The Archaeology of "Ferry Money": An
Archaeological Approach to Numismatics andMonetary History of 14th-18th Century JapanSUZUKI Kimio1
ABSTRACT

Among the various sub-disciplines in contemporary archaeology, historical archaeology is one of
the most exciting fields in both North America and Japan. There exists, however, a striking
contrast between these two academic traditions in terms of their development and resulting
research foci. This paper presents an archaeological and numismatic analysis of coins associatedwith burials from historic sites in Japan and attempts to reconstruct the dynamics of money
circulation during the early Edo period (primarily the 17th century). Through a comparison ofthis case study to historical archaeology in North America, the question “What are the essentials
for historical archaeology?” is addressed.
KEYWORDS: historical archaeology, numismatics, ferry money, Edo period, Japan

Editor’s Note (by HABU Junko)This paper is the full version of the late SUZUKI Kimio’s lecture that was given at theCenter for Japanese Studies of the University of California, Berkeley, in August 2003.
The original manuscript was in Japanese, which I translated into English prior to his
lecture at UC Berkeley.
SUZUKI Kimio (1938-2004) was Professor of the Department of Archaeology andEthnology at Keio University. While his early research focused on the archaeology ofthe prehistoric Jomon period of Japan, from the mid-1980s onward, he passionately
worked on laying down the foundation of historical archaeology of Japan, especially thatof the Edo period (1603-1868).
The paper consists of three main sections. The first section critically reviews thedevelopment of historical archaeology in Japan in comparison to that in the United States.
1

Formerly Professor at the Department of Archaeology and Ethnology, Keio University.
Translated and edited by HABU Junko, University of California, Berkeley (habu@barkeley.edu)
Category: Original Article (solicited) Accepted: 19 December 2013
JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 1 (2013): 22-40

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF “FERRY MONEY”

In doing so, Suzuki provides a convincing argument that historical archaeology shouldplay active roles in our understanding of past sociopolitical dynamics and histories ofdiverse sociopolitical groups. The second section is a succinct summary of his life-longproject of examining the changes in the circulation of Edo period coins. The final section
discusses the future of historical archaeology in Japan and the rest of the world with anemphasis of its interdisciplinary nature.
In re-reading this manuscript 10 years after it was written, I was struck by Suzuki’s
strong emphasis that, unless historical archaeology can address key questions that are
relevant to contemporary society, archaeologists will no longer be able to justify thenecessity of their own discipline. Through his examination of the development ofhistorical archaeology in North America, Suzuki argues that archaeological studies of therecent historic past should be part of the large-scale social and political movements: theyshould be inseparably related to the reexamination of people’s social and ethnic identity,
their memory and the sociopolitical structures behind individuals’ actions. While
Suzuki’s discussion is focused on the archaeology of the recent historical period, this pointshould be taken seriously for archaeological study as a whole, especially in the context of
not only the severe economic recession over the past decade but also ongoing debates
about the role of social sciences in dealing with current social, economic, political andenvironmental problems.
As a former student of Keio University, I had the privilege of taking part in the
excavation and site report preparation of the Makino Family’s cemetery excavation at the
Saikaiji Temple (Suzuki 1986a).
At that time, the idea of excavating Edo period
remains was foreign to most archaeology students, and many of my classmates were
skeptical of its validity. This paper elegantly shows how much we can learn fromarchaeological studies of recent historic past, and what kinds of visions these studies could
provide. Today, Edo period archaeology is an established sub-discipline in Japanesearchaeology, but this paper reminds us of the importance of maintaining active discussion
on the role of archaeology, historical or not.
In publishing this manuscript here, only a handful of really minor changes were made in
the text. I wish to thank SUZUKI Tomiko, the widow of SUZUKI Kimio, who kindly gave
our journal permission to publish this manuscript. Two colleagues, SAKURAGI
Shin’ichi and SAKURAI Jun’ya helped me compile the list of references. Beth Cary
proofread the English manuscript on short notice. All responsibility for translating andediting this manuscript rests with me (HABU Junko).

