

Hello, everyone, I am ISHIMURA Tomo of
the Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural
Properties. There are various forms of maritime
cultural heritage, and I will introduce several ofthem in my explanation of the purpose of today’s
symposium (Figure 1).
First, this diagram indicates the connection
between the oceans and humanity (Figure 2). The
diagram dates back over a century, when it waspresented by the German scholar of culturalmorphology Kurt von Beckmann. The diagram
presents four categories of culture that exist in thisconnection between the oceans and humanity,with the oceans as a source of diverse stimuli forhuman beings, which prompted us to create
cultures in response.
The first of these stimuli is marine products as
resources from the oceans-fish and other bounty
received from the oceans. This stimulus createdfishing cultures as a form of response.
The second stimulus is that of the role of theoceans as “roads,” linking with other lands, a rolethat nurtured seafaring cultures encompassing

trade and commerce.
The oceans have served as a catalyst for
ambitions to explore and conquer the lands thatlie beyond. The oceans’ role as a road to otherlands gave rise to maritime cultures. These cultures
include the turbulence of war and the adventurous
spirit of setting sail into the unknown oceans, as
Columbus did. These maritime cultures go backtwo thousand years before Columbus,
encompassing the time when the Polynesian
people rowed across the Pacific Ocean, without
knowing if there were other islands beyond.
The third of these stimuli gave rise to marine
art cultures, created as a reaction to the influenceof art, knowledge, and thought within theconnection between the sea and human lives.
Consider the famous “floating world” ukiyo-e artof Katsushika Hokusai, or his woodblock print ofMount Fuji seen from the Kanagawa coast (the“Great Wave off Kanagawa” from Thirty-Six
Views of Mount Fuji), which is an example of art
influenced by the sea. Hokusai’s art reached
Europe and inspired the paintings of Van Gogh,

Figure 1

Figure 27

8

in addition to apparently inspiring Debussy tocompose La Mer (The Sea).
Here I will discuss some of the cultural
heritage that expresses these diverse cultures in atangible form.
Perhaps the first thing that comes to mind
with regard to maritime cultural heritage is“underwater cultural heritage” (Figure 3). This
underwater cultural heritage naturally includes
sunken ships as well as a somewhat wider scope.
Figure 4 depicts a stone wall structure (in Japaneseishihibi) akin to a weir for catching fish; tidal-zone
objects such as these are also considered to beunderwater cultural heritage. Other items arerecognized as connected to fishing cultures and as
heritage related to the sea in terms of livelihoods(Figure 5). In Japan in particular, many Jomon-era
shell mounds and similar can also be described as
maritime cultural heritage. Items connected toseafaring cultures include various objects thatwere transported across the ocean roads. A typicalexample is ceramic ware; I believe the presentations
today will introduce glass items and a variety ofother objects that have been traded across theoceans (Figure 6).
Others are those related to ocean scenery.
Figure 7 illustrates the scenery of Tomonoura.
The scenery of this port town is different fromthat of landlocked towns.

In particular, unique landscapes andtownscapes are created with an awareness of theview from the ocean or from ships or the ocean as
seen from the town. These can also be described as
maritime cultural heritage.
There are also objects connected to spiritualbelief in the oceans. Figure 8 is a photo of an
outdoor ritual site on Okinoshima Island. The
various cultural items from within the island,preserved at this site for over a thousand years,
have earned it the name the “Shosoin of the ocean”(as in the well-known treasure house attached to
the Japanese temple complex of that name).
Except for special festivals, people are notpermitted to enter the site, a belief that has
persisted to this day. So sites like this can also be
regarded as maritime cultural heritage.
While the objects presented so far are all
examples of tangible cultural heritage, there arealso examples of intangible maritime cultural
heritage. These Iranian Lenj boats are constructedfrom wood; the shipbuilding and sailing techniques
used therein are on the UNESCO Representative
List of Intangible Cultural Heritage (Figure 9).
Another example of intangible maritime
cultural heritage is the navigation techniques of
Oceania (Figure 10). When the Polynesian andMicronesian peoples of Oceania sailed the oceans,they used a traditional type of seamanship referredFigure 3

Figure 5

Figure 4

Figure 6

Statement of Purpose

to as “star navigation,” where the movement of thestars is used to indicate the direction of the boat.
Although this type of navigation almost
disappeared during the colonial era, there havebeen efforts to revive star navigation as a part of acultural renaissance movement since the latetwentieth century. Practices such as these can also
be described as maritime cultural heritage.
In this way, maritime cultural heritage comesin various types and forms. However, it is difficult
to cover all of them in this symposium, andtherefore, we have narrowed the focus to thefollowing topics for discussion (Figure 11).
The first topic is from a regional perspective,
with a focus on maritime cultural heritage in the
Asian region from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific
Ocean.
We will approach this topic from three

Figure 7

perspectives. The first of these perspectives is thatof cultural exchange via the oceans. The expansive
ocean area spanning East to West includes
numerous regions and their diversity ofcivilizations and cultures. We will discuss theexchange of civilizations and cultures via theoceans and the ways in which they have stimulated
one another.
The second perspective relates to the diverse
new research methods that have been developed
and applied in recent years to understand maritime
cultural heritage. The most prominent of thesemethods is investigative research of underwater
cultural heritage. This includes submersed studies
conducted by scuba diving, indicating the rapid
advancements made in this field. In addition,
physical and chemical analysis of cultural items
has made it possible to understand where they
were made and when the materials used to makethem were obtained. Using these methods, we can
now clearly identify the routes on which thesecultural items moved among regions. Thissymposium will also address the application ofthese new research methods.
An exceptionally large number of researchersin Japan specialize both in Japanese locations andwithin the wider Asia-Pacific region, conducting
research on maritime cultural heritage as described

Figure 8

Figure 10

Figure 9

Figure 119above.
To what extent can the findings of theirresearch and these new research methods be used
when moving forward to preserve the cultural
heritage of other nations through international

10

cooperation? I look forward to the discussion of
possibilities such as these as well.
The purpose of this symposium is along thelines I have just discussed. I hope everyone will
enjoy and benefit from today’s symposium

Lecture 1

The Appeal
SignificanceonObjects
SunkenConnected
Ships: Timeby
Capsules
FY2021 Symposium “Maritime Network
andandCultural
Heritageof- Research
People andOceans”of the Ocean

Lecture 1

The Appeal and Significance of Research on
Sunken Ships:
Time Capsules of the Ocean
SASAKI Randall(Representative, Marine Archaeology Lab)
Born in Kanagawa Prefecture, he holds a Ph.D. from Texas A&M University (Underwater & Nautical Archaeology). His graduate
studies focused on the traditional ship structures of East Asia, investigating archaeological sites in Japan and Vietnam related to
the Mongol Empire’s military incursions via the oceans. His research currently focuses on the management of global underwater
cultural heritage, methods of investigating archaeological sites, and the utilization and public display of archaeological sites. He
advocates the importance of protecting underwater cultural heritage in Japan and communicates research information overseas
through lectures and writing. He has published multiple academic papers and written works for general audiences.
In 2021, he participated as an expert in a UNESCO workshop on underwater cultural heritage organized by Mongolia. He is also
the founder of the Marine Archeology Lab, with which he works to promote the protection of underwater cultural heritage.

Figure 1

Sir Charles Lyell, perhaps the first person to
proclaim the academic significance of the study ofthese underwater artifacts, stated the following:“For it is probable that a greater number ofmonuments of the skill and industry of man will,in the course of ages, be collected together in the
bed of the oceans than will exist at any one timeon the surface of the Continents” (Figure 2). Lyell,
who wrote the Principles of Geology, is often
mentioned in high school earth science textbooks
and the like (Figure 3). Lyell spent a year travelingaround the UK using records from insurancecompanies to search for lost objects from maritime
accidents and shipwrecks, amounting to as muchas 100,000 tons of cargo and other items. He
argued that since even the present day had givenrise to such a large amount of objects lost in theoceans, in the past many other objects must also

Figure 2

Figure 3

Today, I will talk about what underwaterarchaeology is and discuss exploratory methods
for discovering archaeological sites and artifacts(Figure 1). People have searched for objects
underwater since ancient times. Diving bells havebeen used since antiquity and medieval times but
not in the pursuit of academic knowledge.

11

Lecture 1
Figure 4

were instructed to conduct these surveys byarchaeologists who remained on land. At thattime, the divers used prods and other tools tocheck if there were any artifacts underwater. Thesesurveys, in which prods are inserted into the sandto check for objects, have also been conducted tocheck for undersea artifacts at sites such as Japan’s
Takashima Island. While the survey itself didn’t
produce significant results at that time, it was
effective in providing momentum to similar efforts
to locate artifacts underwater in the future.
For some time thereafter, World War II madeit difficult to conduct research. From the 1950s,
scuba diving became more mainstream (Figure 7).
So archaeologists started diving themselves to do
surveys. First, let’s look at the Cape Gelidonya
shipwreck artifacts in Turkey, which date back to1200 BCE. Many damaged bronze items andsimilar objects were found here, so this may havebeen the world’s oldest recycling business-perhaps
an example of a commoner’s ship.
The Uluburun shipwreck was also discoveredin Turkey (Figure 8). About 100 years older thanthe Cape Gelidonya artifacts mentioned above,the ship was loaded with gold, beads, and otherluxury items. This indicates that it was a ship ofroyalty or nobility. These are examples of twocompletely different types of trade being
conducted using a common ship and a noble ship.

Figure 5

Figure 7

Figure 6

Figure 8

have been similarly lost.
To digress a little: Do you know when andwhich country enacted the world’s first law related
to underwater artifacts? (Figure 4). In fact, it was
Greece in 1834 (Figure 5). It was just when Greece
became an independent nation, coinciding withthe rise of nationalism in the country. This law
regarded these underwater artifacts as cultural
heritage as well. In the past, artifacts had been
removed from the Parthenon, and the idea that
this should not be allowed to happen again led tothese underwater objects also being regarded as
Property of the State and protected as national
objects.
Later, from around 1884, surveys were doneon the Battle of Salamis site and other locations(Figure 6). However, the helmeted divers andothers who were actually conducting the work

12

Lecture 1

The Appeal and Significance of Research on Sunken Ships: Time Capsules of the Ocean

Let me explain Figure 9 in more detail: here
I’ve noted the foundations of civilizations and theconnection between civilizations and large rivers.
Perhaps in school, you learned about the Indus
and Mesopotamian civilizations, among others,
and how these civilizations developed alongside
rivers, which were the underlying factors for thatdevelopment. These people used the rivers forinterchange with other places. The rivers wereused as highways, where ships were used to
conduct trade, meaning that without the ships therivers would have been of no use. I believe that it
may have been the ships, rather than the rivers,
that served as the foundation or basis for these
civilizations. Ships existed from a time before theorigins of farming, and they are extremely
important in this regard.
In addition, as there is only so much space ona ship, whatever you bring on board a ship musthave a use. Say you are going on a three-day trip
within your country and you are thinking about
what to pack in your suitcase: Will you bring threerice cookers with you? No, of course not. Similarly,
people will likely only take what is essential on
board a ship. Sunken ships are like a snapshot of
the moment of distribution, meaning thatwhatever is there was definitely brought on board
for a reason.
When thinking of distribution, I often liken
trade to a tree (Figure 10). So just like the roots ofa tree, many items are gathered at a port, and thosegathered items are then transported to various
other places, like the branches and leaves of a tree.
Studying distribution and artifacts on land isbasically a survey of the leaves and branches. So
sunken ships are the trunk of the tree, and theygive us a picture of the whole process of trade at a
certain time in the past. Ports are also important
places where items are gathered and also need tobe considered along with sunken ships. One of themost exciting aspects of research on ports is how
we perceive the transformation in trade from thestratigraphy of discoveries at ports over time.
Sunken ship artifacts are snapshots of a point in
time, and as such, they are a valuable resource inunderstanding the stratigraphy of port artifacts
and in ascertaining how people traded and how itchanged over time.
Professor George Bass, considered the “father”
of underwater archaeology, sadly passed away inMarch 2021 (Figure 11). I was one of those
fortunate enough to be among his last students.
Professor Bass discovered the Uluburun and Cape
Gelidonya shipwrecks mentioned earlier. While
there were established fields of research on ships,
nautical cultures, and maritime cultures, Professor
Bass demonstrated the contributions that
underwater archaeology, that is undersea artifacts,
could make to the fields of history and archaeology.
For his achievements, he was awarded the UnitedStates’ National Medal of Science. This medal,
which is likened to the United States equivalent of
the Nobel Prize, stands as a testament to thewidespread recognition and respect paid toProfessor Bass in the United States and overseas
for his achievements in underwater and oceanic
cultural heritage.

Figure 9

Figure 11

Figure 1013

Lecture 1
14

In English, there are several similar terms
related to “underwater archaeology,” which is thephrase I have been using (Figure 12). These
include, “nautical archaeology” in reference toships and “maritime archaeology” in relation tothe oceans. So the term “underwater archaeology”
essentially refers to the methods through whicharchaeology is conducted in relation to underwater
objects. Maritime and nautical archaeology referto the archaeological investigation of topics suchas the relation between humanity and bodies ofwater (i.e., the oceans), ways in which people set
sail for and adapt to new lands, as well as theiradventurous spirit in tackling unknown oceans.
I will now touch on Japanese archaeologicalsites and artifacts (Figure 13). Going back in timeto the Edo period, Kiuchi Sekitei produced acatalogue of his rock collection entitled Unkonshi,
including the strangely shaped stones, flint
arrowheads, and other rocks that he had collectedfrom areas such as Lake Biwa. Later, in the Meiji
period, when the paleolithic and Jomon-era Sone
artifacts were discovered at the bottom of Lake
Suwa in Nagano Prefecture, excavation surveys
were conducted using boats. In the Taisho period,
artifacts were discovered at Tsuzuraozaki on Lake
Biwa and other places. These discoveries were thebeginning of underwater archaeology in Japan.

