1
南太平洋海域調査研究報告
OCCASIONAL PAPERS

No.58（2017 年 3 月）
No.58（March 2017）

The Islands of Amami and Okinawa
Where Hunter-Gatherers Once Throve
TAKAMIYA Hiroto
Research Center for the Pacific Islands, Kagoshima University

Abstract
Many islands in the world were colonized by Homo sapiens (modern human) after 10,000 years ago.
Considering the high degree of adaptability of H. sapiens, who were all hunter-gatherers prior to 10,000years ago, to various environments, one might wonder why the colonization of islands was recent
phenomenon in human history. Archaeologists and anthropologists have examined human colonization
processes to island environments and come up with several reasons: the low level of water crossing
technology, difficulties in finding adequate amount of food in newly arrived islands, also difficulties ofsmall human population group avoiding natural disasters and diseases and so on.
Among these the most challenging thing for hunter-gatherers was how to obtain enough foodresources in resource poor island environments. Hunter-gatherers move quite often, changing their camps
from one place to another. Most archaeologists and anthropologists argue that many islands in the world
are/were not large enough for mobile hunter-gatherers successfully colonize them. Therefore, most of themwere colonized after agriculture was invented at around 10,000 years ago.
Rarely, exceptions exist. That is small number of islands were colonized by hunter-gatherers. Theseislands are characterized by as follows: 1) large islands, 2) islands closely located from a continent or large
island, 3) large sea mammals more or less constantly available, 4) hunter-gatherers translocated edible
plants and animals from their mother lands to islands and 5) if combination of 1) to 4) is possible.
None of these are/were applicable to the islands in the Amami and Okinawa archipelagos. Therefore,
some archaeologists and anthropologists proposed the Shellmidden period (ca. 6,500 BP to 1,000 BP)
agriculture hypotheses. Archaeologists and anthropologists have worked intensively for the last twenty
years or so especially focusing on faunal and plant remains. The former contained only wild animals except
the dog. The latter too mainly consisted of wild species except the bottle gourd. The results of the analyses
strongly indicate that the hunter-gatherers successfully adapted the islands. The data is an extremely uniqueand important case in human history.
Keywords: archaeobotanical analysis, faunal analysis, Homo sapiens, island colonization, the Shellmidden
period2TAKAMIYA Hiroto

Introduction
Homo sapiens (or modern human) emerged in Africa sometime between 200,000 and
100,000 years ago and soon after that they spread from there to all continents, except
Antarctica. They reached Australia by about 50,000 years ago, to Europe and East Asia ca.
40,000 years ago. From Siberia, they entered into North America (Alaska) at about 15,000years ago. Astonishingly, they expanded from the northern North America to the southern tipof South America within less than 5,000 years. This spread from the northern tip to thesouthern tip by 10,000 years ago demonstrates high degree of adaptability of H. sapiens into
various environments. Since every human being living at that time was hunter-gatherers, thefact simultaneously indicates high degree of adaptability of hunter-gatherers into different
kinds of environments.
While hunter-gatherers adapted into various environments, they had extremely difficulttime conquering island environments. Indeed most islands were colonized after 10,000 years
ago. The main reason is that hunter-gatherer populations could not or do not colonize small
depauperated islands. Thus, it has been hypothesized that in order for modern humans to
successfully colonize islands, food production is necessary (CHERRY 1981). Were theyhunter-gatherers or farmers who colonized the islands of the Amami and Okinawa
archipelagos?

BackgroundPrehistory of this region begins with the Paleolithic period (ca. 32,000 to 10,000 BP; see
Table 1 for chronology). The earliest known site is the Yamashita cho No.1 cave site, dating toca. 32,000 years ago, on Okinawa Island. In the Okinawa Archipelago, eight Paleolithic sites
are reported. In the Amami Archipelago, the number of known Paleolithic sites is five. The
Paleolithic period is followed by the Shellmidden period (ca. 7,000 to 1,000 BP). This period
is characterized by the emergence of pottery culture. The earliest pottery in this region until
recently is known as the finger-nailed pottery and the plain pottery, dating about 6,500 to
7,000 years ago. Pottery culture might go back to 7,000 to 9,000 years ago by the recent
findings from the Kikai sogo ground site, the Minatogawa fissure site, and the Tiiragama site
(TAKAMIYA et al. unpublished data). At about 1,000 years ago, the Gusuku culture began. This
period is characterized by the beginning of food production, the use of iron tools, the long
distant exchange and the emergence of the stratified societies.
This brief review of the prehistory of the region shows that agriculture was establishedby the Gusuku period. Also, since the Paleolithic people were hunter-gatherers worldwide, it
implies probably hunter-gatherers lived on the islands during the Paleolithic period too. The3
The Islands of Amami and Okinawa Where Hunter-Gatherers Once Throve