---------------------------------------------© Japanese Archaeological Association

23

SUZUKI Kimio

Introduction
Historical archaeology represents an important sub-discipline of archaeology. Put simply,
it can be defined as the archaeological study of periods supported by written documentary
evidence. In both Japan and North America, historical archaeology is one of the mostpopular research fields in contemporary archaeology. The historical development of thisresearch field in Japan differs significantly from that in North America, however.
Focusing on the differences, the first part of this paper discusses how historicalarchaeology in Japan varies from its counterpart in North America in terms of goals,
theories, and methodologies. In the second part, I present results of my research on
copper coins from the terminal Sengoku and early Edo periods. Using archaeologicalanalyses of copper coins excavated from burials from the late 16th to the 17th centuries, I
will interpret the dynamics of currency circulation within Japan during the 17th century(see also Suzuki 1999a, 1999b, 2002). On the basis of these results, I will suggest amode of currency management by the Tokugawa Shogunate. The final part of this paper
deals with the implications of my research on copper coins: through the discussion of thiscase study, the aim of which is to examine the interrelationships between currency
circulation and other human activities, I will raise several theoretical issues in the context
of world archaeology.

Historical Archaeology: Differences between Japan and North
America
The beginning of the development of historical archaeology in Japan goes back to theearly 20th century. As early as the 1930s, several scholars suggested that archaeology
could make a significant contribution to the study of periods for which we have historical
documents. In 1937, the archaeologist GOTO Shuichi (1937) published a book titled
Nihon Rekishi Kokogaku, or “Japanese Historical Archaeology.” In the book, Gotosuggested that a wide range of topics should be examined in historical archaeology.
These topics included dwellings, settlements, weapons, forts, shrines, temples, tombs andburial mounds, arts and crafts, coins, and clothing. His perspective shows a sharp
contrast to the traditional view of archaeology of the historical period, in which only Nara
period (710–794) temples and palace sites were the primary foci of research. Put anotherway, Goto’s book was the first academic writing in which a wide range of sites andartifacts during and after the Medieval period were identified as research materials forhistorical archaeology.
This new direction of research suggested by Goto (1937) resulted in the 1956 publicationof the 7-volume series titled Nihon Kokogaku Koza or “Lectures in Japanese Archaeology.”© Japanese Archaeological Association

24

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF “FERRY MONEY”

The seventh volume of this series was devoted to historical archaeology, and was edited by
GOTO Shuichi and the historian ISHIMODA Sho (1956). The volume consists of fivechapters: 1. Material Cultures of Ancient and Medieval Societies; 2. Lifeways of
Agricultural and Fishing Villages; 3. The Development of Japanese Clothing, Foodways
and Dwellings; 4. Craft Production and Commerce; 5. Ceremonies and Religions. The
Appendix for the volume included an article titled “History and Archaeology” written by
the historian UEHARA Senroku (1956). In this article, Uehara summarized major
contributions to historical archaeological studies from the pre-war period to the 1950s.
He convincingly argued that these findings would make significant contributions to thehistorical study of Ancient and Medieval periods.
To summarize, Japanese historical archaeology was already a well-establishedsub-discipline of archaeology in light of research conducted from the pre-war period to the1950s. This characterization of historical archaeology is very similar to the tradition ofclassical archaeology in Europe. In other words, historical archaeology was consideredpart of the holistic study of Japanese history (cf. Hamada 1937). At the same time,
however, historical archaeology in Japan up to the 1950s was considered a supplement tothe study of history through written documents. This characteristic remained afundamental part of Japanese historical archaeology thereafter (Suzuki 2005).
The development of historical archaeology in North America was rather different fromthat in Japan. On one hand, classical archaeology majors in the European tradition wereusually associated with classical literature studies in the humanities. On the other hand,archaeology proper was usually included in the department of anthropology, which waspart of the social sciences. As a result, as far as I know, what we call historicalarchaeology today did not exist in the education system of North American universities.
Archaeological studies of historical periods were extremely rare, with the exception of alimited number of preservation movements of historical sites and monuments related to
Anglo-Americans. A small number of excavations of historical sites was conducted by
non-specialists, who were not academically trained in archaeology.
Two developments in the 1960s resulted in major changes in historical archaeology inNorth America. The first development was the establishment of the Conference on
Historic Site Archaeology and the publication of its proceedings in 1960. The second
was the formation of the Society for Historical Archaeology and the publication of its
journal Historical Archaeology in 1967.
Subsequent developments in historicalarchaeology in North America are well summarized by such scholars as Kathleen Deagan(1982) and Barbara Little (1994). These reviews indicate that new developments in
American historical archaeology over the past several decades reflect changes inapproaches not only to American archaeology but also to the re-examination of American
history. This trend was part of larger-scale social and political movements, in which the© Japanese Archaeological Association