Looking at the rest of the world, figures 14
and 15 present the Godavaya shipwreck in Sri
Lanka, which dates to the period around the first
century CE.
This was the Yayoi period in Japan, so
shipwrecks from the Yayoi period probably looked
similar. The ship was loaded with many bronze
items and other objects. While this shipwreck was
discovered relatively recently, I believe it will
become an increasingly well known shipwreck
over time. Elsewhere in Asia, many ships havebeen discovered in Korea, China, and othercountries (Figure 16). Advancements in research
imply that we are now able to determine factors
such as where a ship was built, mainly throughlooking at the ship’s cross section and the way thematerials are joined, including whether nails were

Figure 12

Figure 15

Figure 13

Figure 16

Figure 14

Lecture 1

The Appeal and Significance of Research on Sunken Ships: Time Capsules of the Ocean

used.
The news has recently reported on the plans
for the construction of a national underwater
cultural heritage center and a national maritime
museum in Saudi Arabia.
Even in a landlocked country such as
Mongolia, there is a growing movement for theprotection of underwater heritage. In September,
UNESCO held a workshop on underwater
cultural heritage. The workshop was attended by
the top officials of Mongolia’s national cultural
heritage policy. I also participated in the workshop
as an expert. It gave me a sense that Mongolia is
rapidly moving toward ratifying the UNESCO
Convention on the Protection of the Underwater
Cultural Heritage.
Having once understood the importance of
these artifacts, we should still consider how best to
discover and excavate them. Here I will discuss
the equipment used for exploring underwaterarchaeological sites. This is data from the same
ship; the data at the bottom is from side scan sonar
and that at the top is from multibeam sonar(Figure 17). Various investigative methods areused to search for artifacts (Figure 18). While thenames listed here are somewhat technical, theAgency for Cultural Affairs in Japan is currently
compiling a handbook on surveys of underwater

artifacts, which may be of interest to those in
search of further details. In this method, basically,a device is attached to the ship. The lines you cansee here go back and forth at 10-meter and20-meter intervals (Figure 19), covering the entire
survey range, while continuously searching for any
artifacts that might be there.
With side scan sonar, a so-called sonic survey,
the device reads sound reverberations to determine
if there is anything in the sea bed (Figure 20).
While it is also possible to see fine details in thisway through a magnetic survey, if the sea is rough,the devices will shake and the images will blur
(Figure 21).
When viewing the side scanner data, imagine
an aerial photo taken when the afternoon sun isstrong. This photo would show, for instance,
whether objects are trees or buildings from the

Figure 17

Figure 20

Figure 18

Figure 21

Figure 1915

Lecture 1
16

shadows reflected on the ground.
You could also measure other informationsuch as size from the shadows’ length and fromother aspects such as the position and angle of thelight source. For convenience, we can consider
sound waves and light as similar here.
Next, let’s discuss multibeam sonar (Figure22). This device also uses sound waves, emitting
multiple beams to obtain readings from various
directions, grasping them as XYZ coordinates,
essentially point group data. While the data must
be post-processed, various perspectives can beused to extract a range of data in several ways.
This is a sub-bottom profiler (Figure 23). Put
simply, it is like an underground radar for theoceans, visualizing a cross-section of seabedsediment. Those who have studied archaeology
will likely know more about these undergroundradars. They enable a cross-section of the seabedsediment to be captured, essentially displaying thesedimentary layer of the seafloor only at the crosssection below the seafloor surface at the point
where the slice was taken. If there is nothing in
the area where the slice was taken, nothing will befound. But if the sediment surface changes, orthere are hard objects in soft soil, they can bedetected.
Magnetic surveying is another method(Figure 24), which is used relatively often overseas.

This is extremely effective when searching formetal objects such as anchors and cannon. It
searches using magnetic response to iron andother materials, which can present difficulties inthat it will respond similarly to both small ironobjects nearby and larger iron objects far away
(Figure 25). As shown in the previous photo, there
are various solutions to this issue, such as lining up
several magnetic survey machines, enabling the
researcher to estimate the distance and directionof the embedded artifacts.
Other methods used recently include
underwater drones (Figure 26). About a decadeago, it was quite difficult to operate underwater
robots and drones. The angle of view was also
narrow, and there were few qualified operators.
More recently though, these machines havebecome much cheaper and are used increasingly

Figure 22

Figure 25

Figure 23

Figure 26

Figure 24

Lecture 1

The Appeal and Significance of Research on Sunken Ships: Time Capsules of the Ocean

often in the private sector as well.
So I think we will see more diverse ways ofusing drones in the future.
Next, I will talk about recording methods(Figure 27). One method that has gained traction
in recent years is photogrammetry, a type ofphotographic surveying in which thousands ofphotos are taken underwater and merged together
to create 3D images. When it comes to methodsof recording underwater artifacts, the best method
is essentially one that anyone can use without
training to create records simply. The phrase“underwater survey” may bring to mind images oflarge-scale investigations conducted withmachines (Figure 28). However, these machines
have become gradually less expensive, and various
new ways to use them have also been discovered.
They are fairly compact and can be connected bya USB to a store-bought laptop and submerged; assuch, they make it relatively easy to take underwater
pictures (Figures 29 and 30). A simple side scansonar or similar device costs around 300,000 to
400,000 yen.
I will now summarize my presentation (Figure
31).
Actually, archaeologists aren’t very good atsearching for underwater artifacts. Through this, I
mean that fishers, divers, or people involved indevelopment projects tend to be better at searchingfor artifacts. Most underwater artifacts worldwide
are initially detected by these people, from whom
information is then received; archaeologists thenwork with exploration companies on these
discoveries. More than a few discoveries are madeduring construction work or other such projects,
and many underwater artifacts are discovered in
the preliminary surveys for development projects(Figure 32). Developments such as offshore wind
power generation have led to a boom in the
discovery of underwater artifacts, with many
thousands of artifacts discovered at sites indeveloped nations. Reclaimed land and other areasused in the past are being searched again, leading
to the discovery of ships. A famous site is theWorld Trade Center, where the 9/11 terrorist

Figure 27

Figure 30

Figure 28

Figure 31

Figure 29

17

Lecture 1

attacks occurred and where ships and items fromthe time of the American Revolutionary War are
being discovered underground. Archaeologists do
not search for artifacts; rather, they investigate
whether objects already found are actually artifacts,
working to explain further details and realize thesignificance of those objects.
Figure 33 presents the distribution andcandidate sites for underwater artifacts, mainly
from countries such as the Netherlands and theUnited Kingdom. In developed nations such asthese, tens of thousands of underwater artifacts
have been recorded. If you were to overlay a mapof western Japan here, you would gain somethingof a sense for the similar potential for discoveries
in Japan.
Underwater artifacts are not subjected toresearch simply as artifacts, which happen to be in
the water (Figure 34). Sunken ships andunderwater coastline ports are archaeological sitesthat do not exist on land. They are valuable sites
containing artifacts from which we learn aboutmaritime cultures and the connection between
humanity and the oceans; as such, they must be
protected. I hope to spread the word that the sea
also contains precious artifacts.
I believe there is now a global trend toward
discovering and protecting underwater artifacts
using information from the general public andpreliminary surveys for development projects.
We may assume that excavating underwater
artifacts is extremely costly; however, they arelargely excavated from areas being targeted fordevelopment projects. Ocean-based development
project costs come to several hundreds of millionsof yen; therefore, spending tens of millions on
excavating underwater remains is not such a large
cost in relative terms. On land, individual projects
can often cost one or two million yen for excavation
alone. So compared with that, I feel that the ratioof money spent on excavation in an ocean-based
development project is quite low. We need to builda system that will thoroughly protect theseprecious artifacts. Thank you for your attention.

Figure 32

Figure 34

Figure 33

18

Lecture 2

FY2021 Symposium “Maritime Network and Cultural Heritage-People and Objects Connected by Oceans”

Lecture 2

Opening the Sea Route:Voyages, and Shipbuilding

KIMURA Jun(Associate Professor, School of Marine Science and Technology, Tokai University)
PhD from Flinders University. After working as a researcher at the Asia Research Center at Murdoch University in Western Australia and at the Field Museum of Natural
History in Chicago, he was appointed to the School of Marine Science and Technology at Tokai University. He specializes in the research on archaeological materialsof ship hulls and artifacts of sunken ships using marine and underwater archaeological methods, as well as the clarification of traditional ship structures andshipbuilding methods of East and Southeast Asia. As a member of the Agency for Cultural Affairs Underwater Archaeological Artifacts Survey Review Committee,
he is involved in the identification of Japanese underwater archaeological artifact locations; as an expert advisor for the ICOMOS Sub-Committee on International
Underwater Cultural Properties, he advises on the protection and management of underwater cultural heritage in the Asia region. His major publications include
Archaeology of East Asian Shipbuilding, Introduction to Nautical Archeology: Methods and Practices (Japanese), and Illustrated Underwater Ruins of the World (Japanese).

In my presentation today, I will talk about the
opening of ocean routes as considered in terms of
the importance of ships, navigation, andshipbuilding (Figure 1).
Let’s see why we think about ocean routes
today (Figure 2). There has long been an interestin ocean routes in Japan in the context of researchon the history of East-West exchanges, studies oftrade, ceramics, and other such fields, withsignificant quantities of research conducted.
Elsewhere, outside Japan, research on the Silk
Road is currently thriving. This overseas researchon the Silk Road is continuing as an extension ofresearch on landborne Silk Road heritage.
In conjunction, there has recently been

particular interest in the Maritime Silk Route (inthis context, the word “route” is used rather than“road”), with movement toward an application forworld heritage status for the Maritime Silk Route.
Sustainable development is a topic often
mentioned in present-day society; number 14 of
the Sustainable Development Goals is “Conserveand sustainably use the oceans, seas, and marine
resources for sustainable development.” As such,there is a growing international interest in themarine environment and its resources. The United
Nations Decade of Ocean Science began in 2021
and will run until 2030. It includes a move toward
preserving the cultural resources of the oceans,alongside conservation of the natural resources of

Figure 1

Figure 219

Lecture 2
20

the oceans, which can be linked to the significanceof holding this symposium.
When considering ocean routes, studies havelong emphasized the connections among marine
areas (Figure 3). Actually, looking at humanhistory, the connections among marine areas areclosely related to the discovery of seasonal winds
and ocean currents. A specific example is thediscovery of a seasonal wind called the Hippalus
wind. Around the start of the Common Era, thiswind was used to navigate from the Mediterranean
Sea to the Middle East and Indian Ocean, causing
maritime trade to prosper in these regions. Some
1,500 years later, the discovery of the Japan(Kuroshio) Current and seasonal winds helped
create a route across the Pacific Ocean. At thesame time, navigation techniques were being
developed. This is an example of a sea chart thatwas created in the late 13th or early 14th century.
It shows linear routes to important port towns forvoyagers. By contrast, the Cantino planispherefrom 1500 already has information for direct travel
to destinations, as well as latitude-longitude andother information. The development of thesenavigation techniques and the advantages of using
ships are described in Figure 3. These factors haveplayed a monumental role in the history ofhumans.
Why, then, do we need to take another look atships, navigation, and shipbuilding?
This question is related to the perspectives
and discussions of the archaeology of ships (Figure4). In the past, there was an immense interest in
the movement of objects via the oceans. Morerecently, research has significantly expanded toinclude objects and the discovery of newarchaeological materials in the form of the ship
hulls that transported these objects, as well as theunderwater excavation of artifacts of sunken ships,
pointing out the significance of considering ships,
navigation, and shipbuilding.
My field of study, ship archaeology and related
topics, considers just this role of ships in the
movement of objects and people. In recent years,
an increase in ship hull archaeological materials
and research thereon have brought to light various
facts.
So what can ship hull archaeological materials
tell us (Figure 5)? In this talk, I use the term “shiphull archaeological materials”: conducting detailed
research on the ship timber remaining in sunken
ships and on the ship hull artifacts can clarify thehistory of ship construction (shipbuilding) for use
in inland waters and open seas. There is an exhibitof an ancient Egyptian boat called the Dashur
boat at the Field Museum of Natural History in
Chicago, my previous place of work. Looking
closely at the boat’s construction, you can see that

Figure 3

Figure 5

Figure 4

Lecture 2

Opening the Sea Route: Voyages, and Shipbuilding

wedges and tenons were used to join the parts
together. Used in ancient Egypt to build riverboats, this is an extremely ancient shipbuilding
technique from around 1850 BCE.
Ship hull archaeological materials are
discovered underwater as well as on land.
Figure 6 presents an example of one of theworld’s oldest sunken ships. Looking at it, we cansee that before it sank, this ship was engaged in
the trade that supported the development of theBronze Age civilization in the Mediterranean Sea
and sailed these waters based in the eastern
Mediterranean Sea, traveling to Egypt as well. Dr.
Sasaki mentioned this in his talk about the shipsof royalty and nobility; this ship also contains glass
ingots and other extremely precious and valuable
items of trade at that time. At the same time,copper ingots, the raw materials of the bronze
supporting the Bronze Age civilization, were also
discovered on this ship. The people who actuallytransported these objects are thought to have beenof Middle Eastern origin, from the area which is
now the Syrian coast.
Let’s consider how the world’s oldest ship wasconstructed (Figure 7). The mortise and tenon
shipbuilding technique in the Mediterranean
dates to the Late Bronze Age, 3500 years ago, andwas revealed from a detailed analysis of thearchaeological materials of ship hulls.
Next, let us consider the Japanese archipelago
and the ship timbers discovered there and what
they tell us about construction techniques (Figure8). Looking at dugout canoes and the ships
subsequently developed, recent research has
revealed that ship parts were joined by tightly
binding with tree bark, rather than with themortise and tenon technique. Discussions on thearchaeology of ships in Japan often adopt anevolutionary perspective, emphasizing themorphological development of ships from dugout
canoes to semi-structured and then structured
ships. Rather than adopting this perspective, if we
instead focus on the shipbuilding techniques
indicated by the ship hull archaeological materials,
it then becomes important to consider the originsof these techniques and how they developed inJapan.
Although the mortise and tenon technique
was used often in the ancient Mediterranean
region, other techniques that excavated ships haveshown to be in widespread use include sewing
together the ship timbers with string and othermaterials (Figure 9). This boat was not excavatedfrom the ocean, but at the French port city ofMarseilles, at a location once underwater and now
on land. Detailed study indicates that the timberparts were sewn together in a seam-frame
construction; this is what is referred to as a sewn
boat. From a recent study of ship hull archaeologicalFigure 6

Figure 8

Figure 721

Lecture 2
22materials, we can tell that the techniques used inthis sewn boat were also widely applied throughout
human history. Some of you may have alreadyheard of The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, anancient guidebook (1st century CE) that describes
ocean trade routes as told by Greek sailors in
Egypt. It describes the seam-frame constructionof sewing together the timber parts, as used in the
Middle East.
Recent underwater archaeological surveys
have been using new diving techniques to do
deep-sea exploration, finding merchant ships fromextremely ancient times, such as ancient Greece
and Rome, in the deep areas of the Black Sea(Figure 10). A study of these sewn ships can be
expected to clarify the periods of antiquity and thelocations in the Mediterranean and elsewhere inwhich they were used.
With regard to sewn boats, let us now focus
on the Indian Ocean and marine areas in Southeast
Asia (Figure 11). The example of dhow ships
indicates that the technique of sewn ships spread

extensively throughout the Indian Ocean; recently
analyzed examples of ship hull archaeologicalmaterials indicate that the same types of sewn
ships also sailed the waters of Southeast Asia
(Figure 12). The seam-frame construction andsewing techniques used to join together the timberparts of ships have also been found in archaeologicalmaterials from around the 7th to 8th century thatwere excavated in Thailand.
Figure 12 is an enlarged photo of the Phanom
Surin ship hull excavated in Thailand. A detailed
examination of the ship’s hull indicates that thetimber sections were sewn together with string
braided from coconut fiber. The period from the
7th to 8th century coincides with the Tang dynasty
in East Asia, during which the Maritime Silk
Route sea trade network was developed (Figure13). The names of several ships appear in theliterature from this period, such as the Brahman
ships, Persian ships, and Kunlun-po ships. The
actual form of sewn ships has become clear basedon those excavated in Thailand and the 9th-

Figure 9

Figure 11

Figure 10

Figure 12

Lecture 2

Opening the Sea Route: Voyages, and Shipbuilding

century Belitung shipwreck discovered in theIndonesian seabed. Persian and other merchantships from Arabic and Islamic countries were
probably also sewn ships, a fact that is gradually
coming to light thanks to the recent analysis ofship hull archaeological materials.
So what kind of ships were the Brahman andKunlun-po ships?
Much is unknown about Brahman ships, but
Chinese-language sources describe how theKunlun-po ships were used by the Kunlun peopleof Austronesia. We can also get an idea of thekinds of ships used to sail the oceans of Southeast
Asia from the images of the ship hull archaeologicalmaterials recently excavated there.
Figure 14 depicts an example of a sunken ship
I studied with fellow Japanese researchers,
constructed with ship timber from the late 8th toearly 9th century, salvaged offshore from thevillage of Chau Tan in central Vietnam. We cansee that it is extremely similar in structure to theships discovered in other areas of Southeast Asia