Table 1. Chronology of the Amami and Okinawa archipelagos.
Amami and Okinawa

Mainland Japan(except Hokkaido)

GusukuMuromachi-Kamakura

1,400 BP

Shellmidden
Late 2

Heian-Asuka

2,600 BP

Shellmidden
Late 1

Kofun
Yayoi

3,000 BP

Shellmidden
Early 5

Final Jomon

4,000 BP

Shellmidden
Early4Late Jomon

5,000 BP

Shellmidden
Early 3

Middle Jomon

6,000 BPShellmidden
Early 27,000 BP

Shellmidden
Early 1ca. 1,100/1,200
1,500 AD～

Beginning ofPottery culture?

～

10,000 BP
32,000 BP

Early Jomon

Initial Jomon
Incipient Jomon

Paleolithic
Paleolithic*Table shows approximate comparison with the mainland Japan. They do no perfectly
correspond between these two regions.

biggest question is whether the people of the Amami and Okinawa archipelagos during theShellmidden period depended on wild resources or agricultural products.

The Shellmidden Islanders: Were They Hunter-Gatherers or Agriculturists?
As mentioned above, most islands in the world were colonized by hunter-gatherers.
Exceptionally, several islands were colonized by hunter-gatherers. These islands arecharacterized by as follows: 1) large islands, such as Tasmania, 2) islands located closely froma continent or a large island such as the California Channel Islands, 3) islands where sea
mammals are reliable as food source such as Kodiak Island, 4) hunter-gatherers translocatededible plants and/or animals from their mother land, such as Manus Island and 5) if

4TAKAMIYA Hiroto

combination of 1) to 4) is possible, such as the California Channel Islands. None of theseapplies to the islands of Amami and Okinawa prehistorically including the Shellmiddenperiod (TAKAMIYA et al. 2016). Therefore, it is extremely important to address the question
entitled for this session. In order to answer the question, let me examine faunal remains first,
and then review plants consumed by the Shellmidden people.
Faunal remains
Archaeologists constantly collected faunal remains since almost the same time whenarchaeological work was first introduced into the region, some one hundred years ago. It isimportant to note that since 1990s, faunal remains have been sampled and analyzed byspecialists. TOIZUMI (2014) has been working on vertebrate remain analysis, and KUROZUMI(2014) has been analyzing shell remains from archaeological sites since 1990s. They haveapplied meticulous methods in order to collect small sized animal remains, such as using
1 mm sized mesh screening. Consequently, they are able to analyze faunal remains larger than
1 mm. TOIZUMI’s analysis (2014) has revealed all vertebrate remains recovered from the sites
were wild species, except the dog. According to him, important vertebrate animal foods werewild boar and fishes available from the coral reef environment. No site is known where sea
mammals preoccupy vertebrate remains. Indeed the carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis
demonstrates sea mammals were not important food (TAKAMIYA and CHISHOLM 2004,YONEDA 2010). Also, the vertebrate remains contain no tranlocated animal foods from theoutside, except the dog. KUROZUMI (2014) sees no signs of shellfish farming from theshellfish remains from the archaeological sites. Thus, in terms of faunal remains, people lived
there during the Shellmidden period relied on wild animal species.
Plant remains
What about plant foods? Compared with faunal remains, since plant remains were smalland very fragile, it had been difficult to unearth plant remains. As a result, only two sites inthe Amami Archipelago (NAKAYAMA 2009) and eight sites in the Okinawa Archipelago
yielded plant remains prior to 1991 (WATANABE 1991). The plant remains recovered andidentified from these sites were all wild plants such as nuts. These pieces of information
imply that the Shellmidden people were gatherers of the wild plants. However, since theamount of plant remains recovered from these sites are fragmentally, and at the same timesince the number of sites which yielded plant remains was only ten, some scholars proposed
the Shellmidden agriculture hypotheses (e.g., YANAGITA Kunio, NITTA Jusei, TAKAMIYA Hiroe,SATO Yoichiro, ITO Shinji and TAKAMIYA Hiroto, see TAKAMIYA 2005).
In order to understand subsistence economy of the Shellmidden period, flotation wasfirst introduced into the region in 1992. Flotation was developed by archaeologists in order tocollect carbonized plant remains, such as carbonized seeds, efficiently from archaeological