25

SUZUKI Kimio

concepts of Americans and American Culture were re-evaluated, and the reconstruction of
public memories was actively sought. Re-evaluation of the concept of “American” canbe seen in various aspects of contemporary American society (Suzuki 2000).
In summary, the development of American historical archaeology during and after the
1960s has been closely intertwined with various issues and problems in contemporary
American society. I suggest that this social background has resulted in a major difference
between American and Japanese historical archaeology. Historical archaeology in Japandeveloped rapidly during and after the 1970s when a wide range of sites and artifacts,
including those from the Meiji through the Showa periods (latter 19th century to latter
20th century), began to be excavated. The majority of these excavations, however, were
rescue excavations as a result of large-scale land development associated with rapid
economic growth. Very few of these excavations were academically oriented. In mostcases, excavations of Medieval and recent features and artifacts were conductedaccidentally, typically only when they happened to be found in the process of excavatingprehistoric and early historic sites. Very few excavations targeted artifacts and features
specifically from the Edo period (17th–mid-19th century) (Suzuki 1988).
Because the development of historical archaeology in Japan has been rather accidental,
its purpose has not necessarily been clear. A general statement that all the buried culturalproperties are national assets is not sufficiently convincing to receive active support fromJapanese citizens for preserving Medieval and recent historical sites. In addition, theresearch interests of historical archaeologists often do not overlap with those of historians.
As a result, even though historical archaeologists emphasize the importance of the study
and preservation of archaeological remains, their relevance may not be recognized byhistorians. During Japan’s high economic growth period, obtaining financial support forthe preservation and excavation of archaeological sites was relatively easy. However,with the severe recession over the past several years, it is becoming increasingly moredifficult to receive support from the general public for archaeological excavations.
Archaeologists are now expected to properly justify the necessity of excavating individualsites, and to provide adequate explanations of why individual sites and artifacts need to be
excavated or preserved.

Copper Coins and Currency Circulation in Edo Period JapanIn 1982, I conducted my first excavation of an Edo period site (Suzuki 1986a). It was an
excavation of the cemetery of the Makino Family, the feudal lords of the Nagaoka Clan.
The cemetery was located at the Saikaiji Temple in Minato-ku, Tokyo, near the campus of
Keio University. This excavation was conducted prior to the restructuring of burial lots.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

26

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF “FERRY MONEY”

Skeletal remains excavated from these burials were subsequently reburied in a temple in
Nagaoka, Niigata Prefecture. A total of 17 graves dating from 1664 to 1853 wereexcavated. These included the graves of clan heads, their wives and mothers, as well as
collected burials of infants and children. The excavation revealed unique features ofburial chambers and coffin structures. Associated grave goods included gold coins, silver
pipes, ink and portable writing kits, and incense burners. Together, these remains
provided us with invaluable data for understanding funeral customs among feudal lords.
In 1985, I excavated two more Edo period sites. The first was the subsidiary residential
property of the Uesugi Family (Suzuki 1986b), and the second was a cemetery associatedwith branches of the Zojoji Temple (Suzuki 1988). The former produced a large numberof artifacts, including ceramic sherds, roof tiles, pipes, ink stones, kitchen utensils, toys,
nails, furniture fragments, whetstones, and copper coins. Food remains including fishbones and shells were also found in garbage pits (Suzuki 1986b). The latter excavation
revealed skeletal remains of approximately 300 individuals, which were interred in casks
called hayaoke. These burials were associated with various grave goods, such as
ceramics, lacquerware, coins, ink stones, pipes, combs, bronze mirrors, sewing kits, andjuzu beads (Suzuki 1988).
Among these artifacts, I was particularly interested in the gold coins excavated fromburials of feudal lords, and the large number of copper coins found in other burials.
These coins were called rokudo-sen (six mon coins), the ferry money to be paid to theferryman when the dead person crosses the river that divides this world from the other. It
seems that gold coins were used for feudal lords because of their high rank. The
inclusion of rokodo-sen as grave goods gradually became common through the latter halfof the Medieval period, when graphic images of hell began to be circulated among
commoners. As the use of coins became more common during the Edo period, thecustom of rokudo-sen became extremely popular. In 1742, the Tokugawa Shogunate
banned the use of coins as burial goods, but the custom continued to flourish. Today, thecustom is still practiced in some rural areas of Japan.
As the name indicates, typically rokudo-sen were six copper coins placed either in thehand of the deceased, or in a small bag around the neck called zuta-bukuro. When I
examined these coins, I noticed that the coin assemblages from different periods show
different characteristics. Rokudo-sen associated with burials from the early 17th century
consist only of coins imported from China. Rokudo-sen assemblages from the mid-17th
century consist of both imported coins from China and domestic coins called Kan'ei Tsuho,
which were minted from 1636, during the Kan’ei era. Rokudo-sen assemblages from theend of the 17th century to the 18th century primarily consist of domestic coins, i.e.,various types of Kan'ei Tsuho. By examining changes in the composition of theserokudo-sen assemblages, it becomes possible to reconstruct the dynamics of copper coin
© Japanese Archaeological Association