(Figure 15).
Specifically, we can see that the ship’s timber
sections are joined together using wooden nails
called dowels. This is the Punjulharjo Ship
excavated in Indonesia. It is being studied byresearchers from the École française d’ExtrêmeOrient.
It is an extremely well-preserved 15-meterlong archaeological ship hull. The timber of thisship, excavated in Indonesia, and that of the Chau
Tan ship found in Vietnam share extremely similarfeatures. When reconstructed, the Vietnamese
Chau Tan ship is about 22 meters long. There areholes in the seams of the timber sections (Figure16). These are probably the holes from the wooden
dowels used to join them.
The literature indicates that the string madefrom coconut fibers was often used to bind
Kunlun-po ships. Similarly, ship hull archaeologicalmaterials excavated in Southeast Asia indicae that
palm fiber string was used to reinforce the timber.
They also demonstrate that wooden dowels were

Figure 13

Figure 15

Figure 14

Figure 16
23

Lecture 2
24

used to join the timber sections. An often-citedtypical example of a ship from Southeast Asia isseen in the Borobudur mural: based on current
research findings, we can say that this ship was
probably also joined together with wooden dowels.
Moving forward in time to the Middle Agesin East Asia, a new form of ship emerged andcame into frequent use (Figure 17). These ships
were used by Chinese Song-dynasty merchants,
also called Song sea traders, who built ships intheir homeland along the shore of the East China
Sea and were active in sailing to foreign lands
during this time of trade. As seen in Figure 17, theships used during this period tapered at the keel toa V-shape. These ships were built to carryvoluminous loads of cargo, facilitated by means ofan armor-like structure with multiple panels
layered on the exterior or by the use of steel pins in
the construction of the hull, enabling internal
partitions called bulkheads. This cross section of
the sunken ship archaeological material reveals a
V-shaped structure and multiple panels on theunderside. Figure 18 presents an example of a ship
excavated offshore in Guangdong, called the
Nanhai One. A Chinese trading ship that sank in
the Song period is similar to a ship from Quanzhou
that was excavated in the 1970s, with its wide
V-shaped structure with multiple exterior panels.
Archaeological materials from the hulls ofthese East China Sea ships in the Middle Ages
have also been discovered in Japan: the second
ship excavated from the Takashima Kozaki Ruins,a famous relic of the Mongol invasions, was a
sturdy ship likely commandeered during theSouthern Song dynasty (Figure 19). A detailed
analysis of these ships indicate a similar structure

to the Nanhai One and Quanzhou ships. Figure
19 depicts a 3D replica of the second Takashima
ship. To further illustrate this by referring to the
Illustrated Account of the Mongol Invasion (anillustrated handscroll), it is thought that this formof ship was used during the Mongol invasions ofJapan (Figure 20).
Shipwreck materials from the 14th century
following the Mongol invasions are scarce acrossFigure 17

Figure 20

Figure 18

Figure 19

Lecture 2

Opening the Sea Route: Voyages, and Shipbuilding

the entire Asian marine region, and it is only
recently that undersea excavations of shipwrecks
in Singapore have been undertaken, associatedwith blue-and-white porcelain from the Yuan
Dynasty (Figure 21).
An increasing number of shipwrecks from the15th century have been discovered. Recent
excavations have confirmed that during thisperiod, hybrid-type trading ships were used, built
using a combination of techniques from different
marine areas. These hybrid trading ships havebeen discovered in the seas of Southeast Asia
(Figure 22). The shipbuilding techniques of East
Asia and Southeast Asian seas were combined tocreate a new hybrid type of trading ship, and it isthese sunken ships that are being discovered on
the seabed.
This slide indicates an example from thePhilippines. These hybrid ships were used over along period of time historically in Southeast Asia
(Figure 23). These hybrid ships are being
discovered not only in the waters of Southeast
Asian islands but also in peninsular waters. Figure

24 indicates an early 17th century shipwreck from
Bang Kachai Bay, Thailand. These ships fromSoutheast Asia eventually sailed to Japan as well.
The ship excavated in Thailand contained animmense amount of timber called sappanwood(Figure 25). The literature states that sappanwood
was imported from Southeast Asia by the Ryukyu
Kingdom and so on; the study of ship hullarchaeological materials indicates that thissappanwood was likely transported by thesehybrid trade ships.
However, the study of ship hull archaeologicalmaterials is in fact experiencing difficulties atpresent (Figure 26). In some areas of Asia, thesematerials are mostly not being properly conserved,
and there are reports of excavated materials justbeing discarded. While there is a growing global
interest in cultural heritage of the oceans, there arealso many issues in this regard in terms of researchand protection.
This concludes my presentation.

Figure 21

Figure 23

Figure 22

Figure 2425

Lecture 2
Figure 25

26

Figure 26

Lecture 3

FY2021 Symposium “Maritime Network and Cultural Heritage-People and Objects Connected by Oceans”

Lecture 3

Glass Beads Brought Across the Oceans:
East-West Trade and the Road of Glass

TAMURA Tomomi(Principal Researcher, Imperial Palace Sites Investigation Department,
Nara National Research Institute for Cultural Properties)
PhD in conservation science from the Graduate School of Human and Environmental Studies, Kyoto University. After completing her
doctoral research, she joined the Nara National Research Institute for Cultural Properties in July 2009 and worked there as a researcher
at the Conservation and Restoration Science Laboratory of the Center for Archeological Operations from April 2010. In April 2017, she
was transferred to Archeology Section 1 of the Imperial Palace Sites Investigations Department. She is currently working as a principal
researcher in the same department and as an expert in cultural property science and conservation science. She specializes in theanalysis of glass bead materials and conducts classification research on glass beads excavated in Japan. She is currently engaged inresearch seeking to clarify chronological changes in glass bead material in the Japanese archipelago as well as the areas of theirproduction and historical trade routes. She received her PhD (Human and Environmental Studies) from Kyoto University in 2013.

I am TAMURA Tomomi of the Nara National
Research Institute for Cultural Properties. At
today’s symposium on “Maritime Network andCultural Heritage-People and Objects Connectedby Oceans,” I will discuss “Glass Beads Brought
Across the Oceans: East-West Trade and theRoad of Glass” (Figure 1).
Let me briefly outline my presentation today(Figure 2). I will discuss Indo-Pacific beads as
glass beads that were brought across the oceans.
This is perhaps the first time many of you haveheard of Indo-Pacific beads, so I will start by
explaining what they are. Then I will use thechemical analysis in which I specialize to introduce
the material characteristics of Indo-Pacific beads
and then consider trade routes based on theirdistribution as clarified through similar casestudies in Asia. Although I will mainly talk aboutmaritime trade in today’s presentation, as acomparison, I will also briefly discuss what kind ofbeads were distributed inland in the Eurasiancontinent. In summary, I will discuss the study ofglass beads excavated dating from ancient times,
particularly in my specialty areas of the Yayoi
through the Kofun periods of Japanese history,roughly from the 3rd century BCE to the 6th

Figure 1

Figure 227

Lecture 3
28

century CE.
I will summarize the routes through whichthese glass beads entered East Asia.
We know that glass was actively tradedthrough land and sea routes and widely distributed
throughout Eurasia. All the glass in the Figure 3
photo was excavated in Japan. Over 600,000 glass
items dating from the Yayoi period to the Kofun
period have been discovered in the Japanesearchipelago, in particular from tombs. Vessels havebeen discovered only in very small quantities;
most of the items are glass beads, referred to in
Japanese as tama. The vast majority of these glass
beads are small, monochrome items referred to as
kodama.
The archaeological surveys conducted thus far
indicate that glass beads with similar features were
distributed in the West from the East Coast of
Africa through to Southern India and across thecoastal areas of Eurasia as far as Southeast Asia.
Recently, we have also learned that these areas of
distribution extended to East Asia, the Korean
peninsula, and the Japanese archipelago in large
quantity.
Figure 4 depicts the so-called Indo-Pacificbeads. Looking at the specific features of theseglass beads, they are defined as beads made using
the “drawing method, creating small, monochrome
beads with a diameter of 6 mm or less (Figure 5).
This “drawing method” is a special techniqueinvolving making a long glass tube and reheating
the split-off sections to create beads. These wereonce called trade wind beads. When it became
known that these beads were widely distributed
mainly from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific
Ocean coastal areas, they were renamed Indo-

Pacific beads by researcher Peter Francis Jr. in
1989-90. There are various theories as to theorigins of these Indo-Pacific beads, but now
thanks to the discovery of what is thought to be
their oldest production site-the Arikamedu site inSouthern India-it is thought that they were firstmade around the 3rd century BCE, withproduction then expanding throughout Southeast
Asia. Incidentally, the oldest Indo-Pacific beads tohave been discovered in Japan are from a 3rd
century BCE burial jar in Northern Kyushu.
Although the start of production of Indo-Pacificbeads in India likely predates this somewhat,
either way, it seems remarkable that these IndoPacific beads arrived in the Japanese archipelago
quite soon after their production began.
I actually visited the Arikamedu site in 2013,
as you see in Figure 6. The site is in the suburbs ofPondicherry (now Puducherry) in Southern India.
These archaeological artifacts discovered
there are currently on display at the Puducherry

Figure 3

Figure 5

Figure 4

Lecture 3

Glass Beads Brought Across the Oceans: East-West Trade and the Road of Glass

Museum (Figure 7). Vast amounts of Indo-Pacificbeads were discovered at this site, as well as
numerous glass materials and tube-shaped
incomplete items. It is clear that the finished items(i.e., beads) are very similar to those items
excavated in Japan. Similar production site
artifacts have been discovered throughout
Southeast Asia, and production is thought to havespread at least as far as Thailand, Myanmar, andVietnam. Currently, there is still no clear evidence
to indicate whether the production of Indo-Pacificbeads reached Southern China. For instance,
Figure 8 presents glass beads excavated from the
Mupon site in Myanmar.
In addition to glass beads, glass tubes andmaterials and numerous other items have been
discovered, so it is clear that beads were produced
here. By contrast, in Far East Asian areas such as
the Japanese archipelago and the Korean peninsula,although a large amount of finished products havebeen discovered, the excavation surveys so far havefound no production site artifacts including
unfinished items or glass materials. Based on this,we can assume that the vast number of IndoPacific beads excavated in Far East Asia, such as in
the Japanese archipelago and the Korean peninsula,
all entered these areas as finished products.
In summary, Indo-Pacific beads with acommon production method were distributed in
the Eurasian coastal areas and had already reached
the Japanese archipelago by the 3rd century BCE(Figure 9). As there have been no unfinishedgoods, glass materials, or other items used to makebeads found in East Asia, it is thought that thesebeads entered the area having been produced
elsewhere.
So where were the beads made and by whatroute did they reach Far East Asia, including theJapanese archipelago? One clue is the distinctive
material qualities of glass, basically its chemicalcomposition (Figure 10).
Now, I’d like to talk briefly about analysis. It is

Figure 6

Figure 8

Figure 7

Figure 929

Lecture 3

thought that glass was invented around 3000 BCE
in West Asia (Figure 11). The main raw material
used to make glass is a substance called silicon. A
typical example of a material containing silicon isquartz, which is a crystalline mineral. The mainmaterials actually used included clustered crystals,
sand with a high quartz particle content, and soon. However, melting quartz alone requires
extremely high temperatures of around 1700˚C ormore. As it is not possible to achieve such hightemperatures using ancient techniques, themelting temperature must be lowered. Various
melting agents (known as “flux”) are added tolower the melting point temperature; they
contained lead, potassium, or sodium. The glassthen takes the name of the materials used to makeit, as in lead glass and potassium glass. Glass madeof sodium is called soda glass.
As for the specific raw materials, galena is thelead-based material used, and the mineralpotassium nitrate is the potassium-based material.

Figure 10

Figure 1130

In the case of sodium, there are many including asubstance along the lines of burnt plant ash andthe salt that forms when a lake dries up. A
particularly well known substance is “natron” fromthe Natron Lakes in Egypt; although different
from table salt, it still contains a lot of sodium. It
is thought that these substances and materials
were used to make glass. The types of raw materials
used also depend on the production areas andtheir varying traditions. Thus, identifying the raw
materials used by their chemical composition
enables a rough identification of the production
area as well. For instance, China has traditionallymade lead glass using lead, while potassium glass
made using potassium nitrate is distinctive to
India and Southeast Asia. Soda glass made withnatron is notably from the Mediterranean Sea,and soda glass made with plant ash is acharacteristic of West and Central Asia. I have
simplified the actual situation somewhat, as to go
into detail would take up my whole presentation,
but I hope this gives you the general idea.
Figure 12 presents the findings of analyticalsurveys of the glass beads distributed across theJapanese archipelago from the Yayoi to Kofun
periods, classified by their chemical composition.
The color coding in Figure 13 denotes the
production areas based on the characteristics ofthe materials used. The green text indicatesmaterials that have the characteristics of glass
made in India and Southeast Asia.
Figure 14 indicates a map with color coding.
The figure includes photos of the typical productsof these areas. Looking at these groups classified
by chemical composition, there is a clear
connection between the type of product and the

Figure 12

Lecture 3

Glass Beads Brought Across the Oceans: East-West Trade and the Road of Glassmethods used to make it. Basically, glass itemswith the material characteristics of glass made in
India and Southeast Asia are mostly Indo-Pacificbeads. Conversely, no typical Indo-Pacific beads
have been found among glass with the material
characteristics of other areas. We also know that
there are many different types of glass composedof the materials made in India and Southeast Asia.
Basically, it can be said that there were also several
production areas for Indo-Pacific beads.
Next, I will take a closer look at the connection
between the materials of Indo-Pacific beads andtheir production areas (Figure 15). First, the IndoPacific beads made from potassium glass were theearliest to enter Japan (Figure 16).
They arrived in large quantities: over 100,000
have been discovered. The chemical compositionof these potassium glass beads distributed in Japan
can be roughly divided into two categories (Figure17). Each of these categories has been found tocorrespond to different color tones of glass. The

timing of the entrance of these two types ofpotassium glass beads into the Japanese archipelagoalso follows different patterns and rhythms interms of the numbers of beads found. The earliest
potassium glass beads to enter Japan are shown innavy blue in the figure. As the composition andrhythm of distribution differ, we can assume thatthe two types of potassium glass beads are fromdifferent production areas.
Comparing the distribution of products andexamples from analyses conducted overseas, thepotassium glass beads shown in light blue have asimilar chemical composition to the glass foundmainly from Southern China to Northern
Vietnam; it is therefore highly probable that theglass beads were produced in these areas (Figure18). Meanwhile, while there have long beenvarious theories regarding the origins of thepotassium glass beads shown in navy blue, thepreviously mentioned Arikamedu site in Southern
India has a lot of glass with a similar chemical

Figure 13

Figure 15

Figure 14

Figure 16
31

Lecture 3
32

composition, and the current prevailing theory isthat they were probably produced in Southern
India.
A noteworthy point is that the volume of
distribution of both types of beads in the Japanesearchipelago rapidly increased in the 1st century
CE (Figure 19). The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea,
previously mentioned by Dr. KIMURA, describes
the discovery of the Hippalus trade wind aroundthe 1st century and how it led to dramatic advancesin navigation techniques. The rapid increase inpotassium glass from the south also occurred in
Far East Asia around the 1st century, and we cantherefore suppose there was some kind ofconnection between this rapid increase and theadvances in navigation techniques during that
period.
Let us also briefly discuss the distribution of
products, as seen from a detailed examination of
the distribution routes of Indo-Pacific beads.
Using mainly the materials my team and I haveanalyzed, we have plotted the areas in which IndoPacific beads have been excavated in Figure 20. As
you can see, many of them are in the coastal areasfrom India to Southeast Asia. Large quantities of
Indo-Pacific glass beads similar to those in theJapanese archipelago have also been found in thesouthern Korean Peninsula. Meanwhile, a
relatively large amount of Indo-Pacific glass beads
have been found in China in areas such as modernday Jiangxi in the south and coastal areas further
south of the Jiangnan Region. However,particularly in the period corresponding to Japan’s
Yayoi period, in the Zhongyuan central plains
region of the Han empire, where the key cities of
Luoyang and Chang’an were located, almost noneof these beads have been found.
As for inland Eurasia, completely different
kinds of glass beads were distributed there. Figure
21 depicts glass beads excavated from a Xiongnu
tomb in Mongolia around the start of the common
era. At a glance, you can see that their characteristics