5The Islands of Amami and Okinawa Where Hunter-Gatherers Once Throvesites. From several archaeological sites dating from the Early 2 to the Late 2 periods, soil
samples were collected. Also around 2000, wetland sites were excavated for the first time inthis region. From these wetland sites numerous amounts of plant remains were recovered andidentified by OMATSU and TSUJI (1999), TAKAMIYA (1999), TAKAMIYA (2006) and TSUJI et al.
(2007). Below, plant remains recovered from the Shellmidden sites will be briefly introduced.
The Early 1: the Shinjoshichabaru No.2 site
The site is a wetland site and yielded one of the earliest pottery, finger-nailed pottery.
14

The C date of wild boar was cal. BC 5050–4910. The site unearthed more than 20 taxa ofplant remains. All belonged to wild species, such as red bayberry and silvervine (TAKAMIYA2006).
The Early 2: the Ireibaru site
This site is also a wetland site and yielded the Sobata pottery. The 14C dates ranged
between cal. BC 4250–3770. TSUJI et al. (2007) analyzed plant remains from the site andreport numerous amounts of nuts species. In addition to nuts species, they have reported morethan 60 taxa, all of which belonged to wild species, except bottle gourds. While plant remains
recovered from the Hango site is still in the process of analysis, all plant remains identified so
far are nuts (TSUJI et al. 2007).
The Early 3 to the Early 4: the Omonawa No. 4 site
A small amount of soil samples was collected and processed by flotation. Consequently,
only few plant remains were collected and identified. They were nuts and silvervine(TAKAMIYA unpublished data).
The Early 4: the Mebaru site
This site was a wetland site and the 14C dates range between cal. BC 2300–1940.
OMATSU and TSUJI (1999) report 50 taxa and TAKAMIYA (1999) identified at least 30 taxa.
They all belonged to wild species. OMATSU and TSUJI (1999) mention a large amount of nuts
was recovered. The Kuzuri site, which dates to this period and whose plant remains have beenin the process of analysis, has so far yielded only wild species (TAKAMIYA unpublished data).
The Early 5: the Sumiyoshi Shellmidden
This site unearthed several house pits, and soil samples were mainly collected from thesefeatures. The 14C dates ranged between cal. BC 1540–1210. The result of plant remain
analysis showed all plant remains were wild species such as nuts. The Tobaru site, theNakazato site and the Nishinagahamabaru site, which belong to the Early 5 also yielded only
wild species (TAKAMIYA et al. 2016).

6TAKAMIYA Hiroto

The Late 1: the Takachikuchibaru Shellmidden
The Takachikuchibaru Shellmidden was the first site where flotation was applied in thearchipelagos. Therefore, a large amount of soil samples was collected for flotation. While alarge amount of soils was processed by flotation, the plant remains from the site did notcontain any cultigens. Again, all of them were wild species such as nuts (TAKAMIYA et al.
2016).
The late Late 1 to the Late 2: the Yomisaki, Arago, Matsumoto and Nagarabaru Higashi sites
The first three are located on Amami-Oshima Island, and the last one on Ie Island in theOkinawa Archipelago. All sites yielded only wild plant remains (TAKAMIYA et al. 2016).
The late Late 2 to the Initial Gusuku period
Cultigens appear for the first time in flotation samples dating to this period. TheNazakibaru site, Kumuibaru site, Uganhira-hoppo site and Yabumedabaru site on themainland of Okinawa yielded barley, wheat, foxtail millet and broomcorn millet. The Gusuku
site group (among them, plant remains were analyzed from the Yamada-nakanishi,Yamada-handa, Maehata, Kohane and Oufu sites) on Kikaijima Island and Akakina gusuku
site on Amami-Oshima Island unearthed barley, wheat, foxtail millet and broomcorn millet.
The 14C dates of these cultigens are between the ninth to twelfth centuries AD, indicating thetransition from hunting and gathering to food production took place at about this time. At thesame time, it has become evident that people lived on the islands prior to this time (theShellmidden period) were hunter-gatherers (TAKAMIYA et al. 2016).

Discussion and Conclusion
Were people of the Shellmidden period hunter-gatherers or farmers? Faunal remain
analyses have demonstrated that they relied on wild animals for foods. Recent intensive
archaeological work focusing on recovering plant remains using flotation successfullycollected plant remains from sites dating to the Early 2 to the Late 2. In addition, fortunately
enough the wetland archaeological sites were excavated for the first time, and numerous
amounts of plant remains were recovered from these sites. The results of plant remains
analyses unearthed from most of the Shellmidden sites contained no cultigens but all wild
plants. The results strongly indicate that the Shellmidden people were gatherers of the wild
plants. Thus the answer to the above question is, they were hunter-gatherers.
In the background section, I have mentioned very rare cases where hunter-gatherers
adapted island environments. The Amami and Okinawa archipelagos case do not belong tothese five cases. Thus, the Amami and Okinawa case provide a new perspective of

7
The Islands of Amami and Okinawa Where Hunter-Gatherers Once Throve

hunter-gatherer adaptation to the islands. While we still need more data, the Early 1 people
relied on nuts and wild boar, the Early 2 on nuts and inner bay fishes and from the Early 3 tothe Late 2 on nuts and coral reef fishes. Also the shellfish species inhabits in the coral reef
environment played important role during the entire Shellmidden period. These are newstrategies which enabled hunter-gatherers successfully colonize island environments. The casefrom Amami and Okinawa archipelagos provides an extremely rare case in human history.