27

SUZUKI Kimio

circulation within Japan from the 16th to 18th centuries.
It may be useful to look back on the history of the use of currency in Japan before I
present the results of my analysis. From the beginning of the 8th century to the 10th
century, copper coins minted by the ancient Ritsuryo State were commonly in use.
During the 11th century, however, the use of these domestic coins became less common.
By the mid-12th century, a large number of copper coins minted by various Chinese
dynasties began to be imported. These Chinese coins include Kaigen Tsuho of the Tangdynasty from the 7th century, various Northern Song coins dated during and after the 10th
century, Southern Song coins, Yuan coins, Kobu Tsuho and Eiraku Tsuho of Ming, coins of
Liao and Jin in northern China, and coins made by other Southeast Asian and East Asiandynasties, including Annam, Ryukyu, and Choson. Because Japanese Medieval samurai
domains could not issue their own coins, foreign coins from East Asia, North Asia, andSoutheast Asia were all in use.
In the beginning of the 17th century, the Tokugawa Shogunate achieved politicalunification of Japan. Following its establishment, the Tokugawa Shogunate first issued
gold and silver coins in 1601, and then copper coins in 1636. As a result, imported
copper coins that were commonly circulated during the Medieval period were graduallyreplaced with newly issued domestic coins called Ko-kan'ei Tsuho, which means old
Kan’ei currency. This implies that a large-scale replacement of currencies from oldimported coins to newly-minted domestic coins occurred for the first time in Japanese
history. We know that the amount of imported copper coins circulated in Medieval Japanwas quite large. This is because, archaeologically, a total of more than 3.5 million
imported coins have been found within Japan in caches from the Medieval period.
Recalling these imported coins and replacing them with newly minted domestic coins
would have entailed various political and economic difficulties. However, historical
documents tell us little about the process of this major change in Japanese monetaryhistory.
Figure 1 (all the figures can be found after References) shows the relative frequencies ofdifferent types of copper coins in rokudo-sen assemblages. This figure was made using
frequency seriation, a quantification method developed in American archaeology during
the 1930s. The five types are imported coins, three types of copper Kan'ei Tsuho(Ko-Kan’ei Tsuho, so-called Bun-sen, and newly-issued Shin-Kan’ei Tsuho, issued in
1636, 1686, and 1697, respectively), and Iron Kan'ei Tsuho issued in 1739. Samples
were taken from 366 assemblages of rokudo-sen recovered from burials in Edo.
Although the total number of excavated Edo period burials associated with copper coins ismuch larger (923), the remaining samples had either greater or fewer than 6 coins, andthus were excluded from the current analysis. As the figure indicates, among thebattleship-shaped curves represented in this diagram, those that show the transition from© Japanese Archaeological Association

28

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF “FERRY MONEY”