Figure 17

Figure 19

Figure 18

Figure 20

Lecture 3

Glass Beads Brought Across the Oceans: East-West Trade and the Road of Glassdiffer from those of Indo-Pacific beads. Materials
analysis indicates that the majority of the Xiongnu
glass beads are natron glass from the Mediterranean
or what is referred to as Roman glass (Figure 22).
Similarly, vessels made with Roman glass, stone
products, other decorative items made with lapis
lazuli, and other items found in large quantities in
the Mediterranean were also found in the Xiongnu
tomb.
The second most widely found variety ofXiongnu glass beads are those made with plantash glass (Figure 23). The beads thought from thecharacteristics of their chemical composition tohave likely been made in Central Asia are thosesecond most widely found.
It is not the case that there is absolutely no
glass from the south (Figure 24). But it is extremely
scarce in relative terms, and the distribution of alimited variety has been confirmed. The somewhat
unusual orange glass shown here is among these,
as well as these small beads with a very dark purple

coloring, which are also Indo-Pacific beads. So we
can say that a certain amount of these beads fromthe south were distributed up to the Mongolian
plains via inland routes. However, the navy blue
and light blue potassium glass beads found inlarge quantities in Southeast Asia and the Japanesearchipelago are not found in the Xiongnu tombsite.
We can assume that many of these beads werebrought to Far East Asia by the sea trade thatconnected coastal areas.
Going back to the Kofun period, from aroundthe 4th to 6th century CE, soda glass Indo-Pacificbeads were distributed in large amounts (Figure25). Many of these beads were made from soda
glass with a high alumina content, a chemicalcomposition typical of beads from India andSoutheast Asia. This soda glass with a highalumina content was the most general type ofglass in Southeast Asia, with its high aluminumand low calcium content (Figure 26). AnotherFigure 21

Figure 23

Figure 22

Figure 24
33

Lecture 3

feature is color variation: an extremely colorfularray of glass has been found. These examples
were all excavated in Japan, but glass beads withsimilar characteristics have also been excavated inSoutheast Asia.
As an example, here are some materials
excavated from the Angkor Borei site in Cambodia(Figure 27). Angkor Borei is the remains of whatis thought to have once been the capital city of the34

Figure 25

Kingdom of Funan around the 5th or 6th century.
There is now a museum at this site, with glass
artifacts on display. Many typical Indo-Pacificbeads have also been excavated here.
Figure 28 indicates a specimen on display that
I borrowed from Angkor Borei as a sample foranalysis. It is very similar in size and color variation
to the beads excavated in Japan that date from thesame period. In terms of materials as well, all but
two of the items are soda glass with a high alumina
content. When compared with items excavated inJapan, they are almost identical (Figure 29).
These are fascinating materials that may
connect the Indo-Pacific beads of Japan andCambodia (Figure 30). The Nihon Shoki states thatin 543, King Seong of Baekje (in ancient Korea)presented goods from Funan and slaves to Wakoku(a word used by foreigners for ancient Japan). At
around the same time period as this description in
the Nihon Shoki (i.e., the 6th century), Indo-Pacificbeads of the same colors were distributed in large
amounts in Baekje as well as in Japan and

Figure 26

Figure 28

Figure 27

Figure 29

Lecture 3

Glass Beads Brought Across the Oceans: East-West Trade and the Road of Glass

Figure 30

the Northern Wei site of Yongning Temple in
Luoyang.
Around 150,000 glass beads have been
excavated from the west gate of the temple.
Analytical surveys indicate that most are thesouthern-type of Indo-Pacific beads, made of soda
glass with a high alumina content. As for how
these Indo-Pacific beads entered this area, there isa fascinating passage in the Wei Shu, a classicalhistorical text from the western region of theKingdom of the Greater Yuezhi. The text recounts
that the people from that kingdom made fivecolors of glass from stone at the capital city ofNorthern Wei, and the glass they produced was ofsuch high quality that the people of China nolonger considered glass a prized rarity. Consideringthat high-ranking Buddhist priests from the West
were frequently invited to Northern Wei andgiven that the beads were excavated from Buddhist
temple ruins, we cannot exclude the possibility
that these glass beads were also brought from
India via inland routes.
Finally, let me summarize my presentation sofar (Figure 32). We have looked at the distributionof Indo-Pacific beads from the perspective of glass
beads brought across the oceans. Indo-Pacificbeads were made in India up to around the 3rd
century BCE and arrived at the Japanesearchipelago shortly after in the early mid-Yayoi
period. Subsequently, Indo-Pacific beads
continued to be distributed in Far East Asia up to
the 6th century CE; however, as there have beenno discoveries of artifacts indicating the beads
were made there, it is likely that they wereconsistently imported as finished products. Studiesof the import routes reveal that the beads were

Figure 31

Figure 32

Cambodia. Personally, I think these colored IndoPacific beads were likely included in the goods
from Funan.
Incidentally, King Muryeong of Baekje, thepredecessor to King Seong, is well-known forhaving been buried with a vast amount of glass
beads.
However, it cannot be definitively confirmedthat all these Indo-Pacific beads from the south
were consistently transported by ocean routes toEast Asia. For example, large amounts of IndoPacific beads were distributed around the start ofthe common era in Japan, the Korean Peninsula,and other places. But as mentioned before, only a
few glass beads have been discovered in the
Zhongyuan central plains at the heart of China.
Nonetheless, even in Luoyang-in those central
plains-large quantities of Indo-Pacific beads havebeen excavated from the ruins of Buddhist temples
dating from the Northern Wei period around the
6th century.
Figure 31 presents glass beads excavated from35

Lecture 3
36basically distributed in the coastal areas of Eurasia
from around the start of the common era to the
5th century. It was quite rare for the beads to enter
via inland routes, so it is thought that they weremainly transported by ocean-based routes.
However, from the 6th century, large quantitiesof these beads were used in Buddhist temples ininland China as well. Thus, in subsequent periods,

there remains the possibility that a certain quantityof beads were also distributed via inland routes.
That said, from their first introduction
through the 6th century, Indo-Pacific beads were
essentially transported by sea routes as typicaltrade items.
Thank you for your attention (Figures 33 and34).

Figure 33

Figure 34

Lecture 4

FY2021 Symposium “Maritime Network and Cultural Heritage-People and Objects Connected by Oceans”

Lecture 4

People Crossing the Maritime World:
Islamic Merchants, Including theMerchants of Hormuz

YOKKAICHI Yasuhiro(Associate Professor, Graduate School of Arts, Rikkyo University)
PhD (Literature) from Waseda University. Positions held before the current one, as of 2018, included full-time lecturer at Kyushu University. His specialist
subjects include the history of East-West Eurasian exchanges, maritime history of Asia, and the history of China, Mongolia, and Iran. He studies the relationshipof merchants and the religious with society and the state, using historical materials written in Chinese, Mongolian, and Persian. Recent research projects
include studying the format of multilingual documents during the Mongol Empire; investigating the distribution of ceramics, silver, and textiles in Eurasia andthe coastal areas of the Indian Ocean; and researching the transmission of dragon and phoenix crests and stone lions in Eastern and Western Eurasia.

Thank you for the introduction. I am
YOKKAICHI Yasuhiro of Rikkyo University(Figure 1). Today, I will discuss Islamic merchants
who crossed the oceans from the viewpoint of thehistory of literature. The phrase “Islamic
merchants” covers a broad range, including
merchants from various regions and categories
differing quite considerably according to thetimes. Today, I will focus on the merchants of
Hormuz, who were active around the 13th to 14th
century-the time of the Mongol Empire, my
specialty area.
First, I will discuss the Islamic port-state andmerchants of marine trade. Hormuz, Kish, andSiraf are all towns in Iran (Figure 2). The
merchants of Siraf, Hormuz, and Kish are known
for spearheading trade in the Indian Ocean.

Various other urban and port-based merchants
were also active in marine trade, including the
Adeni merchants of Yemen.
The merchants of Siraf, a port town on thenorth coast of the Persian Gulf, began trading
around the 9th century. These Siraf merchantssteadily built their trading bases, expanding fromthe western side of the Indian Ocean up to East
Asia, covering East Asia, Southeast Asia, andNorthwest Africa. They used these bases to rapidly
expand their trade. However, from around the10th to 11th century, the port of Siraf began torapidly decline. There were various reasons forthat decline, including a major earthquake, theemergence of rival port states, and poor relations
with the larger nations called domain-states.

Figure 1

Figure 237Lecture 4
38

From the 12th to around the 14th century,
Siraf merchants were replaced by those from theports in the city-state kingdoms of Hormuz, Kish,and also Aden. Unlike those of Siraf, all of thesemerchants were from kingdoms, each with its own
king. That said, the members of the royal familiesof these kingdoms were originally from a family
lineage of Siraf merchants and ship captains called
Nakhuda. The literature confirms how they
became kings at their respective destinations.
The kingdoms of Kish and Hormuz were port
city-states in the Persian Gulf, the remains ofwhich exist to this day. We can specifically confirm
this mostly from information in historicalmaterials, such as chronicles in Persian and Arabic(Figure 3). The Majma‘ al-Ansāb (Source of
Genealogy) documents the royal bloodlines ofeach of these royal families of Iran, as well as thehistory of the origin and development of Hormuz’skingship. The Tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf (Wassaf History) isa chronicle from the Mongol period in Arabic andPersian. It also has considerable information on
the Indian Ocean trade of Kish and Hormuz.
There are also Portuguese-language materials
from the explorer Pedro Teixeira, who wrote A
History of the Kings of Hormuz, based on what he-a
Portuguese who had come to Hormuz-had heard
from the kings of Hormuz about their royallineage. Research is being conducted based onthese historical materials by researchers in a varietyof locales, particularly Europe and Iran. Beyond
this, in Japan, YAJIMA Hikoichi is world
renowned for his studies of the history of the
Indian Ocean.
As such, there is now a history of research on

trade in the Indian Ocean, including Hormuz andKish, considering a range of different aspects.
I have also been researching Hormuz for sometime, and my recent findings particularly relate to
the Kingdom of Hormuz, when it was the oldroyal capital. You can see Old Hormuz and New
Hormuz written on the map. Around the start ofthe 14th century, the old royal capital of Old
Hormuz became New Hormuz when it was
relocated to the small island of Djerba (Figure 4).
Although the royal regime remained the same,
New Hormuz is the name modern-day
archaeologists use for the city after the capital was
relocated. The kingdom of Kish refers to themodern-day island of Kish. As stated previously,
the merchants of the islands of Kish and Hormuz
traded in the Indian Ocean. If we examine thepower balance in Iran at the same period, there
was the Qara-Khitai Kingdom of Kirman, also
called the Qutugh-Khanid dynasty, north of
Hormuz. To the west of this, northwest of
Hormuz, was the Shabankarah Kingdom. Further
west in Fars province was the Atabeg
administration of Fars-also known as theSalghurid dynasty-with the ancient city of Shirazas its capital. Though they were not vast, theyruled over certain territories as territorial stateswith local lords in surrounding areas. Later in the
13th century, a vast territorial state covering allothers emerged in the form of the Il-khanate
dynasty. Succeeding to the Mongol Empire’s
regime, it ruled over all of Iran.
Hormuz and Kish maintained relations withthese regional states and the enormous empire of
the Il-khanate dynasty, which they needed to

Figure 3

Figure 4

Lecture 4

People Crossing the Maritime World: Islamic Merchants, Including the Merchants of Hormuz

trade with. Specifically, Hormuz and Kish enteredinto a protective arrangement with the Il-khanate
dynasty, in which their merchants tithed the
profits of trading in pearls and other items in the
Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, in return forreceiving protection from the regime. Before theMongols came to Iran, Hormuz and Kish had also
formed similar relations with the dynasties of
Qutugh-Khanid, Shabankarah and Salghurid,
thereby maintaining a delicate power balance ofadministration in the region.
At that time, the port towns of Hormuz, Kish,
Siraf, and Aden served as starting points for
caravan routes that connected Shiraz (the capitalof Fars Province), the Il-khanate dynasty capitalof Tabriz, and the enormous cities of Baghdad,
and Cairo. Pilgrimage routes also ran in all
directions from Mecca and Baghdad. These
caravan routes, used for both pilgrimage and trade,connected directly to the port states of Kish and
Hormuz in the direction of the Persian Gulf.
All of the above is confirmed in the literature.
A typical example is in the Tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf I
mentioned earlier, in which Ghazan Khan of theIl-khanate Dynasty is said to have dispatched to
the Yuan Dynasty the Kish merchant leader Fakhr
al-Din Ahmad, a prince of the Kish Kingdom(Figure 5). He was the son of the Kish king of thetime, Shaykh al-Islām Jamāl al-Dīn Ibrahīm. The
Tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf also recounts that after four years
trading in China, he died in Southern India on his
way back to his homeland. In the Maval region ofSouthern India, the Kish merchants of the Persian
Gulf set up a trade base and formed relations withthe king of the local Pandya Dynasty. We know
this from the historical materials, including
Chinese-language sources (Figure 6).
The Collected Works of Huang Jin, which is also
called as Huang Document Collection contain an
engraved epitaph of Maritime Commander YangShu.

