Overview: Japanese Archaeological Research Trends 20111
Tanaka Yoshiyuki2

When speaking of the year 2011, or of Japan at any subsequent point in time, it will
likely be impossible to leave out the Great East Japan Earthquake. The three-folddisaster of a massive earthquake, followed by a gigantic tidal wave, then thedispersion of radioactive material from the hydrogen explosion at the Fukushima
Daiichi nuclear power plant coming like a kick to someone already down, dealt atremendous blow to Japanese society. And in the midst of all of this, a variety ofsystematic problems in Japanese society seem to have been exposed. Our academic
discipline of archaeology and its operations hardly stand isolated from these events.
In face of this unprecedented catastrophe, the Preparatory Committee for aSpecial Emergency Response Committee to the Great Tōhoku-Kantō Earthquake3(changed from April 1 to read “Great East Japan Earthquake”), established at the
March 2011 meeting of the Japanese Archaeological Association’s Board of
Directors, began its activities by ascertaining the fates of Association members andgathering information on the extent of damage to cultural properties, participatingin the Agency for Cultural Affairs’ “Cultural Properties Rescue” program andsharing information about the conditions of damage, conducting on-the-groundinspections in Miyagi and Iwate prefectures and holding discussions there of theconditions suffered in the disaster, the handling of buried cultural properties in
conjunction with reconstruction efforts, and the current state of cultural properties
rescue operations. While it was confirmed that no Association member met withpersonal tragedy, we must not forget there were victims among archaeologicalresearchers who were non-members.
The Board of Directors released an emergency statement from the Association[Trends in Japanese Archaeological Research, 2011 , is a partial translation of “Nihon kōkogaku
kenkyū no dōkō” 日本考古学研究の動向, in Nihon kōkogaku nenpō 64 (2011 nendoban) 日本考古学年報
64（2011 年度版) (Archaeologia Japonica 64 [2011 Fiscal Year Issue]) (Nihon Kōkogaku Kyōkai, 2013),
pp. 1-65. This essay appears on pp. 1-4, under the Japanese title “Sōsetsu” 総説. It was translated byWalter Edwards, and published by the Japanese Archaeological Association (Nihon Kōkogaku Kyōkai
日本考古学協会) online in 2013. To streamline the text, characters for Japanese names and terms, andbibliographic information have been placed in footnotes. When an English translation of the name ofan organization or publication (or symposium, etc.) is suppliedby the party responsible, this is usedwith minimum changes in capitalization etc. to conform to the style followed by Trends in JapaneseArchaeological Research. Romanized names of individuals are given with the surname followed by the
personal name.]2
田中良之
3
Tōhoku Kantō Daishinsai Kinkyū Taiō Tokubetsu Iinkai Junbikai 東北関東大震災緊急対応特別委員会準備会
1

Trends in Japanese Archaeological Research, 2011
© 2013 The Japanese Archaeological Association
published online: September 2013