the Medieval imported coins to Ko-Kan'ei Tsuho are not as smooth as the others. In
other words, very few burials were associated with both imported coins and Ko-Kan'ei
Tsuho (for details, see Suzuki 1999a: 134-136).
When the Tokugawa Shogunate issued new copper coins in 1636, the Shogunate
declared by the law that new coins were equivalent to old imported coins, and thus theyshould not be distinguished from each other. The edict to terminate the circulation of oldcoins was finally issued in 1670, 34 years after the minting of Ko-Kan’ei Tsuho. If weassume that both types of coins were circulated during those 34 years, we would expect tofind varied combinations of these two types of coins in rokudo-sen assemblages dated
1636–1670. However, archaeological data indicate that the transition from old coins to
new coins occurred rapidly. In other words, archaeological data suggest a different
picture from the conventional interpretation derived only on the basis of historical
documents.
These results led me to examine another question: Did the rapid change from old coins to
new coins occur only in the city of Edo, the political center, or did it occur throughout theJapanese archipelago? To answer this question, rokudo-sen data were collected fromvarious parts of Japan. Results from different regions were summarized in Figures 2 to 5.
The results indicate that, in all the regions, including the Kanto region (excluding Edo)
(Figure 2), the Chubu region (Figure 3), the Kinki region (Figure 4), and western Japan(Chugoku, Shikoku and north Kyushu regions) (Figure 5), the transition occurred rapidly.
The data indicate that the rapid transition from old coins to new ones was not unique toEdo, but that it occurred almost simultaneously throughout the Japanese archipelago(Suzuki 1999a: 137-145).
Very few scholars in the fields of Edo period economic history and monetary history
have focused on economic changes caused by this rapid currency replacement. By
looking at fragmentary historical documents, I found that the price of copper coinsdeclined dramatically around 1642, six years after the minting of Ko-Kan’ei Tsuho. The
Tokugawa Shogunate responded by providing a large amount of economic support toshukuba-machi, or post stations, along major roadways, such as Tokaido and Nakasendo.
According to edicts issued in 1616 and 1617, fifteen to sixteen years after the Tokugawa
Shogunate first minted gold and silver coins in 1601, the Tokugawa Shogunate declaredthat the exchange rate between newly-minted gold coins and old Medieval imported coinsshould be 4,000 mon in copper coin per 1 ryo in gold. However, the actual exchange rate
was determined by money exchangers on the basis of market rates. This is very similar
to the flexible rate system of foreign currency exchange today. The exchange rate
fluctuated depending on the circulation amount of gold coins and copper coins, and onchanges in the seasonal demand for these currencies. The rapid decline in the value ofcopper coins in the early 1640s was apparently caused by the influx of a large amount of© Japanese Archaeological Association

29

SUZUKI Kimio

new copper coins. More than 1.3 billion copper coins were minted in the four years from
1636, and as a result, copper coins were over-supplied.
Such fluctuations of the exchange rate between gold and copper coins resulted in major
economic turmoil. Many samurai were paid in gold coin, which they regularly needed to
exchange with copper or silver coins for daily use. Farmers and city dwellers wereprimarily using copper coins: in other words, for these people a decline of the copper coinvalue implied a decrease in their asset value. Samurai and other people who traveledalong Tokaido and major roadways tended to carry their money in the form of either goldor silver coins; when necessary, these people exchanged gold and silver coins with copper
coins to pay their travel expenses. Thus, the decline in the copper coin value wasadvantageous to these travelers with gold coins. In contrast, people living in shukuba, or
post stations, incurred serious economic losses. For the Tokugawa Shogunate, active
interaction between Edo and Kansai was critical for both economic and military reasons.
Thus, the economic destabilization of post stations and the resultant decrease in public
safety were seen as serious problems.
In order to solve these problems, the Tokugawa Shogunate took to controlling currency
in an extremely tactical manner. In 1642, the Shogunate provided 500-900 ryo of loans
in gold per post station requiring no collateral and no interest. Each post station was told
to use the gold to buy copper coins, which were then used to pay back the debt to the
Shogunate. For the repayment, the official exchange rate of 4,000 mon per 1 ryo wasused. Because the market exchange rate at that time was 6,000 mon per 1 ryo, post
stations benefited significantly from this policy.
As a result of this, large amounts of copper coins flowed back from many post stations
on Tokaido and Nakasendo to the Shogunate. This functioned as an effective method toretrieve the over-supplied copper coins. In 1655, the Shogunate lent a large amount ofcopper coins, in this case 3-6 million mon, to post stations again. However, this time,each station was told to buy gold coins with copper coins, and pay back the debt with gold.
Through a series of such currency management tactics, the Shogunate was able to stabilize
the exchange rate. Put another way, by taking advantage of the fluctuation in theexchange rate, the Shogunate was able not only to stabilize the post station economy, butalso to retrieve over-supplied copper coins. Once the value of copper coins returned tonormal or higher, the Shogunate backtracked, thus successfully retrieving the gold coinsthat were previously released (Suzuki 1999a, 2002).
This policy was an extremely tactical method of currency circulation control. Throughthis control, the Shogunate was able to adjust exchange rate fluctuations between gold andcopper coins. It is especially interesting to think about the types of copper coins thatwere returned from post stations to the Shogunate during and after 1642. If the majorityof these coins were old imported coins from the Medieval period, the above-described© Japanese Archaeological Association