The Yang clan was from Songjiang, close tomodern-day Shanghai. They handled marinetransport and maritime civil service for the Yuan
Dynasty. Yang Shu was dispatched as an envoy to
the Il-khanate Dynasty of Iran at the start of the
14th century. The epitaph states that Yang entered
Hormuz at that time and traded there. The sitewhere he landed in Iran and conducted trade wasclearly Hormuz.
Figure 7 illustrates an epitaph in China. It was
excavated in the port city of Quanzhou in Fujian
Province, the gateway to southern maritime trade.
In China, it is referred to as the “monument to theenvoys to Persia.” The inscription states that at thestart of the 14th century, the Yuan Dynasty
dispatched envoys to King Ghazan of the Ilkhanate Dynasty (Ghazan Khan) and that thoseenvoys passed through Hormuz en route.
From these materials, it is clear that theIslamic port states of Hormuz and Kish wereconnected not only to the West via the Indian
Ocean and Persian Gulf but also to East Asia as

Figure 5

Figure 639Lecture 4

far as China through the trade networks. There isalso an Arabic document that came to light in the
2000s, entitled The Light of Knowledge on the
Governance, Laws, and Customs in Yemen, Ruled by
the Honorable Sultan Muzaffar. These materials
are administrative documents of the Rasulid
Dynasty of Yemen. Within them is a list of trade
tariffs for the Aden port, as well as a list of products
related to Kish and Hormuz (Figure 8). The
product list includes items from China, Southeast
Asia, and India, enabling us to gain a sense of the
product distribution structure connecting theIslamic world with East and Southeast Asia. If weplot that structure on a map to recreate it, we cansee that items from China passed through Indiaand items from India crossed the Persian Gulf andthe Red Sea, which were also connected by trade
networks.
The above is an introductory explanation ofIslamic port states, merchants, and products
mainly based on historical literature. This

Figure 7

Figure 840

information can also be clarified from anarchaeological perspective in terms of the themeof this symposium-cultural heritage. As mentioned
previously, this is a slightly more detailed map of
the caravan routes between the port towns and thecity of Shiraz (Figure 9). These caravan routes
from the Persian Gulf ’s north bank to central Iranand their origin points in port cities such as Kish
and Hormuz have been studied for decades. I ama philologist (a scholar of history who uses mainly
literature). I have been working on a joint projectwith an archaeologist specializing in ceramics anda researcher of local Iranian history, surveying
these caravan routes and the port cities of Kish
and Hormuz for over a decade (Figure 10).
We have been mainly surveying the caravanroutes from the Kish and Hormuz islands and thearchaeological sites of the Kingdom of Old
Hormuz to Shiraz, the capital of Fars Province.
Time constraints today make detailed discussion
impossible, but I will touch on a few of ourresearch points below.
First is Kish Island. Hormuz is on the east
coast of the Persian Gulf, just at its entrance, andKish Island is slightly west of Hormuz. On thenorth coast are the ruins of Harireh, dating fromaround the 12th to 14th century (Figure 11). Mostof the excavation surveys of the ruins are being
done by a British survey team and the Universityof Tehran, and several of the buildings have been
restored.
These are the remains of a bazaar or market.
The remains of markets and buildings facing theocean have now been restored to a fairly significant
extent, and a considerable number of ceramic

Figure 9

Lecture 4

People Crossing the Maritime World: Islamic Merchants, Including the Merchants of Hormuz

potsherds from China have been found in thevicinity (Figure 12). Scattered over the groundsurface, most of them are from the Southern Songto Yuan dynasties.
Occasionally, some pieces from as late as the
Ming dynasty or from before the Song are found,but most are olive green ceramic pieces from theSouthern Song to Yuan dynasties, called Longquanceladon porcelain. These collected samples are
now preserved in Iran. By way of example, thislotus design matches those of Yuan-dynasty
ceramics; artifacts featuring designs such as thesehave been found in considerable numbers at thesesites.
Next, I will discuss the remains of Old
Hormuz (Figure 13). The site is located on the
shore of the mainland adjacent to Hormuz Island.
There is a town called Minab to the east of thelarge port city of Bandar Abbas on the opposite
shore. There are several hundred groups ofarchaeological sites in the Minab river basin,
dating from ancient times to the early modern

period.
Several of these artifacts are from the kingdomof Hormuz during the period of the former capital.
These include the Tapeh Sorkh artifacts (Figure14). “Tapeh” means hill or tomb, and “sorkh”
means red. So Tapeh Sorkh means the “red hill
artifacts.”
Scattered here are numerous glass fragments

Figure 10

Figure 13

Figure 11

Figure 14

Figure 1241Lecture 4
42

and Chinese ceramic wares, dated from the Fivedynasties and Song periods to the Ming dynasty(Figure 15). Glass beads from the pre-Islamic
period have been found, and our investigations
have also found Yongle Tongbao copper coinsfrom the Ming dynasty (Figure 16).
These large-scale remains are called the K103
site. There is a relatively large amount of Chinese
ceramic wares scattered among the Hormuz
artifacts as well (Figure 17). There are building
remains from this period on the ground surface inthe present day, following the layout of the cityduring that period. Looking at the satellite picture,
you can see that these remarkable remains quite
clearly show the districts and overall structure of
the city. It is quite close to the sea, and so it may
sink into the sea due to rising tides. Most of theChinese ceramic wares found here are from thelimited time period of the Southern Song to Yuan
dynasties, with hardly any pieces from the Tang,
Five dynasties, Northern Song, or Ming (Figure18). A few pieces of Islamic glass and copper items

have also been found here. Survey teams fromJapan have also visited this location, thought to be
the old capital of Hormuz, many times.
When we surveyed the area, we found anotably high ratio of Chinese ceramics andseemingly too few ceramic wares from Islamic
countries, and so on. Therefore, my team and I
believe that rather than being the capital of
Hormuz, this area was perhaps a trading port.
These are the “Hill Remains of Old Hormuz”(Figure 19). Here as well there are Islamic ceramics
and Chinese ceramic wares from the Southern
Song to Yuan dynasties only; we think that it was
this area that may have been the capital of Hormuz(Figure 20).
This is the Tapeh Jangar Hoseinābād site
(Figure 21). Slightly older artifacts have beenfound here, such as Yue ware ceramics from theFive dynasties period. There are also white
porcelain pieces from the Tang dynasty and theFive dynasties to Northern Song eras and blueand-white Ming porcelain. As such, there are

Figure 15

Figure 17

Figure 16

Figure 18

Lecture 4

People Crossing the Maritime World: Islamic Merchants, Including the Merchants of Hormuz

artifacts scattered here from a fairly broad range oftime periods.
This is the Tapeh Sardkhāneh site (Figure22). The emerald green pieces shown in Figure 23
are glass fragments.
As the ratio of glass pieces is quite high, there
may have been either a glass factory or a glass
market here. However, no crucibles or other tools
needed to produce glass have been found here.

We have so far looked at the remains of Old
Hormuz from the era of the old capital. Next I
want to look at the remains of New Hormuz fromthe period after the capital was moved to Hormuz
Island (Figure 24). Originally called Djerba Island,
the island includes the remains of a Portuguese
citadel alongside scattered Chinese ceramic
potsherds (Figures 25 and 26).
Unlike Old Hormuz, there are more ceramics

Figure 19

Figure 22

Figure 20

Figure 23

Figure 21

Figure 24
43

Lecture 4
Figure 25(Figure 28). The mausoleums became an object ofworship for the nautical faiths of sea-faring
merchants and sailors. Ceramic fragments from
China and Southeast Asia have also been foundaround the mausoleums.
We have thus far looked at religious facilities
in and around port cities. From here, we will lookat the remains of trading cities and religious
facilities on caravan routes. Figure 29 presents theremains of the monastery of the Daniyal sect
within the city of Khonj, a scholars’ city known asa base for Sufi orders and Ulama during the Ilkhanate dynasty. Many Chinese ceramic fragments
are found at the remains of large Islamic mosquesand mausoleums and Sufi monasteries. The
Persian inscription on the pillar depicted in Figure
30 states that the King of Hormuz made donations
to this monastery.
Fragments of Yuan-dynasty Chinese ceramics
have also been found here. In essence, thisconstitutes important evidence that the merchantsof Hormuz were directly involved in the trade of

Figure 26

Figure 28

Figure 27

Figure 29

from later periods like the Ming and Qing
dynasties, rather than the Song and Yuan. Figure
27 indicates a fragment of Yuan blue-and-white
porcelain.
Hormuz Island also has mausoleums, such as
those for Saint Khizr and Saint Ilyas. Records
from the 14th century reveal that the scholar andexplorer Ibn Battuta visited these mausoleums

44Lecture 4

People Crossing the Maritime World: Islamic Merchants, Including the Merchants of Hormuz

Chinese ceramic wares. A relatively large numberof Chinese ceramic fragments have also beenfound scattered in similar mausoleums of Islamic
saints and monastery ruins (Figures 31 to 34).
Figure 33 indicates what was once the strongholdof Kazerun, the former home of the Kazeruni (orEshaq) order, a site at which Chinese ceramic
potsherds of the Mongol period have also beenfound.
In addition, the ruins of the mausoleum of
Bibi Maryam have been found on the island of
Qeshm next to Hormuz (Figure 34). Bibi Maryam
was a queen of Hormuz.
She became an object of worship for merchants
in Mongol-period Hormuz, and thus, a mausoleum
was built for her (Figure 35). There are also pieces
of Chinese and Islamic ceramic wares found on
this site. Queen Bibi Maryam was born in Qalhat
in Oman and moved to Hormuz when she
married. A mausoleum was also built for her in
her ancestral land of Qalhat. In addition, as there
are similar place names to the north of the Persian
Gulf, it is presumed that there may also once havebeen mausolea for Queen Bibi Maryam there(Figure 36).

Figure 30

Figure 31

Figure 33

Figure 32

Figure 34
45

Lecture 4This distribution of mausoleums is perhaps
indicative of the distribution of trade networks of
Hormuz merchants.
Lastly, I will summarize my presentation. The
activities of Islamic merchants can be connected
directly with various factors (Figure 37). One suchfactor was “empires”-enormous nations withimmense political power.
For example, today I have talked about the Il-

Figure 35

46

khanate dynasty, but the Siraf and Hormuz
merchants also had connections with the empiresof the Abbasid, Buwayhid, and Seljuk dynasties.
Another such factor was the merchants’connections to religious sects, typified by the Sufis.
Islamic merchants were often engaged in tradebonded by protection and patronage with religious
sects such as the Sufis.
In addition, while I did not talk much about
this today, the city states and port towns had both
hostile and cooperative relations with one another,and in fact, this significantly affected traderelations between them.
Iran is further from China than Japan is. Yet,
the amount of Chinese ceramic wares found there
is greater than the amount found in Japan (Figure38). In particular, the sites where these artifacts arefound are scattered along the caravan routes fromport cities like Hormuz to major cities like Shiraz.
This includes religious buildings like themonasteries known as khanqah and zawiyah,mosques, and mausoleums, where Chinese ceramic

Figure 36

Figure 38

Figure 37

Figure 39

Lecture 4

People Crossing the Maritime World: Islamic Merchants, Including the Merchants of Hormuz

fragments are found particularly frequently.
Although not found to such an extent in otherplaces, Chinese ceramic fragments can be foundrelatively easily in the ruins of cities and religious
buildings along the caravan routes.

Today, I have discussed only Hormuz, but wemay consider that Islamic merchants in different
times and regions shared similar aspects,
overlapping with the topics we have covered today
to some degree. Thank you.

47

Lecture 5

FY2021 Symposium “Maritime Network and Cultural Heritage-People and Objects Connected by Oceans”

Lecture 5

Places where the Sea and Land Meet:Port Cities of Asian Waters:
Shophouses & Courtyard Houses

FUNO Shuji(Visiting Professor, College of Industrial Technology, Nihon University)
D.Eng. from the University of Tokyo. Specialty in architectural planning, with a focus on the history of Asian urban architecture. He started
researching kampong urban settlements in Indonesia in 1979, and since then has conducted fieldwork mainly in Asian cities in the fieldof urban tissue (composition) research. His trilogy of works on Asia includes The City as Mandala, Mughal Cities, and Da Yuan City. He has
also engaged in colonial urban studies with a focus on the Dutch colonial city, including The Modern World System and Colonial Cities, The
Grid City, and The Formation of Modern Korean Cityscapes. He has also edited and published Houses Across the World, History of AsianArchitecture and Cities, and Encyclopedia of the Global History of Cities, as well as his recent book, Surabaya: Kampung as Cosmos.

48

My specialty is architectural planning. Since
1979, I have spent over 40 years in the field, mainlyin Asian countries. Today, I will be discussing port
cities in Asian waters (Figure 1).
While there are various ways of approaching
the topic of port cities, one of their essential
characteristics is as a site of exchange of objects,
people, and information. A major theme inarchitecture and urban planning is the principle ofsegregation of various ethnic groups-an issue ofthe spatial composition of port cities. Here I will
discuss shophouses (dianwu) and courtyard houses(siheyuan)-in essence, the basic housing styles
that make up cities, their variations, and how they
are interrelated with regional features (Figure 2).
Siheyuan are a Chinese style of housing.
They are referred to as “courtyard houses” inEnglish. These courtyard-style houses are basic
urban residences found in all times and places.
“Shophouse” is the English translation of dianwu(Figure 3). The Oxford English Dictionary(OED) describes a shophouse as a style of housing
found in Southeast Asia.

Figure 1

Figure 3

Figure 2

Lecture 5

Places where the Sea and Land Meet: Port Cities of Asian Waters: Shophouses & Courtyard Houses

Baidu Baike, the Chinese version of Wikipedia,
contains a similar definition. So shophouse is the
English translation of the Chinese word “dianwu”.
The Chinese word “wujiaolang”, literally a fivefoot corridor, is also used; in Indonesian and
Malay, the word is Kaki Lima, meaning five feet.
Thus, a shophouse is both a shop and a residence,with a five-foot-wide arcade. When Stamford
Raffles built Singapore in the early 19th century,
he used this style of housing, which has its origins
in Southern China, for a range of different people
including Chinese, Indians (Chulias, i.e., mixedrace merchants descended from Tamil Muslims,
Arab merchants, and Indian-Arabs), Bugis(Sulawesi), and Arabs. A distinctive feature ofthese houses is their arcades. They follow thetradition of houses with arcades in Europe andSouthern China, reflecting Singapore’s position asa meeting point of East and West. Let us focus
here on housing styles in port cities.
“Port city” is the English translation of theChinese term “gangshi”. The term “port” originatesfrom the Latin word “emporium” or “emporion” inGreek. The outer port of Piraeus in Athens wasdifferent from the agora market. Piraeus was not amarketplace within Greece but an archetypal port
city that handled overseas trade. Essentially, port
cities are located on the border between land andocean. The oceans were originally a free place thatbelonged to no one. Port cities were a kind ofintermediary device between the land and thepeople from overseas who crossed those oceans.
As such, port cities are composed of ethnic groups
with varying cultural backgrounds (Figure 4).
As for what kind of port cities became hubs in
Asian waters, we can get an idea from several sea
voyage logs. These include The Periplus of theErythraean Sea (1st century CE), The Travels of

Marco Polo (1290-1293), The Rihla by Ibn Battuta(1325-59), “Occidental Voyage of Zheng He” inYingya Shenglan by Ma Huan (1405-1433), Suma
Oriental by Tome Pires (c. 1515), The Mediterranean
and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II
by F. Braudel (1949), and other texts I referenced
while studying marine research and deciding on
the port cities for my field studies (Figure 5).
I have surveyed around 40 port cities in Asianwaters. The main port cities, starting from Japanand moving west, are Hakata, Nagasaki, Ulsan,
Busan, and Naha, with Ningbo historically serving
as a major port and hub (Figure 6). Then Malacca,
Georgetown, Galle in Sri Lanka, Goa, and so on;
it strikes me again today that many of these port
cities are registered as World Heritage Sites. I
have also been to East Africa, which boasts theWorld Heritage Sites of Lamu, Stone Town ofZanzibar, and Kilwa Kisiwani (Figure 7). The
Swahili world has been connected with Southeast
Asia since ancient times.
We can broadly divide the formation of a
network of port cities in Asian waters into various
stages in the global history of cities. The two major
categories of this formation are the Mongol
Impact that linked inland areas in Eurasia (PaxFigure 4

Figure 6

Figure 549

Lecture 5
50

Mongolia) and the Western Impact (the so-called
Pacific Rim revolution that connected the globe)(Figure 8). The formation of Austronesia is themain underlying factor in how humans (Homosapiens) spread throughout the earth (Figure 9).
The urban civilizations that developed following
the urban revolution shaped the seas and oceans ofChina and India. The Nile River flows into theMediterranean Sea, and parallel to the Red Sea.
Mesopotamia runs through the Persian Gulf
to the Arabian Sea and into the Indian Ocean(Figure 10). After the rise of Islam, from theAbbasid Caliphate to the 14th century, the Indian
Ocean became the ocean of Islam (Figure 11), but

this was all to change with the advance ofEuropean countries and the emergence ofsteamships. This was to become a significant
phase of history in which the Suez Canal was built(Figure 12).
From among the many port cities, I haveselected one to discuss today: Quanzhou, which
was inscribed as a World Heritage Site this year
(Figure 13). Dr. KIMURA introduced the sunken
ships of Quanzhou in his presentation.
Quanzhou is a port city already open to theworld by the 10th century. Maritime tradeadministrators were appointed there at the end of
the Northern Song, and Quanzhou became a