–1–

–2–

TRENDS IN JAPANESE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2011

President, dated April 1 and titled “To Members of the Japanese Archaeological
Association and Related Personnel,” 4 and adopted an exemption from membershipfees for a limited period as a measure of support for members who suffered damage.
The Special Response Committee to the Great East Japan Earthquake5(hereafter, the Special Response Committee), formally established at the 2011
General Meeting, began its activities such as raising funds as contributions andfinancial support for cultural properties rescue operations, conducting a session ofpresentations at the General Meeting on the disaster and the lessons to be learned
from the Great Hanshin Earthquake, 6 and publishing a report summing up various
problems in issue No. 174 of the Association’s Bulletin. 7 Because these measures
were already in progress when the media began reporting that buried culturalproperties policies might hinder the recovery, a statement from the Association
President titled “Expectations for the Preservation/Investigation of Cultural
Properties in Conjunction with the Great East Japan Earthquake Reconstruction
Efforts”8 was promptly released on July 12.
The Special Response Committee subsequently continued its discussions with
cultural resource management personnel in the disaster region, conducting a4“Nihon Kōkogaku Kyōkai kaiin narabi ni kankeisha no minasama e” 日本考古学協会会員ならびに関係者の皆様へ. The statement is available in Japanese on the Association’s website (http://archaeology.jp/
proceedings/kaicho20110401.htm).
5
Higashi Nihon Daishinsai Taisaku Tokubetsu Iinkai 東日本大震災対策特別委員会
6“Kinkyū hōkoku, Higashi Nihon Daishinsai ni chokumen shite: Hisaichi kara no hōkoku oyobi
Hanshin Awaji Daishinsai ni manabu” 緊急報告 東日本大震災に直面して: 被災地からの報告及び阪神淡路大
震 災 に 学 ぶ (Emergency Report, Confronting the Great East Japan Earthquake: A Report from theStricken Region, Plus Learning from the Great Hanshin Earthquake), session held at the Nihon
Kōkogaku Kyōkai 2011 Nendo Sōkai 日本考古学協会 2011 年度総会 (Japanese Archaeological Association 2011 General Meeting) (Kokugakuin University, 29 May 2011).
7“Higashi Nihon Daishinsai Taisaku Tokubetsu Iinkai hōkoku” 東 日 本 大 震 災 対 策 特 別 委 員 会 報 告(Report of the Special Response Committee to the Great East Japan Earthquake), Nihon Kōkogaku
Kyōkai kaihō 日 本 考 古 学 協 会 会 報 (Bulletin of the Japanese Archaeological Association), no. 174(December, 2011): 13-15. This report is also available in Japanese on the Association’s website(http://archaeology.jp/proceedings/disast1.htm)
8“Higashi Nihon Daishinsai fukkō jigyō ni tomonau bunkazai no hozon/chōsa ni nozomu” 東日本大震
災復興事業に伴う文化財の保存・調査に望む . The statement is available in Japanese on the Association’s
website (http://archaeology.jp/proceedings/kaicho20110712.htm).
[Translator’s note: As explained in the Special Response Committee’s December 2011 report (note7, above), in June there were notices in the press of a request to build reconstruction housing on the
Tako no ura Shell Mound in the city of Ōfunato (Iwate prefecture), a nationally designated HistoricSite, plus a question about whether the need for investigation prior to construction at another Iwate
location, in the city of Miyako, posed an obstacle for the reconstruction effort.
The July 12 statement released in response to such concerns noted the rich cultural heritage of thedisaster region and the many museums and other facilities displaying that heritage, expressing the
Association’s desire that in the conduct of reconstruction projects, efforts would be made to preserveand protect cultural properties, and restore facilities displaying them to their former states, while
asking residents of the area for their understanding and cooperation in this regard. It further stated thehope that reconstruction efforts and any new investigations and administrative measures attending
them would be conducted in accordance with the aims of the Law for the Protection of Cultural
Properties. Finally, it stressed that for the reconstruction effort after the Great Hanshin Earthquake,
cultural properties served as a source of local identity and pride that proved invaluable for efforts torebuild local communities, and expressed the hope that those lessons would be applied in the ongoingreconstruction.]O VERVIEW–3–

questionnaire survey of local preparations for excavations of buried culturalproperties in conjunction with reconstruction projects, publishing the results inissue No. 176 of the Association’s Bulletin. 9 The problems of preserving,conserving, and protecting cultural properties remained without clear prospects forresolution, beset with numerous challenges such as securing sufficient
preparedness for excavating buried cultural properties prior to development, andwith no outlook whatsoever for countermeasures to deal with heritage that wasradioactively contaminated from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor accident.
Moreover, the dispersion of radioactive material extended over a wide area. It isthought that many problems as yet not understood may emerge in the future, suchas possible secondary exposure to radiation on occasions of excavating sites, theeffects of contamination of sites and artifacts on analysis for chemical elements andisotopes, and so forth. The Special Response Committee will continue its activities
while coordinating with various related academic societies, organizations, andinstitutions. We appeal to all members of the Association for their further
cooperation and support.
The Association faces another significant challenge in the problem of its library.
Originally this issue arose because the books in the Association’s possession were
kept in a storehouse and thus not under conditions where they could be utilized,
and even though at first some solution was sought whereby they could bemaintained while available for reading, the cost of doing so was prohibitive, andeven the storage fees were pressing upon the Association’s finances. After longexamination, the decision made by the Board of Directors to donate the entire
collection, and the ensuing open search and selection process for a receiving
institution, resulted in the library being offered to the Sainsbury Institute ofEngland. As is well known, this was overturned at a special General Meeting held in
the previous Fiscal Year. Accordingly, based on the proposal made by the chair of
the special meeting, a Special Committee Concerned with the Association’s
Library10 was established at the 2011 General Meeting. Because the Board of
Directors’ original proposal had been overturned, the point was to have acommittee other than the Board of Directors consider the problem, and its members
were selected so that there would be no bias either for or against the Directors’
proposal of the previous year. Further, it was decided to have two intellectuals who
are not members of the Association join the committee, to provide opinions from awider perspective. The earnest debate conducted by the committee is being
published in ongoing fashion in the Association’s Bulletin and on its website, andthe committee’s findings are expected to be issued in the upcoming Fiscal Year,
based upon which the Board of Directors will then submit a proposal to the General
Meeting.
“Higashi Nihon Daishinsai Taisaku Tokubetsu Iinkai hōkoku,” Nihon Kōkogaku Kyōkai kaihō , no.
176 (August, 2012): 51-54. This report is also available in Japanese on the Association’s website(http://archaeology.jp/proceedings/disast2.htm).
10
Kyōkai Tosho ni Kakawaru Tokubetsu Iinkai 協会図書に係わる特別委員会
9