30

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF “FERRY MONEY”

currency control process would have been an effective method to retrieve old coins. This
would explain why the transition from the old to newly minted coins occurred in a
relatively short period. Regulations issued by the Shogunate do not specify what types ofcopper coins should be used for the repayment. However, historical records from theKagoshima Clan give us an indication that the repayment may have been made primarily
with old, imported coins.
Account records of the Kagoshima Clan from 1640 indicate which types of currency
were used to pay the tobacco tax within its territory. Of all the tax, 83 percent of thetobacco tax paid in copper coins was with old, imported coins. People seem to have
known that old coins would be phased out of circulation in the near future. Given thisincidence, it is likely that people at post stations along Tokaido and Nakasendo werethinking the same way. Thus, I suggest that the majority of the repayment from post
stations was made in the form of old copper coins.
Based on these lines of evidence, it is likely that the retrieval of old, imported coins
occurred quickly. I suggest that the majority of old coins must have been retrieved by
1655, when the value of copper coins rose significantly. No other scenario would explain
the high exchange rate of copper coins to gold at this point. In summary, through anarchaeological analysis of rokudo-sen and an examination of historical documents, I
suggest that the transition from imported coins to newly minted Ko-Kan’ei Tsuho wascompleted by the mid-17th century, and that the transition was a result of tacticallymanipulated currency control performed by the Shogunate. This date is more than 15
years earlier than the conventional estimate. From this perspective, the 1670 prohibitionof the use of imported coins can be seen as the final declaration by the Shogunate, whichsimply confirmed the fact that old coins were no longer in circulation (Suzuki 1999a,
2002).

Discussion and Conclusion
This archaeo-numismatic research on the dynamics of 17th century money circulation uses
two lines of evidence: archaeological data and historical documents. It may appear thatmy research adopted the traditional method of historical archaeology, in whicharchaeological analyses supplemented the study of historical documents. However, it
should be noted that very few scholars in the fields of economic history, monetary history,
and Edo period history have focused on money circulation dynamics during the early Edo
period. This is largely due to the fact that relatively few written documents have been
available on this topic. In addition, in the past most historians did not realize thepotential contribution of archaeological data for such a study. Even if scholars wereinterested in this topic, it would have been impossible to examine it using the framework© Japanese Archaeological Association

31

SUZUKI Kimio

of a single discipline, such as history or economic history. This is because no single lineof evidence is sufficient to approach this issue in a holistic manner. I would like toemphasize that conducting research on this project required an interdisciplinary andsynthetic perspective that transcends traditional disciplinary boundaries. The naming ofarchaeo-numismatic research itself reflects my strong belief that, by accumulating similarkinds of case studies, we can develop a new and interdisciplinary genre of research.
Given the rapid development of historical archaeology on a global scale, the necessity of
conducting interdisciplinary research may occur in various parts of the world. This isbecause historical archaeology deals with a variety of artifacts, features, and sites. For
example, in the field of African-American archaeology, several issues that transcend the
traditional boundary of archaeology have been raised. These include the economic
structure and the movement of commercial goods and people within the triangle marked
by the industrial district of northern United States, the Caribbean region, and theplantations in the South. Change in the lifeways of immigrants from the west coast of
Africa in the context of cultural interaction is another topic to be debated. This includes
social and economic change and the resulting change in lifestyle among
African-Americans.
None of these topics can be effectively examined without
collaboration among specialists of various fields related to historical archaeology (e.g.,
Deetz 1996, Singleton 1985, Suzuki 2005).
From these discussions, it becomes clear that the possibility of future interdisciplinary
collaboration is not only between archaeology and history, but also between archaeology
and many other disciplines. These disciplines could include humanities and social
sciences such as folklore, sociology, economics and economic history, historicaldemography, as well as medical sciences and their related disciplines such as public health,genetics, paleopathology, and immunology. Other disciplines that deal with theformation of modern society, such as city planning and history of philosophical thought,
including monetary philosophy, may also be relevant. In other words, the amount of
information embedded in historical archaeological materials is enormous. We do not yet
know the range of possible future contributions of historical archaeology. In this context,
we need to keep in mind that, among scholars in many disciplines, archaeologists will be
the first ones to excavate, record, analyze, or process all the material remains even if thedata are more relevant to other disciplines.
We all know that archaeological remains often require special care at the time of
excavation. The lack of adequate care may result in the loss of information. In theworst scenario, the excavators may not recognize the importance of certain artifacts orother remains, and the materials may be discarded. The history of archaeology in various
parts of the world indicates that archaeologists do not necessarily know the value of all of
the archaeological remains at the time of excavation. Given this situation, it will become© Japanese Archaeological Association