Figure 7

Figure 10

Figure 8

Figure 11

Figure 9

Figure 12

Lecture 5

Places where the Sea and Land Meet: Port Cities of Asian Waters: Shophouses & Courtyard Houses

major hub in China’s overseas development in theSouthern Song Dynasty. Marco Polo and Ibn
Battuta called Quanzhou “Zaiton”; it is wellknown that both of them described Quanzhou to
the West as perhaps the world’s greatest port city.
Islam spread quickly, and the Qingjing (Ashab)mosque in Quanzhou was clearly not Chinese but
Iranian iwan-style. The Kaiyuan Buddhist temple
has reliefs of the Hindu monkey god Hanuman,
who may have served as the model for thelegendary Chinese monkey king Sun Wukong:
there seems to be an ancient association with India
too (Figure 14).
Dr. YOKKAICHI previously mentioned
Siraf. Arabs and Persians, who came to Guangzhou
and Quanzhou from early on, stayed in a foreigners’
settlement there called the “fanfang”. In the mid13th century, there was a maritime tradeadministrator called “Pu Shougeng”. Although
the academics Kuwabara Jitsuzo and Maeshima
Shinji argued about his origins, this Muslim
merchant and administrator in China seems tohave been from Siraf (Figure 15).
There are three styles of housing in Quanzhou.
One is the siheyuan courtyard-style houses (Figure16). Then there is the shoujin-liao housing style,with a courtyard that has a narrow frontage.
Guangzhou has bamboo houses called zhutongwu,
similar to the traditional townhouses calledmachiya in Japanese. There is also the qilou styleof housing that features an arcade. This is a dianwu
shophouse in Singapore (Figure 17).
Turning our attention to the topic of port
cities and segregation, related terms in Japanese
include “toubou” and “toujinbou,” as well as the“Binjin-sanjuurokusei” (“Thirty-six families fromMin”) in Naha’s Kume Village in Okinawa, asettlement built by Fujianese. There was also the

Figure 13

Figure 16

Figure 14

Figure 17

Figure 1551

Lecture 5
52

Parián settlement in Manila, essentially a
Chinatown. Cebu also had a similar settlement.
As the Parián settlement in Manila had various
disputes with the Spanish there, its location was
moved about six times (Figure 18). Japan also had
shogun-authorized trading vessels, which sailed toSoutheast Asia. So-called “southern oceans
Japanese towns” (nan’you nihonjin-machi) were
set up in Manila, Phnom Penh, and Ayutthaya(Figure 19).
Hindus, Jains, and Muslims co-existed in theareas adjoining the Indian Ocean. The caste
system also made segregation extremelycomplicated. The southwest monsoon winds
carried ships from East Africa and the Arabian
Sea as far as the Gujarat region, where trade cities
developed in ancient times. These included theprosperous Cambay (Khambhat) and Mundra
ports, where diverse and finely segmented groups
lived, including the Bohras (Shia Muslims) andBanyan ( Jain) merchants (Figure 20).
In Singapore, the city was planned and divided
into districts at the outset. At the center was theEuropean settlement, followed by the Chinatownand districts for Chulia and Tamil Muslim
merchants, and pre-planned Arab Kampong andBugis Kampong segments. There was also theextreme form of segregation implemented by the
British in Cape Town and other places in South
Africa, which ultimately led to apartheid.
Singapore did not practice this extreme
segregation: each district had similar shophouses.
Raffles associated the city with the world’s largest
flower, Rafflesia, found in Sumatra, and sometimes
referred to it as the Shophouse Rafflesia.
Singapore’s archives have some 500 construction
permit blueprints, which can be analyzed to see
the styles used in each district (Figure 21).
The urban housing style of shophouses withan arcade, which was created in Singapore, first
spread to the British Straits Settlements inSoutheast Asia. These included Malacca as well as
Georgetown in Penang. Next, in 1859, King Rama
IV of Siam (Thailand) dispatched two ministers
to Singapore. They returned with the basic stylesof the urban planning that were adopted for
Bangkok’s Rattanakosin Island (Figure 22).
Next, in Southern China, the urban planninglegislative system of the United Kingdom wasreverse-imported. The arcade style of architecture
was also virtually adopted in its entirety in Taiwan,
where it is referred to as tingzijiao. From there, it

Figure 18

Figure 20

Figure 19

Figure 21

Lecture 5

Places where the Sea and Land Meet: Port Cities of Asian Waters: Shophouses & Courtyard Houses

was also brought to China. Houses with verandas
were built early on in Hong Kong and then on
Haikou (Hainan Island), and in 20 cities including
Guangzhou, Xiamen, and Zhangzhou, in addition
to Quanzhou (Figure 23).
The same pattern can be seen in the Indian
Ocean region, particularly in Northern India,
where there is a courtyard-style of housing called
havelli (Figure 24).
There is also a style called gala, which can be
described as similar to townhouses or shophouses.
When the port of Cambay declined, the center of
trade shifted from deep in the Gulf of Cambay to
Surat. There you can see shophouses essentially

Figure 22

based on the forms established in Singapore(Figure 25).
The Gujarati merchants brought this galastyle of housing with them to the areas to which
they migrated (Figure 26). The owners’ origins are
expressed through the entrance doorways ofhomes in Stone Town of Zanzibar, which I
surveyed. There are three categories of doors:
Gujarati, Omani, and Swahili. Although thissystem has broken down considerably in recent
years, it seems to correspond to the segregation of
ethnic groups there (Figure 27).
Most port cities that were historicallysignificant remain important in modern times. In
terms of the transaction volume of containers(Figure 28), the outer port of Piraeus in Athens,
which I mentioned at the start of my talk, isnumber one in the Mediterranean Sea and number
26 in the world. Mundra is also one of India’s
leading port cities. That said, a major change isthat eight of the top ten port cities are now
concentrated in the East China Sea and South
China Sea.
Looking at a map reveals how the once free
and open oceans owned by no one are now almost
completely a thing of the past, with land-based

Figure 23

Figure 25

Figure 24

Figure 26
53

Lecture 5

states controlling the majority of the oceans(Figure 29).
The study of maritime areas and port cities isimportant in terms of clarifying the mechanisms
by which different cultures accept or reject one
another in the context of cross-cultural exchange,
and then extracting knowledge from investigationsin this regard (Figure 30).
This year I published a book entitled Surabaya,

which refers to a port city in Indonesia ranked
45th in the world for container transaction volume.
In the near future, I hope to publish a book on thefindings of my current field work in Asian port
cities (Figure 31).

Figure 27

Figure 30

Figure 28

Figure 31

Figure 2954Forum

FY2021 Symposium “Maritime Network and Cultural Heritage - People and Objects Connected by Oceans”

Forum

The World Connected Through the Oceans
Moderator:

ISHIMURA Tomo

Commentators: SUTO Yoshiyuki (Professor, Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya University)
ITO Nobuyuki (Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya University)
SASAKI Randall, KIMURA Jun,
TAMURA Tomomi, YOKKAICHI Yasuhiro,

FUNO Shuji

Session 1: East-West Maritime Exchange
ISHIMURA: I will be themoderator for today’s
forum.
First, let me explain
how the forum will work.
In the first half, our five
speakers will commentonone
another’s
presentations,posingquestions and responding as needed. Then Dr.
SUTO and Dr. ITO will provide commentaryfrom the perspectives of the regions of Europe andthe Mediterranean and Central and SouthAmerica, respectively. Lastly, we will discuss how
to facilitate international cooperation from theviewpoint of maritime cultural heritage andmaritime exchange.
Today’s presentations have covered topics
such as maritime exchange and new surveying
methods and techniques that make use of theoceans. Let us begin by discussing maritime
exchange. Dr. TAMURA and Dr. YOKKAICHI
talked about maritime exchange in the East andWest during ancient and medieval times,
respectively. First, let us have Dr. TAMURA
comment on Dr. YOKKAICHI’s presentation.
Dr. TAMURA, if you please.

TAMURA:Dr.
YOKKAICHI, thankyou for your fascinatingpresentation. I found it
deeply interesting fromthe perspective of a
researcher of East-Westtrade in ancient times. In
terms of the ocean routes
in ancient East-Westtrade, for example between Rome and India, items
from India and China in the East were imported
into Rome in the West. It has been mentionedthat this created an imbalance, in which trade wasbiased from East to West. What was this balanceof trade like during medieval times?
YOKKAICHI: This is avery important and alsodifficult question. Therecertainlywas
animbalance, but specialty
items are, to some extent,
determined by eachregion; so trade isn’t
necessarily going to beequal. Ceramic wares,
silk, and also silver would have been imported
from China.
However, silver and gold were also produced
in other areas besides China. So trade wouldn’t
necessarily always have been from east to westitems moved from west to east as well; so it is55

Forumdifficult to say definitively one way or the other.
That said, silk, silver, ceramic wares, and then tea
all gradually became specialty Chinese items,
already moving westward from the 10th century
in the early premodern era. In contrast, items suchas precious stones, pearls, and spices moved from
West to East. Areas of spice production wereconcentrated in India and Southeast Asia.
Frankincense was produced solely in the Arabian
Peninsula. As a result of the significant increase in
the importance of horses in maritime trade,
Arabian horses in particular were exported to
India. The Arabic text The Light of Knowledge,
which I mentioned in my presentation, has been
available since the 2000s. It describes how silver
and silk from China were used to pay for horses
from Islamic countries. So we know from this textthat horses were transported eastward from the
Arabian Peninsula over the ocean to India andused as payment for silk and silver. However,unlike today, the conditions for transporting
horses by boat were not good. While it would
probably have been feasible to transport horses
from the Arabian Peninsula as far as India,
transporting them by ocean further east to China
would have been largely impossible. Therefore, it
is believed that traded goods were not brought
directly from the Arabian Peninsula to China:
although spices, glass, metal, and other such items
from intermediary points such as India andSoutheast Asia entered China along with goods
from the Islamic world, horses did not enter China
in this way.
ISHIMURA: Thank you. Now I would like to ask
Dr. YOKKAICHI to offer a comment or question
on Dr. TAMURA’s presentation.
YOKKAICHI: I’m also interested in glass. Glassfrom Syria is very well known in the 10th to 11th
century, the period I am studying. In yourpresentation today, you mentioned that there arevarious glass-producing areas around the world
and that these glass items are used in a variety ofways. Did the production locations, movement,
and distribution structure of glass change from theancient period which you study to the medieval
period of my research? Also, do we know whether
it was just glass that was transported, or was theglass transported with other objects? And what56

was used as payment for this glass?
TAMURA: Thank you for your questions. First,
the production areas were quite similar in ancientand medieval times. So with regard to glass fromaround the Mediterranean Sea, products from
Syria, Israel, and Egypt moved eastward. Part ofthe ocean route in that case included countries
such as India; glass beads were apparently
transported by routes that passed through thegrassland areas of the Xiongnu people and so on.
Glass from Southeast Asia entered the Japanesearchipelago and Korean peninsula in vastquantities up through the 6th century or so. Leadglass started being produced in Japan from aroundthe 7th century, and on the Korean Peninsula fromaround the 5th or 6th century. So because of thissituation unique to East Asia, the demand forimported glass suddenly decreased. And for sometime, absolutely no imported glass came into East
Asia. Glass started being imported again during
the Middle ages, but not as actively as during
ancient times. Some Islamic glass, such as thepieces in the Shosoin Treasure House, enteredthese areas, but my impression is that much moreglass was imported during ancient times.
So I believe that the main glass production
areas essentially remained the same between
antiquity and medieval times. Specifically, theproduction areas were the Eastern Mediterranean
Coast (natron-type soda glass in the tradition of
Roman glass), Western Asia (plant ash-type soda
glass typified by Islamic glass), and China(potassium lead glass). Basically, glass production
areas were located where there was an abundanceof raw materials for glass (silica sand and flux).
However, natron soda glass gave way to plant ash
soda glass around the 9th century. The reason forthis may have been depletion of the raw material
natron.
In the medieval period, a new type of glass(potassium lime glass) was made using wood ash
from beeches and other forest trees as flux. Plant
ash was also used as a flux in ancient glass, but thisflux was produced from herbs growing in the salty
grasslands of western and central Asia. Using
forest timber meant that inland Europe (inland
France and Germany, the Czech Republic, etc.)
was to become a major production area. This typeof glass is called forest glass (waldglass): a typicalForumForum: The World Connected Through the Oceans

example is Bohemian glass.
As for the structure of distribution, I believe it
was basically the same in ancient and medieval
times, but the spread of technology meant thatglass beads were produced in more areas than in
antiquity. That said, the production of glassmaterials was itself still dependent on theavailability of the raw materials, so essentially mattersremained the same. In terms of the distribution offinished products, I have the impression that
distribution by ocean routes (from the West to
Southeast Asia) became more active than it was inancient times. However, in areas of Far East Asia
such as the Japanese archipelago, there was agreater influx in ancient times. With regard to
Southeast Asia, there was an active influx of Islamic
glass and also Venetian glass somewhat later.
Incidentally, the Indo-Pacific beads that wereso prolific in Southeast Asia seem to have been
replaced by Chinese glass beads (potassium lead
glass produced by the coiling method; i.e., Chinese
coil beads) around the 13th century.
A detailed examination of this kind reveals
the ever-changing situation across different time
periods and different regions, along with factors
including the invention of new types of glass andthe accompanying changes in distribution. I
specialize in the Japanese archipelago during
ancient times, but even in this small area, thesituation is complex in that large amounts of glassentered and then disappeared within the limited
time period of antiquity. If research can show
similar shifts over time in various parts of theworld connected by the distribution of glass, I
hope that we will be able to use glass to gain agreater understanding of the movement of people,
objects, and technology in the world in different
eras.
Additionally, as for which items weretransported along with glass, it appears that inancient times, glass was transported from west toeast along with silver and gold, particularly silver
items from Iran. As the topic for today was ocean
routes, I didn’t talk much about inland routes. But
in the late 5th century, quite a lot of glass beads
seem to have entered East Asia via inland routes
as well. This was likely glass from Central Asia,
which entered along with silver. So because of thistrend, there is a focus on the movement of silver
with glass beads, as well as silver and gold productswith glass beads.
Lastly, the subject of what was used as payment
for glass beads is something of a difficult problem
because it varies depending on the region andtime period. Here are a few interesting examples
from the Japanese archipelago in ancient times.
From the 3rd century BCE to the early 5th
century CE, most of the glass beads found in theJapanese archipelago were Indo-Pacific beads
transported via ocean routes from India andSoutheast Asia, with the exception of some
Chinese lead glass. Then, in the late 5th century,
there was an influx of glass beads made of plant
ash soda glass. These beads are larger than the
typical Indo-Pacific beads, and their material
reveals that they are Central Asian in origin.
Details about the origin and route of the influx are
still unknown, but a large amount of glass beads
with the same material and morphologicalcharacteristics, dating from the same period, havebeen excavated in the Silla region in thesoutheastern Korean peninsula. It is therefore
highly likely that the final transit point on the way
to the Japanese archipelago was the Silla region.
Other than glass, there was also an influx of gold
products and other items thought to be of Central
Asian origin into Silla during this period. This
provides an interesting insight into the cultural
artifacts that were transported along with glass. A
large amount of jade magatama produced in Japan
have been excavated in the Silla area dating fromthis period. It appears that jade may have been
sent to Silla in return for the glass beads.
Also, as in my slides, according to the Nihon
Shoki, “cultural artifacts of Funan” were presented
by Baekje to Japan in the 6th century, and I do notthink it unlikely that Indo-Pacific beads would
have been included among them. It is known thatJapanese umbrella pine wood was used for thecasket in the tomb of King Muryeong, thepredecessor of King Seong of Baekje.
The distribution structure in East Asia does
not seem to have involved a balance of trade, so
this might have been somewhat different from“payment for goods.” Nonetheless, I do think thatthese, at least, are examples of goods that were
exported from the Japanese archipelago.
ISHIMURA: Thank you. Dr. FUNO’s presentation
covered the period from medieval to early modern
57