–4–

TRENDS IN JAPANESE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2011

A proposal to institute three awards, a “Grand Award,” “Monetary Award,” and“Special Award,” was made and adopted at the 2010 General Meeting, after
examining existing awards and methods of citation for merit as reference.
Accordingly a Selection Committee was established, and after evaluating the works
that were submitted as candidates, the results were announced at this year’s
General Meeting and presentations made by Association President Kikuchi Tesuo.
First, before the Grand and Monetary awards, the Japanese Archaeological
Association Special Award was conferred on Association member Tsuboi Kiyotari,11for his contributions to the field of archaeology over many years, plus his receipt in1999 of the Person of Cultural Merit award.12 Then the first Grand Award was given
to Association member Ikeya Nobuyuki for his monograph on the archaeology ofobsidian,13 and the first Monetary Award to Association member Mizusawa Kōichi
for his study of Medieval distribution along the Japan Sea. 14 Even though thenumber of applicants was not great, perhaps because this was the first time forthese awards and they were not sufficiently well known, it is thought they were
given to suitable works for recognition through the Japanese Archaeological
Association Awards. In addition to extolling the honor won by these threerecipients, it is hoped that the Awards program will become enriched in the future,and that Association members will actively respond to calls for applications, so that
the Awards will contribute to the development of archaeology in Japan as well.
The Japanese Archaeological Association has six standing committees, theResearch Conditions Investigative Committee, Committee on Policy for the
Preservation of Buried Cultural Properties, Committee to Investigate Social Studies
and History Texts, International Exchange Committee, Editorial Committee, andPublic Relations Committee,15 each of which is conducting its separate activities.
The Research Conditions Investigative Committee has been examining the problemof the system for licensing archaeological investigators, and made a poster
presentation at the General Meeting on the results of a questionnaire survey
focusing on the issue,16 but since the Agency for Cultural Affairs, which should be
坪井清足
Bunka Kōrōsha 文 化 功 労 者 (awarded by the Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology)
13
Ikeya Nobuyuki 池谷信之, Kokuyōseki kōkogaku: Gensanchi suitei ga akiraka ni suru shakai kōzō tosono henka 黒曜石考古学: 原産地推定が明らかにする社会構造とその変化 (Obsidian Archaeology: Social
Structure and Its Transformation Revealed through Inferring Source Locations) (Shinsensha, 2009).
14
Mizusawa Kōichi 水澤幸一, Nihonkai ryūtsū no kōkogaku: Chūsei bushidan no shōhi seikatsu 日本海
流通の考古学: 中世武士団の消費生活 (The Archaeology of Distribution on the Japan Sea: Consumption
Habits of Medieval Samurai Groups) (Koshi Shoin, 2009).
15
Kenkyū Kankyō Kentō Iinkai 研究環境検討委員会， Maizō Bunkazai Hogo Taisaku Iinkai 埋蔵文化財保護対策委員会， Shakaika/Rekishi Kyōkashotō Kentō Iinkai 社会科・歴史教科書等検討委員会， Kokusai
Kōryū Iinkai 国際交流委員会， Kikanshi Henshū Iinkai 機関誌編集委員会， Kōhō Iinkai 広報委員会
16
Kenkyū Kankyō Kentō Iinkai, “Shinpojiumu ‘Kibishisa o masu kenkyū kankyō’ o kangaeru deshimesareta kaiin no iken” シンポジウム厳しさを増す研究環境を考えるで示された会員の意見 (Association
Members’ Opinions Indicated at the Symposium “Thinking About the Increasingly Severe Conditions
for Research”), poster presented at the Japanese Archaeological Association 2011 General Meeting(Kokugakuin University, 29 May 2011). [Translator’s note: The symposium named in the poster title,sponsored by the Association, was held at Tohoku Gakuin University, 3 March 2010.]
11
12