32

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF “FERRY MONEY”

necessary for historical archaeologists to collect or record a wide variety of archaeological
data, even if the data are not directly relevant in the context of their own project goals.
This situation is very similar to the issue of the preservation of written documents. In
the case of diplomatic and administrative documents, scholars have actively debated whatshould be preserved, and to what extent. The issue is closely related to similar
discussions in other disciplines: for example, the preservation and evaluation of everyday
commodities in material culture studies, the definition of art objects in art history, and thedenotation of texts in literature. Put another way, it is not only selfish but also risky forhistorical archaeologists to determine the value of excavated materials on their own.
Collaboration with specialists from appropriate fields may sound reasonable, butarchaeologists cannot always predict the types of artifacts buried in each site. It is also
important to emphasize that many excavations of historical sites are rescue excavations,and thus they are conducted under significant constraints, often in terms of both time andmoney.
In order to avoid these potential pitfalls, I suggest that we need to develop a new fieldthat I would name “Archaeography.” The primary goals of this new field should be torecord and preserve various kinds of archaeological data for future use. For example, inthe process of my own project on coins, I created a database that can be used by
non-archaeologists for future research. The published version of my work provides
detailed discussion on the analytical methods. I believe that these efforts are necessary inorder to keep the field of archaeo-numismatics open to non-archaeologists.
Needless to say, I do not intend to suggest that the accumulation of raw data willautomatically enable us to provide adequate historical interpretations. In this regard,
Japanese historical archaeology has a lot to learn from anthropological archaeology andhistorical archaeology in America, in which problem-oriented research and deductive
approaches have been emphasized. However, an over-emphasis on specific project goals
could also result in neglecting archaeological remains that are not directly relevant to thesegoals. We need to remember that, in order to reconstruct the past, we must deal with awide range of material remains that reflect various human actions and behaviors. And
these materials can be obtained only through archaeological excavations.
If the need for “archaeography” is widely recognized, this will lead to an exponential
increase in the amount of data available for historical archaeology. Some scholars may
think it is unrealistic to preserve or record such a large amount of data. Just as historians
cannot record everything for future use, neither can archaeologists preserve everything.
Nevertheless, I would like to point out that the accumulation of accurate data and finding
relevant interpretations for these data are at the core of historical studies. In this regard,
historical archaeologists cannot avoid this critical issue. Individual historical events are
encoded in archaeological and historical data in a different manner. We need to develop© Japanese Archaeological Association

33

SUZUKI Kimio

effective methodological devices to decode these different lines of evidence, and thensynthesize them as a whole. As the first step, archaeologists should be held accountable
for the evaluation and care of the archaeological materials that they excavate.