Forumand modern times. So
from that perspective,
could you comment on
Dr.
YOKKAICHI’spresentation?
FUNO: There are twopoints I would like to ask
about. The first isregarding the origin of the name Zaiton. While
Quanzhou is referred to as Zaiton in Arabic,
Zaiton also means olive.
So why is Zaiton the name for Quanzhou in
Arabic? The second question is about the wealthy
Muslim merchant Pu Shougeng, active from theend of the Song Dynasty to the start of the Yuan
Dynasty. We know that he was an Arab or Persian
Muslim; was he originally from Siraf ?
YOKKAICHI: First, let me discuss the origin of thename Zaiton. The Japanese historian Kuwabara
Jitsuzo argues that Zaiton arose as a corruption of“Citong,” another name for Quanzhou Castle.
However, this is not only phonetically unlikely,
but also a sound change that, according to Chinese
researchers, would not occur. Zaiton also means
olive in Arabic and Persian. However, according to
Ibn Battuta, there were no olive trees in Quanzhou
in the 13th and 14th centuries, and in fact none
now either. So when considering why Quanzhou
was called Zaiton (olive) in Arabic even though58

there are no olive trees there, perhaps the name isderived not from olive as in the fruit, but rather
from the color, which is zaituni or zaitunya.
The Chinese characters for celadon porcelain
include the character for blue, but the porcelain
itself is green. And celadon is still called zaituni in
Iran. So perhaps Quanzhou was called Zaituni,
meaning either “the city of celadon” or “the citythat exports celadon.” Certainly, ceramic wares areproduced near Quanzhou. So my theory is thatthe name Zaiton was given to Quanzhou to refer
to “a city of ceramics,” as it was a trade port
exporting those ceramics.
As for where Pu Shougeng originally camefrom, I can only say I don’t know. Muslim names
may use adjectives indicating personal attribution,referred to as nisba. For example, Sirafii or Sirawee
are nisba indicating Siraf. But it’s debatable as towhether nisba can be used to confirm Pu
Shougeng’s origin. And even if it could be
confirmed, a nisba doesn’t necessarily indicate theactual place of origin, but simply a connection ofsome kind to that place. It might be used, forexample, to refer to the hometown of a grandfather
or ancestors further back. That said, there werecertainly many people from Siraf who came to
China at that time. The Chinese charactertranscription of the “Sirafii” nisba is also found in
Chinese literature, so we cannot deny thepossibility. But we also cannot prove it one way or
the other.

ForumForum: The World Connected Through the Oceans

Session 2: Ships and Technology

ISHIMURA: Both Dr. SASAKI and Dr. KIMURA
focused on underwater cultural heritage in theirpresentations. First, let me ask Dr. KIMURA tocomment on Dr. SASAKI’s presentation.
KIMURA: Dr. SASAKI,
in your presentation, you
explained the differences
betweenmaritimearchaeology, underwaterarchaeology, and nauticalarchaeology.
Thissymposium and researchin general address not
only objects found underwater, but also objects
discovered on land and at ports. In particular,
maritime archaeology covers a wide range ofobjects, not just those underwater, and also a wide
range of archaeological sites and heritage related
to marine areas.
As for underwater sites and artifacts, thanks
to improvements in surveying techniques, youmentioned that recently there has been a trend
towards discovering a variety of objects underwater.
Considering distribution, trade and the movementof people in regard to ship artifacts, yourpresentation made me think once again that thesefall into the category of land artifacts.
Based on this, I would like to ask you about
the current status of this area of study, and whatkind of developments you anticipate in the future.
Also, what should Japan do in this context? You
mentioned that Mongolia is moving toward
ratifying the 2001 UNESCO Convention on theProtection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage,
and more countries are expected to ratify theConvention in the future.
Could you give us an
overview of this issue
from your perspective?
SASAKI: It’s quite atricky question.
Even though there
are still issues, I believethat the global trend is toward a growing
understanding of underwater cultural heritage
among many countries worldwide.
In Japan, “marine issues” tends to refer mainly
to the problem of garbage in the oceans. Actually,
these marine issues include the need for humans
to preserve the cultural heritage left to us in all
waters, including oceans, lakes and rivers. #14 of
the SDGs is to “conserve and sustainably use theoceans, seas, and marine resources.”This represents
the contemporary movement towards conserving
the bountiful oceans, including cultural heritage. I
think this will become a worldwide trend fromhere on. So Japan has to move along with the restof the world and take action in this area. In termsof marine development, as cultural heritage is alsopart of the resources of the ocean, we must takeresponsibility and protect these resources.
ISHIMURA: There are various issues when it
comes to protecting and conserving underwater
cultural heritage. In fact, Dr. TAMURA’s specialty
is conservation science, and she is currently
working on preserving actual artifacts at the Nara
National Research Institute for Cultural
Properties. Dr. SASAKI, could you please ask Dr.
TAMURA about the conservation of underwater
cultural heritage?
SASAKI: As you know, if measures are not taken
to conserve artifacts pulled up from the ocean,
their condition will deteriorate rapidly.
Unfortunately, at this symposium we haven’t beenable to talk much about conservation science, butconservation is one of the major issues inunderwater cultural heritage. Dr. TAMURA,
while in your specialty area of glass, conservation
treatments may not be needed so much, whatconservation treatments do you actually use? Also,
what can Japan offer the world in the field ofconservation treatments? I have the impressionthat Japan is relatively advanced in document
preservation techniques and so on. Could you tell
us if there is anything we can share with the worldin the field of conservation science?
59ForumTAMURA: I myself don’t
work on conservation of
artifacts
relatedtounderwater archaeology
and underwater cultural
heritage. But I do havecolleagues who are quite
actively involved in thatfield, so I will include
some of the findings
from their activities in my response.
No finished glass products have yet beensalvaged from the ocean in Japan, and so I don’t
think there are any examples of glass artifacts
actually being subject to conservation treatments
here. Overseas, though, there are examples ofIslamic glass and other objects being salvaged
from sunken ships. I am not clear on what specificconservation treatments are used, but probably
salt has to be removed in what is called desalination
treatment. This treatment is also used for glassand ceramics in land-based excavations from soil
with a high salt content. There are many examplesof salt damaging artifacts that have been excavated(salt inside the artifact moves to the surface layerof the artifact due to moisture evaporation andthen crystallizes, eroding the surface of the artifact

60

and causing damage), so I believe that after
desalination, some kind of method to fortify the
glass is employed. In the future, if any glass items
are excavated from archeological sites associatedwith Japan, we must be sure to engage in serious
research in terms of conservation science as well.
As for what kind of contributions Japan canmake, salvaging artifacts is one way we can do this,and conserving local sites is another significant
option. If we choose to conserve artifacts as they
were at the bottom of the ocean, we first have tosurvey the soil. My place of work is currently
studying the methods to be used if we then decideto rebury the artifacts and conserve them on site.
Japan can make significant contributions byresearching these reburying conditions anddisseminating the findings.
With regard to the treatment of salvaged
items as well, many of them are made fromblended materials, such as wood and metal.
Recently various methods have been used to treat
these items, including the use of trehalose; thisadvanced method from Japan is now being sharedwith the rest of the world. While research is
ongoing, I feel that furthering research in this way
is one contribution Japan has to offer.

ForumForum: The World Connected Through the Oceans

Session 3:Global Perspectives on the Oceans and Cultural Heritage-Maritime Exchanges
Between the Mediterranean and the Caribbean

SUTO Yoshiyuki(Professor, Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya University)
Born in 1962, in Yokosuka City, Kanagawa Prefecture. After majoring in archeology at the University of Tokyo, he studied abroadin Athens on a Greek government sponsorship. His area of specialism is ancient Greek history and the history of eastern
Mediterranean cultural exchange. In recent years, he has been engaged in field research in Egypt, studying the dynamics ofEgyptian society during the Hellenistic period. His main published works include Ancient Greece: Expansion into theMediterranean (2006) and Hellenism in the World of the Nile: Encounters between Egypt and Greece (2014).

ITO Nobuyuki(Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya University)
Scholar of Mesoamerican archaeology, in particular the origins of Mesoamerican civilization, with a focus on preclassic culture.
He has conducted archaeological surveys in Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras. He also works to elucidate features of
Mesoamerican civilization as demonstrated through stone carving, in particular with regard to the Olmec civilization that
produced the giant stone head statues and other works. He is currently excavating and investigating the ruins of ancient cities
with a focus on El Salvador as a crossroads between Mesoamerican civilization and the cultures and civilizations of regions
further to the south.

SUTO: Hello, everyone. My name is SUTO
Yoshiyuki of Nagoya University (Figure 1). Today
I will comment from the perspective of my
specialty area, the Mediterranean Sea.
Regarding the sea as a topic of discussion, theMediterranean Sea is known as the setting ofworks by the French historian and author Fernand
Braudel (Figure 2). Although his work The
Mediterranean World focused on the 16th century,
recent interest appears to have shifted to theMediterranean world before and also after that
period.
A particularly topical title is The Corrupting
Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History by Peregrine

Horden and Nicholas Purcell (Oxford, 2000); it isabout the world of connected smaller environments
which divided the Mediterranean Sea.

Figure 161Forum62

If we had more time, I would have liked to
discuss our perspective on the oceans in thecontext of the Indian Ocean as well.
Personally, I am interested in how knowledge
in the broader sense expanded alongside themovement of objects in the Mediterranean Sea,
particularly centered on Greece (Figure 3). Aided
by the teachings of various experts worldwide, I
have been researching the movement andorganization of knowledge in the ancient
Mediterranean Sea. The proceedings of aninternational research conference held on this
topic in 2018 will soon appear in Austria as
Transmission and Organization of Knowledge in theAncient Mediterranean World (Y. Suto (ed.),Vienna, 2021).
The Mediterranean Sea is characterized bybeing an extremely limited space clearlysurrounded by continental land. I think it isreasonable to consider this area roughly in termsof three scales (Figure 4). The yellow circle in the
middle of the slide is the core area of Greece. This
range includes roughly, for example, the Minoanand Mycenaean civilizations, the Delian Leagueof classical Athens, and so on. So first, there was
movement and connection of people connected by
the ocean within this range.
However, Greece had notably important links

to the greater area of the eastern MediterraneanSea, as shown here in this white circle around it. I
call this the expanded sphere of ancient Greek
civilization. While surveying Egypt, I first becameaware of this maritime connection when studying
amphorae (unglazed bisque-fired ceramic vessels
used to transport liquids such as wine and otheritems) that were used for marine transportation ofwine (Figure 5). Amphorae have been excavatedin large quantities from our archaeological surveysite at Achoris in Egypt, about 400 km inlandfrom the Mediterranean Sea. This has made me
acutely aware of the importance of maritime trade.
Looking at the bottom right of this map, the tip ofthe Italian peninsula and the southeastern tip ofGreece in the Aegean Sea have been circled;
amphorae made in these locations have been
excavated in large quantities from our Egyptian
survey site.
This actually points to a more serious issue;
namely, the fact that in archeology, we tend to
focus on tangible objects, despite the fact that
underlying trade in tangible objects, there wasoften movement of information and intangible
things (Figure 6). This naturally includes theknowledge I previously mentioned, while theamphorae traded during the Hellenistic age were
almost certainly the return cargo of wheat andFigure 2

Figure 4

Figure 3

Figure 5

ForumForum: The World Connected Through the Oceans

grain. So we must remember that using theamphorae was a way of restoring the trade ofwheat, which has left no physical trace, and othervaluable goods. Also, in the study of material
culture, the focus has been on static points (places
where objects are made and used, etc.), but afundamental aspect of objects and people is thatthey are not static, and instead move in various
ways. Dr. SASAKI mentioned in his presentationthat sunken ships are snapshots of that instant of
distribution. I think we need to focus more on
artifacts such as sunken ships in order to learn
more about this kind of movement in the
Mediterranean Sea as well.
Also, from an archaeological perspective, themovement of objects tends immediately to beconnected with trade. However, in the case of
Greece and the Mediterranean, there is a wealthof literature indicating that objects were also
moved by looting and gifting, as much as by trade(Figure 7). The widely accepted theory is that the
Uluburun ship, mentioned at the start of thesymposium, transported goods for gifting. We
should pay more attention to these processes andthe aesthetic senses and knowledge in the broader
sense which moved along with them.
In the Mediterranean in particular, an ideathat has gained traction in recent years is that the

Greek world emerged from the movement ofgoods and from networks rather than from theformation of networks among existing cities. I am
also interested in whether something similar canalso be said about Asia and the area around theIndian Ocean (Figure 8).
ISHIMURA: Thank you, Dr. SUTO Since
Braudel’s The Mediterranean World, the topic ofmaritime exchange in the Mediterranean has been
extensively researched. Some of the most recent
findings have been shared today, and we have agood understanding of how this research should
also be referenced when considering maritime
exchanges in the Asia Pacific region.
Moving on, let me ask Dr. ITO to comment
from the perspective of Central and SouthAmerica.
ITO: Hello. My name is ITO Nobuyuki of Nagoya
University. I am not a specialist in maritime
archaeology, so I will focus on the connection
between the New World and Old World, focusing
on the topic of “people and objects connected byoceans” (Figure 1).
Figure 2 shows Acapulco, a port on the New
World side of the galleon ships’ route connecting
the New World and the Old World. There you’ll
find Fort Santiago-now the Acapulco HistoricalMuseum-a place with very close connections toJapan.
The connection between Japan and the oceansof the New World began during the Age of
Discovery.

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 863ForumFor 250 years, from the 17th century to thestart of the 19th century, trade was conducted bygalleon ships via Acapulco. It is thought that themaritime exchanges between Japan and the New
World started when some galleon ships ran
aground in Japan.
If we look at the routes of the galleon ships
and Spanish fleet during the Age of Discovery, we
see that to reach the Americas, called the New
World, from the Philippines, sailing to Acapulco
was a prerequisite. So products from Manila, theMoluccas (now the Maluku Islands) or so-called
Spice Islands, China, and Southeast Asia arrived
at Acapulco. The loaded cargo was thentransported overland, from Acapulco on the
Pacific Ocean side to Veracruz on the opposite
side (Mexico Bay and the Atlantic Ocean). The
cargo was then taken to Europe by Spanish naval
vessels.
Galleon ships were built not just in Europe,
but in Japan as well. In the 17th century, One wasbuilt in the Sendai feudal domain: Hasekura

Figure 1

Figure 264

Tsunenaga, head of the Keicho Mission to Spainand Rome, is said to have used a galleon ship when
he and his Mission crossed the Pacific Ocean.
The Mission traveled inland from Acapulco
via Mexico City, the capital of the Viceroyalty of
New Spain (Virreinato de Nuevo España), andmoved on to the Atlantic Ocean side, where theyboarded a different ship bound for Spain in
Europe. Legend has it that there are still Japanesedescendants living in Coria del Rio to the south of
Seville in Spain. I have participated inadministering DNA analysis surveys in Spain.
Based on the study results, there was no positive
indication of Japanese descent. However, as DNA
analysis technologies advance further, if thepresence of Japanese descendants becomes clear, it
may be possible to determine that people bearing
the local Japon (Spanish for Japan) surname are ofJapanese descent.
From around the 16th century to the mid19th century, enslaved people from Africa werebought and sold and taken to Central and SouthAmerica. Recent DNA studies have revealed thatmost African-Americans have roots in Africa.
Also, the Garifuna, who live mainly along the
Caribbean coastline of Honduras, Nicaragua,
Guatemala and Belize in Central America, aresaid to be a mixed-race people descended fromenslaved Africans and the indigenous people of
the Caribbean.
Their music is called Garifuna music, and it isclosely connected with dance (Figure 3). The
traditional instruments that they have long used
are mainly drums, maracas, and the marimba(xylophone). In this photo (taken in Antigua Cityin Guatemala), you can see the marimba(xylophone) and maracas. Many people in
Guatemala currently believe that the traditionalmarimba, which can be found from Guatemala to
the Mexican state of Chiapas, may originally havecome not from Africa but from around Guatemala.
Let us consider Mexico from the perspectiveof international exchange, based on this photo(Figure 4). The photo shows the Casa del Risco
colonial-era house in Mexico City.