O VERVIEW–5–

expected to provide direction on this issue, has been overwhelmed with the
response to the recent catastrophe and has made no progress, the situation is left
stranded without any prospect regarding what comes next. At the same time, thelicensing system of the Japan Association for Preservation of Cultural Properties 17
has started operation and appears to be taking hold, and it goes without saying that
this situation is undesirable. The Committee on Policy for the Preservation of Buried
Cultural Properties is continuing its vigorous program of activities, but in addition to
the problems of heritage preservation it has dealt with previously, the Great East
Japan Earthquake and its reconstruction are likely to influence the entire scope ofburied cultural properties administration, so this committee is conducting its
business in close cooperation with the Special Response Committee. This is a newissue for the Research Conditions Investigative Committee as well. In this manner,
we are being influenced by the Great East Japan Earthquake in a variety ofsituations.
The Committee to Investigate Social Studies and History Texts continued its
activities, holding a session at the General Meeting on “How Do We Relate the
Yayoi and Kofun Periods to Children?” 18 and presenting a poster there on theteaching of those periods in grade school. 19 Education through the elementary andmiddle school levels becomes the foundation of historical cognizance for the
majority of citizens, and is thus extremely important. In recent years, with so muchemphasis being placed on modern history we even hear the extreme view that theancient periods are unnecessary, but the modern nation state developed with astrong consciousness of the ancient state, and it goes without saying that knowing
the passage of history in systematic fashion from prehistoric times on isindispensable for understanding the modern citizenry’s variety and the process ofnational unification.
The International Exchange Committee, in coordination with the Committee toInvestigate Social Studies and History Texts, is conducting a survey of the contentsof history texts for various countries in Asia, and presented a poster on this topic at
the General Meeting.20 Also, it continued to coordinate an open lecture seriessponsored by the Association along with three other Japanese archaeological
Nihon Bunkazai Hogo Kyōkai 日本文化財保護協会 (an organization comprised of private contractors
engaged in work with cultural properties)
18“Kodomotachi ni Yayoi/Kofun jidai o dō tsutaeru ka: Gakkō genba de no jissenrei to sono kadai” 子
ども達に弥生・古墳時代をどう伝えるか : 学校現場での実践例とその課題 (How Do We Relate the Yayoi and
Kofun Periods to Children? Practical Examples and Issues from the Schools), session held at theJapanese Archaeological Association 2011 General Meeting (Kokugakuin University, 29 May 2011).
19“Shōgakkō no kyōkasho de oshietai: Yayoi/Kofun jidai” 小学校の教科書で教えたい : 弥生・古墳時代(What We Want to Teach through Grade School Textbooks: The Yayoi and Kofun Periods), poster
presented at the Japanese Archaeological Association 2011 General Meeting (Kokugakuin University,
29 May 2011).
20“Ajia no rekishi/shakaika kyōkasho bunseki: Kōkogaku kijutsu o chūshin ni” アジアの歴史/社会科教科書 分析 : 考古学 記述 を 中 心 に (Analysis of Asian School Texts in History and Social Studies: With a
Focus on Archaeological Descriptions), poster presented at the Japanese Archaeological Association2011 General Meeting (Kokugakuin University, 29 May 2011).
17