References
Deetz, James, 1996. In Small things forgotten: an archaeology of early American life.
Expanded and revised edition. New York: Anchor Books/Doubleday.
Deagan, Kathleen, 1982. Avenues of inquiry in historical archaeology. Advances in
Archaeological Method and Theory 5: 151-177.
GOTO Shuichi, 1937. Japanese historical archaeology. Tokyo: Shikai Shobo. 後藤守
一 1937『日本歴史考古学』東京：四海書房.
GOTO Shuichi & ISHIMODA Sho (eds.) 1956. Lectures in Japanese Archaeology. Vol.
7: Historic Period ( Medieval and Edo Periods). Tokyo: Kawade Shobo. 後藤守一・石母田正（編）『日本考古学講座 第７巻 歴史時代（中世・近世）』東
京：河出書房HAMADA Kosaku, 1939. Archaeological studies. Tokyo: Zayuho Kankokai. 浜田耕作
1939『考古学研究』東京：座右寶刊行会
Little, Barbara J. 1994. People with history: an update on historical archaeology in the
United States. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1(1): 1-40.
Singleton, Theresa A. 1985. The Archaeology of slavery and plantation life. New York:
Academic Press.
SUZUKI Kimio, 1988. Current issues in Edo period archaeology, in Editorial Board of theArchaeological Essays in Honor of late MURAKAMI Toru (ed.), Archaeologicalessays in honor of late MURAKAMI Toru, pp. 205-206. Tokyo. 鈴木公雄 1988
「近世考古学の課題」『村上徹君追悼論文集』村上徹君追悼論文集編集委員会
編、pp.205-206, 東京- 1999a. The archaeology of coins. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kobunkan. 鈴木公雄『銭の考古学』東京：吉川弘文館- 1999b. A study of excavated coins. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. Changes in thecurrency in circulation during the transition from the medieval to the Edo periods inJapan, in Rekishi Kenkyukai (ed.), Currency in Cross-Border, pp. 161-209, Tokyo:
Aoki Shoten. 鈴木公雄「出土銭貨からみた中・近世移行期の銭貨動態」歴史学
研究会編『越境する貨幣』東京: 青木書店
- 2000. Archaeology of battlefield: recent current of American historical archaeology.
Shigaku Zasshi 109(11): 1989-1991. 鈴木公雄「古戦場の考古学―最近のアメリ© Japanese Archaeological Association

34

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF “FERRY MONEY”

カ歴史考古学の新しい試み」『史学雑誌』109(11): 1989-1991.
- 2002. A study of excavated coins. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. 鈴木公雄『出土銭貨の研究』東京：東京大学出版会- 2005. The development of historical archaeology and the future of archaeological studies.
Shigaku 73(4): 121-129. 鈴木公雄「歴史考古学の発達と考古学の未来」『史学』
73(4): 121-129
SUZUKI Kimio, (ed.) 1986a. Excavation report of the cemetery of feudal lords of theMakino Family, Nagaoka Clan, in Mita, Minato-ku, Tokyo. Tokyo: Board of
Education of Minato Ward. 鈴木公雄（編）『港区三田済海寺 長岡藩主牧野家墓所発掘調査報告』東京：港区教育委員会- 1986b. Excavation report of the Azabudai 1-chome site. Tokyo: Board of Education of
Minato Ward. 鈴木公雄（編）『麻布台一丁目 郵政省飯倉分館構内遺跡』東京：
港区教育委員会- 1988. Excavation report of the Zojoji Temple Branches. Tokyo: Board of Education of
Minato Ward. 鈴木公雄（編）『芝公園一丁目 増上寺子院群光学院・貞松院跡』
東京：港区教育委員会
UEHARA Senroku, 1956. History and archaeology, in GOTO Shuichi & ISHIMODA
Sho (eds.), Lectures in Japanese Archaeology. Vol. 7: Historic Period ( Medieval and
Edo Periods), pp. 241-257. Tokyo: Kawade Shobo. 後藤守一・石母田正（編）『日
本考古学講座 第７巻 歴史時代（中世・近世）』東京：河出書房.

© Japanese Archaeological Association

35

SUZUKI Kimio

Figure 1. Seriation Diagram of 366 Sets of Six Coins Excavated from
Archaeological Sites within the City of Edo (modified from Suzuki 1999, p. 135).

© Japanese Archaeological Association

36

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF “FERRY MONEY”

Figure 2. Seriation Diagram of 497 Sets of Six Coins Excavated from
Archaeological Sites in the Kanto Region (excluding the City of Edo) (modified
from Suzuki 1999, p. 138).
© Japanese Archaeological Association

37

SUZUKI Kimio

Figure 3. Seriation Diagram of 142 Sets of Six Coins Excavated from
Archaeological Sites in the Chubu Region (including Tokai and Hokuriku)(modified from Suzuki 1999, p. 140).

© Japanese Archaeological Association

38

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF “FERRY MONEY”

Figure 4. Seriation Diagram of 141 Sets of Six Coins Excavated from
Archaeological Sites in the Kinki Region (modified from Suzuki 1999, p. 141).

© Japanese Archaeological Association

39

SUZUKI Kimio

Figure 5. Seriation Diagram of 308 Sets of Six Coins Excavated from
Archaeological Sites in Western Japan (Chugoku, Shikoku and North Kyushu
Regions) (modified from Suzuki 1999, p. 143).
© Japanese Archaeological Association40