ForumForum: The World Connected Through the OceansThis fountain is decorated with ceramics
traded at the time. This includes decoration madewith Imari ware ( Japanese porcelain from Hizen).
Looking at the situation in Central and SouthAmerica in terms of the ratification of the
UNESCO Convention on the Protection of theUnderwater Cultural Heritage, almost 20
countries have either ratified it or are considering
it. These countries include Mexico and Argentina,
where cultural heritage related to maritime
exchange is protected by both domestic andinternational laws. However, Argentina does nothave many specialists who can work on conserving
excavated artifacts, and the results of aquestionnaire survey in Mexico show that there isminimal budget for the conservation andexhibition of these artifacts. In addition, thegovernments of Guatemala and El Salvador are
extremely lackluster in their efforts to conserve
underwater cultural heritage. An acquaintance ofmine, who is an expert in underwater archaeology
in El Salvador, laments that there is no government

assistance even for conducting surveys. Researchersof underwater archaeology in Guatemala also say
the same thing.
In fact, there are anecdotal reports ofinterference in surveys in these locations.
I believe that Japan can be involved inconservation and restoration work in Latin
America through international cooperation.
ISHIMURA: Thank you, Dr. ITO. When
discussing maritime exchange in the New World,
Spain and Portugal often come to mind. But as
indicated in the story of Hasekura Tsunenaga,
there is also a connection with Japan. The
Caribbean region also has important connections
with the slave trade with Africa, such as the
Garifuna. These perspectives remind us that theworld is connected by oceans. It is also very clearthat we need to closely consider maritime exchange
at the global level.

Figure 3

Figure 465ForumSession 4: Issues and Prospects for International Cooperation

ISHIMURA: Lastly, Dr. ITO highlighted the topic
of international cooperation. A key aim of theJapan Consortium for International Cooperationin Cultural Heritage ( JCIC-Heritage) is finding
ways to channel research findings into international
cooperation. I would like to invite today’s
participants, represented by Dr. KIMURA and
Dr. FUNO, to share any comments they may havefrom this perspective. First, let me ask forcomments on the potential of international
exchange from Dr. KIMURA, who has been
deeply involved in underwater cultural heritageand has extensive experience in overseas research.
KIMURA: I have a few
opinions on how the
JCIC-Heritage
cancontribute to international
cooperation, using overseas
research on underwater
cultural heritage (Figure1). First, I will briefly
outline the current
situation overseas, specifically on underwater
cultural heritage rather than maritime cultural
heritage (Figure 2).
Mechanisms for conserving underwater
cultural heritage are established to a certain extent
in the international community.These mechanisms
are promoted by two international organizations.
You are all familiar with the first one, UNESCO,
while the second one is ICOMOS (TheInternational Council on Monuments and Sites).

Figure 1
66

These two organizations have been extensively
involved in the principles and legal mechanisms
for the protection of underwater cultural heritage.
Looking at the history of mechanisms for theprotection of underwater cultural heritage, prior
to these two international organizations, in the
1980s, the UN included clauses in its Convention
on the Law of the Sea for the protection of cultural
heritage in the oceans and archaeological artifacts(Figure 3). Following that, it was debated whether
these clauses were sufficient. Led by a group of
legal experts engaging in international discussion
on the protection of cultural heritage, it was
concluded that there was a need for slightly
stronger mechanisms for the protection ofunderwater cultural heritage. ICOMOS listened
to this view, and in 1996 promulgated the Charteron the Protection and Management of Underwater

Figure 2

Figure 3

ForumForum: The World Connected Through the Oceans

Cultural Heritage.
This Charter underpinned the adoption of
the Convention on the Protection of theUnderwater Cultural Heritage at the General
Conference of UNESCO in 2001. This
Convention came into effect in 2009.
Looking chronologically in this way, it is now
20 years since the 2001 Convention wasestablished, and as such, 2021 can be seen as amilestone. However, as for the situation in Japan,
compared to the level of discussion on world
heritage stipulated in the same UNESCO
Convention, I think we can say there has been
little discussion on underwater cultural heritage inthe past 20 years.
With regard to the current situation inneighboring regions, in Southeast Asia, forexample, UNESCO has set up training
opportunities regarding the protection ofunderwater heritage (Figure 4). However, eachcountry is grappling with its own issues in thistraining. The protection of underwater cultural
heritage is more advanced in some Southeast
Asian countries than in others. In Indonesia,
regrettably, notwithstanding UNESCO training,
the illicit trade in artifacts salvaged from the ocean
floor has not been completely eliminated. This
table contains data on the sale of ceramic items
salvaged from sunken ship archaeological sites. It
shows how many ceramic items have been
retrieved from archaeological sites, and how manyof them have been sold. It is a staggering number,
isn’t it? These ceramic wares are not treated ascultural heritage, but rather as goods to sell for a
profit. In addition to the salvage issue, countries inSoutheast Asia are also dealing with a lack ofestablished techniques to conserve salvaged items.
In this regard, the trehalose wood preservation
technique mentioned by Dr. TAMURA is perhaps
a field that Japanese researchers can study with
their fellow researchers, both in neighboring
Asian nations and in developed nations. Also, on
the topic of maritime cultural heritage, there has
recently been much discussion on the Maritime
Silk Route. Japan has experience in research on
the Maritime Silk Route, so perhaps we also need
to be involved in research and discussions on thisarea and its associated heritage.
When considering maritime cultural heritage,
I believe that it is very important we pursue this
topic from transregional and cross regional
perspectives, across multiple regions, rather thanfocusing on individual countries or regions (Figure5). My hope is for Japan to play a role in broadening
this approach within the scope of international
cooperation.

Figure 4

Figure 5

ISHIMURA: Moving on, I would like to ask Dr.
FUNO to comment. He has been working withand advising the JCIC-Heritage for many years.
FUNO: I have been
involved in the JCICHeritage for many years.
I am currently in my
fourth year of serving as
the Chair of theSoutheast and South
Asia
Subcommittee.
Frankly, the range ofactivities possible within
the JCIC-Heritage’s current framework is not

67Forumvery broad.
At today’s symposium, which mostly consistedof relatively academic discussions, I myself may
have raised the most pressing problem we face
now. The conservation of cultural heritage hasboth country-specific and region-specific contexts,
with a range of different issues. In the backgroundof these issues is the use of the open Indian Ocean
and Pacific Ocean, these very international andhighly political waters. While the marine world asoriginally one of free waters, owned by no one,may be only a philosophy, I wish to consider
international cooperation from the starting pointof respecting the culture of various regions, at leaston the premise that the oceans are a shared spacefrom this perspective.
My specialty is architectural and urban
planning, and in these fields, there is a certain
shared understanding of valuing cultural heritage
in community-building throughout. However,when discussions are difficult due to complex
international relations and political power

68

relationships in each region, I think it is important
to share regional experiences.
This is about recognizing one another’s
different cultural backgrounds, while having
discussions on specific regions and sharing
experiences of conservation methods andtechniques. By further expanding this networkthat connects regions, I believe that the JCICHeritage can also further contribute tointernational cooperation.
ISHIMURA: Both Dr. KIMURA and Dr. FUNO
have pointed out that the oceans are transregional.
So in terms of advancing international cooperationfrom that viewpoint, Japan is extremely fortunate
to have an array of researchers studying various
countries. This is one of Japan’s academic strengths,
and also has the potential to lead to transregional
international contributions. I hope the JCICHeritage can also become such a platform.
I’d like to thank all the presenters andcommentators for their time.

Closing Remarks
YAMAUCHI Kazuya (Professor, Research Institute of Cultural Properties, Teikyo University)
1984 graduate of the Waseda University, School of Humanities and Social Sciences (AsianHistory), master’s degree from the Waseda University, Graduate School of Letters, Arts andSciences in 1988, master’s degree from the University of Tehran, Faculty of Literature andHumanities in 1992. After joining the Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties
in 2003, employed in current position as of 2016. Specialist in the cultural history andarchaeology of Iran and Central Asia. Actively involved in the protection of cultural heritage
in the Caucasus, Central and West Asia, including Afghanistan (Bamiyan), India (Ajanta),
Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Egypt, Jordan and Armenia.

As one of the people involved in planningtoday’s symposium, “Maritime Network andCultural Heritage-People and Objects Connectedby Oceans,” I will be giving the closing remarks
for today.
First, I would like to thank the many
participants in today’s symposium. We aredelighted by the high level of participation, which
also proves just how many people have an interestin the oceans and their cultural heritage.
This symposium was planned as part of therelease of the findings of the international
cooperation survey on Maritime Network andCultural Heritage. In 2019, when I proposed thisinternational cooperation survey, I had in mind
that its core would be the Maritime Silk Route,rather than focusing on major topics like maritime
network and cultural heritage.
Perhaps many of you recall the registration of
the Silk Road, the trading routes network of the
Chang’an-Tianshan Corridor, as a UNESCOWorld Heritage in 2014. Of the three routes of
the Silk Road (the Steppe Route, Oasis Route,and Maritime Route), only a part of the Oasis
Route was registered as World Heritage.
Nonetheless, this registration led to recognition
and inspiration that triggered a momentum incountries and regions to register the Maritime
Silk Route and other routes on the Silk Roads asWorld Heritage, spurring action and initiatives toadvance this movement. This momentum hasgiven further significance to initiatives to preserveand protect, survey and study the cultural heritage
along the Maritime Silk Route, as well as theinvestigation of potential Japanese cooperation
with these initiatives.
Meanwhile, while discussing the contents ofthis international cooperation survey, the view
emerged that there was no need to focus solely on
the Maritime Silk Route. Many people expressedthe view that it might be beneficial to take a muchbroader, worldwide view of exchanges amongpeople via the oceans, and the cultural heritage
associated therewith. Also, the ships andshipbuilding that enabled maritime trade andexchange and the invention of navigation
techniques, as well as the craft items and techniquesthat emerged in each area and region throughcontact with these ships and the people directly
involved in those activities-these are all similarly
and closely connected with maritime cultural
heritage. Another aspect of maritime cultural
heritage that easily comes to mind is the items
remaining underwater, such as sunken ships. But
the port facilities and port towns on land can also
be said to be part of maritime cultural heritage.
Today’s symposium brought together researchers
who share these views.
Dr. SASAKI talked of the appeal of sunken
ships. Surveys of sunken ships provide direct
evidence of their structure and cargo. They areindeed the time capsules of the sea.
Next, Dr. KIMURA discussed advances inshipbuilding and navigation techniques. Using69

specific examples of the techniques underpinningmaritime exchange, he employed the viewpoint of
so-called marine archaeology.
Dr. TAMURA presented the findings of herchemical analyses of glass beads discovered
throughout Asia including Japan, and outlined
how the world was connected historically andwhat trade between east and west was like at thattime. These specific examples of glass beads willcontinue to further clarify how objects moved
around through maritime exchange.
Following these presentations largely about
physical objects, Dr. YOKKAICHI talked about
the people actually involved in these exchanges
and trade. His presentation helped us tounderstand the Islamic merchants who were activein East-West exchange in premodern Eurasia andthe oceans of Asia, discussing the reality of theiractivities, and the wide geographical range inwhich they were active.
The final presenter, Dr. FUNO, talked of port
towns in the maritime world of Asia. Although
the Japanese term for “port city” is now relatively
unusual, these port towns were the contact points
connecting the oceans and the land. And it is here,
in these contact points of exchanges of people andobjects via the oceans, that we find related cultural
heritage.
Dr. ISHIMURA was the moderator of today’s
forum, in which the commentators were Dr.
SUTO, who specializes in Greece and theMediterranean, and Dr. ITO, who specializes inCentral and South America. This forum went
beyond the south and south-east coasts of theEurasian continent, covered by the examples cited
in today’s presentations, and took a wider, global
view of the oceans and cultural heritage. Thissymposium reminded us of the common theme
shared by all of us: everywhere we look, we willfind people and objects connected by oceans, andmaritime cultural heritage. 70% of the earth iscovered by the oceans. The remaining 30% is theland we live on. We tend to turn to land-based
evidence when examining interactions and contact
among humanity, but when we look at exchangesof people and objects across the vast oceans, it canlead us to new discoveries and realizations. The
cultural heritage created through these exchangesof people and objects, found throughout the world,
has come into greater focus in the 21st century.
70

Also, as mentioned before, there is now amovement to register the Maritime Silk Route asWorld Heritage.
This slide is a map created on Google Earth(Figure 1).

Figure 1

It shows the network of maritime exchanges
in East Asia. Toward the registration of the Silk
Road as World Heritage in the future, ICOMOS
asked us to create a base map of East Asia, andthis map was created with the help of Japanese
researchers. This map shows not only ocean routes,
but also the routes from port towns and cities toinland areas. This map shows how Asia wasconnected not just by land routes, but by ocean
routes as well. As Dr. SUTO and Dr. KIMURA
have pointed out, we need to consider theexchanges of people and objects within the area
encircling a single ocean (the ocean area), as wellas cooperating for the protection thereof.
One of the aims of this symposium was tointroduce maritime cultural heritage and foster
interest in this area. With so many people
participating in this symposium, I feel we havelargely achieved this aim. I also hope this
symposium will serve as a catalyst for considering
how Japan can cooperate in the future in the fieldof researching and protecting maritime cultural
heritage. This was another aim of this symposium:
to enable us to consider how Japan can contributein this field moving forward.
As you can see on the map, the oceans are an
important stage connecting people and objects.
People have sailed out on these oceans andconnected with the world. Their traces remain as
cultural heritage throughout the world. In this21st-century world of increasing globalizationthat we live in, I hope this symposium will become
an excellent impetus for research on the tracesremaining of humanity’s journeys across theoceans and for the launch of activities to protectthese traces. With apologies for speaking at somelength, this concludes my closing remarks. Thankyou for your attention.

71

FY2021 Symposium Report“Maritime Network and Cultural Heritage-People and Objects Connected by Oceans- ”
February 2023

Published by :Japan Consortium for International Cooperation in Cultural Heritage

C/O Independent Administrative Institution National Institutes for Cultural Heritage
Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties
13-43, Uenokoen, Taito-ku, Tokyo 110-8713, Japan
Tel: +81-(0)3-3823-4841 / Fax: +81-(0)3-3823-4027

Edited by: FUJII Ikuno ・(Japan Consortium for International Cooperation in Cultural Heritage)
Printed by: Choyodo Printing Co., Ltd.
©Presenters of FY2021 Symposium and Japan Consortium for International Cooperation in Cultural Heritage.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted,
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the copyright owners.

Symposium Maritime Network and Cultural Heritage -People and Relics Connected by Oceans-

Japan Consortium for International Cooperation in Cultural Heritage