–6–

TRENDS IN JAPANESE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2011societies.21 The Editorial and Public Relations Committees worked diligently toenrich the journal, Nihon kōkogaku (Journal of the Japanese Archaeological
Association),22 the annual report, Nihon kōkogaku nenpō (Archaeologia Japonica),
and the Association’s website.23
Of course, there were important discoveries and research seen for the field ofarchaeology in the 2011 Fiscal Year. Trends for 2011 in every period and region
are given in detail in the sections of this volume that follow, 24 and I ask the reader toexamine these while noting that many presentations and reports were given at theGeneral and Autumn Meetings. On the first day of the 2011 General Meeting, heldat Kokugakuin University, Kobayashi Tatsuo, a professor emeritus of that institution,
gave an open lecture on the topic of Jōmon monumental sites,25 and the following
day there were poster sessions plus research presentations at four different lecturehalls, all of which were well attended. From the current fiscal year there is a change
in the format of the presentations for the General Meeting, as in addition to theindividual oral presentations continuing from before, sessions focusing on
particular topics were introduced. As a result of proposals made under the latter
category, there were sessions on ancient cooking methods inferred from residues
on pottery, a reexamination of Jōmon agriculture based on the results ofpaleoethnobotanical work, examinations of human skeletal remains from the
Shiraho Saonetabaru Dōketsu site in Okinawa, and the investigation of stone toolmaking behaviors of people in the Paleolithic and later eras. 26 In addition, there
were the two sessions held by Association committees already mentioned, focusing[Translator’s note: The four societies all share a regional focus on Asia. The other threeorganizations are the Japan Society for Chinese Archaeology (Nihon Chūgoku Kōkogakkai 日本中国考古学会), the Japan Society for Southeast Asian Archaeology (Tōnan Ajia Kōkogakkai 東南アジア考古学会), and the Japanese Society for West Asian Archaeology (Nihon Nishi Ajia Kōkogakkai 日本西アジア考古学会). The fourth annual program of open lectures jointly sponsored by these four societies was heldon the theme of Asian ceramics (“Kōkogaku kara mita Ajia no yakimono” 考古学から見たアジアの焼き物[Asian Ceramics Seen from Archaeology]), at Meiji University on 6 March 2011.]
22
Nihon kōkogaku 日本考古学 (Journal of the Japanese Archaeological Association)23
http://archaeology.jp/index.htm
24[Translator’s note: The reference here is to summaries, by period and region, of research trends
contained in Nihon kōkogaku nenpō, the same volume as this introductory overview.]
25
Kobayashi Tatsuo 小林達雄, “Gekijō kūkan to shite no Jōmon kinenbutsu” 劇場空間としての縄文記念物(Jōmon Monuments as Theatrical Space), open lecture given at the Japanese Archaeological Associa tion 2011 General Meeting (Kokugakuin University, 28 May 2011).
26
The titles for these four sessions, respectively, all held at the Japanese Archaeological Association2011 General Meeting (Kokugakuin University, 29 May 2011), are as follows: “Doki shiyōkon kenkyū:Susu/koge kara mita Jōmon/Yayoi doki to Hajiki ni yoru chōri hōhō” 土器使用痕研究: スス・コゲからみた
縄文・弥生土器と土師器による調理方法 (Research on Vestiges of Pottery Use: Cooking Methods Seen fromSoot/Scorched Residues on Jōmon/Yayoi Pottery and Haji Ware); “Saikin no kominzoku
shokubutsugaku kenkyū no seika kara mita Jōmon nōkō saisaikō” 最近の古民族植物学研究の成果からみた縄文農耕再々考 (A Re-reconsideration of Jōmon Agriculture Seen from Recent PaleoethnobotanicalResearch); “Okinawa-ken Ishigaki-shi Shiraho Saonetabaru Dōketsu kara shutsudo shita kōkikōshinsei jinkotsu: Kōkogaku to kotsukōkogaku no kyōdō” 沖縄県石垣市白保竿根田原洞穴から出土した後期 更 新 世 人 骨 : 考 古 学 と 骨 考 古 学 の 協 働 (Late Pleistocene Human Skeletal Remains Recovered from
Shiraho Saonetabaru Dōketsu, Ishigaki, Okinawa: Cooperation between Archaeology and
Osteoarchaeology); “Kyūjin/shinjin no sekki seisaku gakushū kōdō o saguru” 旧人・新人の石器製作学習
行動を探る (Probing for Learned Behavior of Stone Tool-making of Paleolithic and Neolithic Man).
21

O VERVIEW–7–

on the teaching of the Yayoi and Kofun periods in the schools and the emergency
report on the earthquake,27 for a total of six sessions in all organized aroundparticular themes. The proposed sessions permit the participation of related
academic societies, and on this occasion the Anthropological Society of Nippon 28
made a submission. As the individual presentations in each session are all mutuallyrelated, the format is felt to have helped maintain a high level of interest. We believe
this kind of experimentation will promote the revitalization of the Association in the
future.
The 2011 Autumn Meeting was held in the city of Tochigi at the Kokugakuin
University Tochigi Educational Center. The first day saw an open lecture by
Kokugakuin Tochigi Junior College Professor Sakayori Masashi focusing on
Japanese archaeological investigations on the Asian mainland in the 1930s, 29
followed by three simultaneously held symposia on the utilization of stone material(especially obsidian) in the stone age, on archaeological perspectives of mortuary
practices and rituals, and on problems related to livelihood in ancient society. 30
There were also poster presentations focusing on social studies school texts, 31 andthe ongoing problem of the locus of responsibility for the protection of buried
cultural properties.32 The results of the above investigations and research will likely
be published in various academic journals, beginning with the Association’s Nihon
kōkogaku.
As is clear from this brief overview, with its background of an enormous numberof investigations, the volume and variety of archaeology in Japan may be regarded
as among the foremost in the world. In addition, within this great volume lies muchresearch that can be described as international, interdisciplinary, and integrated
with other fields, keywords currently in great demand in Japanese academics. In
that regard, Japanese archaeology has certainly been undergoing transformation.
See notes 6 and 18, respectively, above.
Nihon Jinrui Gakkai 日本人類学会
29
Sakayori Masashi 酒寄雅志, “Tōa Kōkogakkai no tanjō to katsudō: Bokkaikoku Tonkinjō no chōsa ochūshin ni” 東亜考古学会の誕生と活動: 渤海国東京城の調査を中心に (The Birth and Activities of the East
Asia Archaeological Society: Focusing on the Investigation of Dongjingcheng in Bohai), open lecture
given at the Nihon Kōkogaku Kyōkai 2011 Nendo Shūki Taikai 日 本 考 古 学 協 会 2011 年 度 秋 季 大 会(Japanese Archaeological Association 2011 Autumn Meeting) (Tochigi, 15 October 2011).
30
The titles for these three sessions, respectively, all held at the Japanese Archaeological Association2011 Autumn Meeting (Tochigi, 15-16 October 2011), are as follows: “Sekki jidai ni okeru sekizai riyō
no chiikisō: Kokuyōseki o chūshin to shite” 石器 時代 に お ける 石 材 利用 の地 域相 : 黒 曜石 を中 心と して(Regional Aspects of Stone Material Utilization in the Stone Age: Focusing on Obsidian); “Kōkogaku
kara mita sōsō to saishi” 考 古 学 か ら み た 葬 送 と 祭 祀 (Mortuary Practices and Rituals Seen from
Archaeology); “Kodai shakai no nariwai o meguru shomondai” 古代社会の生業をめぐる諸問題 (Various
Problems Concerning Livelihood in Ancient Society).
31
Committee to Investigate Social Studies and History Texts, “Shakaika kyōkasho o kangaeru” 社会科
教科書を考える (Thinking About Social Studies Texts), poster presented at the Japanese Archaeological
Association 2011 Autumn Meeting (Tochigi, 15-16 October 2011).
32
Special Response Committee to the Great East Japan Earthquake, “Maizō bunkazai no hogo wa dare
no sekinin de nasareruka (2011 aki)” 埋蔵文化財の保護は誰の責任でなされるか (2011 秋) (Under Whose
Responsibility Will Protection for Buried Cultural Properties to Undertaken? (2011 Autumn)), poster
presented at the Japanese Archaeological Association 2011 Autumn Meeting (Tochigi, 15-16 October2011).
27
28

–8–

TRENDS IN JAPANESE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2011

For the future it is vital that this not end as merely a domestic dialog, but that theresults of archaeological developments in Japan be broadcast to the world topartake in mutual evaluation. When that becomes the normal situation, the genre of“Japanese archaeology” will have become established within archaeology on aworldwide scale.