References
CHERRY, J. F. 1981. Pattern and Process in the Earliest Colonization of the Mediterranean
Islands. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 47: 41–68.
KUROZUMI, T. 2014. Kairui Itai kara mita Okinawa Shotou no Kankyou Henka to BunkaHenka (Environmental and Cultural Changes in the Okinawa Archipelago as Seen from
Shellfish Remain Analysis). In: Ryuukyuu Rettou Senshi/Genshi Jidai no Kankyou to
Bunka no Hensen Vol. 2, Ryuukyuu Rettou Senshi/Genshi Jidai ni okeru Kankyou to
Bunka no Hensen ni kansuru Jisshou teki Kenkyuu Ronbunshuu (The Cultural andEnvironmental Changes during the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Times in the Ryukyu
Archipelago Vol. 2, The Collections of Papers on the Empirical Studies on the Culturaland Environmental Changes during the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Times in theRyukyu Archipelago) (Eds. TAKAMIYA, H. and SHINZATO, T.), 55–70, Rokuichi Shobō,Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
NAKAYAMA, K. 2009. Horidasareta Amami (Excavated Amami), 154 pp., Zaidan Hojin
Amami Zaidan, Amami City, Kagoshima, Japan (in Japanese).
OMATSU, S. and TSUJI, S. 1999. Mebaru Iseki kara Sanshutsu shita Oogata Shokubutsu Itaigun(Macro Plant Remains Recovered from the Mebaru Site). In: Mebaru Isaki (The MebaruSite) (Ed. GINOZA-SON KYOUIKU IINKAI), 223–241, Ginoza-Son Kyouiku Iinkai, Ginoza
Village, Okinawa, Japan (in Japanese).
TAKAMIYA, H. 1999. Saibaishokubutsu no Tansaku (Search for Cultigens). In: Mebaru Isaki(The Mebaru Site) (Ed. GINOZA-SON KYOUIKU IINKAI), 259–275, Ginoza-Son Kyouiku
Iinkai, Ginoza Village, Okinawa, Japan (in Japanese).
TAKAMIYA, H. 2005. Shima no Senshigaku: Paradaisu deha nakatta Okinawa Shotou noSenshi Jidai (Prehistory of the Islands: Prehistory of the Okinawa Archipelago Was Not aParadaise), 227 pp., Boder Inku, Naha, Okinawa, Japan (in Japanese).
TAKAMIYA, H. 2006. Shokubutsu Itai (Plant Remains). In: Aragusuku Shichabaru Dai 2 Iseki(The Aragusuku Shichabaru No.2 Site) (Ed. OKINAWA-KEN MAIZO BUNKAZAI SENTA),259–275, Okinawa-Ken Maizo Bunkazai Senta, Nishihara Town, Okinawa, Japan (inJapanese).

8TAKAMIYA Hiroto

TAKAMIYA, H. and CHISHOLM, B. S. 2004. Okinawa Shotou Joumon Jidai Bankijin oyobi
Kinseijin wa Nani wo Tabetaka (What Final Jomon and Recent Populations Ate, Basedon Carbon and Nitrogen Isotope Analysis). In: Gusuku Bunka wo Kangaeru (To Examine
the Gusuku Culture) (Ed. NAKIJIN VILLAGE BOARD OF EDUCATION), 401–416, Shin
Jinbutsu Ouraisha, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
TAKAMIYA, H., HUDSON, M. J., YONENOBU, H., KUROZUMI, T. and TOIZUMI, T. 2016. An
Extraordinary Case in Human History: Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherer Adaptation to theIslands of the Central Ryukyus (Amami and Okinawa Archipelagos), Japan. The
Holocene, 26(3): 408–422.
TOIZUMI, T. 2014. Sekitsui Doubutsu Itai kara mita Ryuukyuu Rettou no Kankyou Henka to
Bunka Henka (Environmental and Cultural Changes as Seen from Vertebrate Analysis).
In: Ryuukyuu Rettou Senshi/Genshi Jidai no Kankyou to Bunka no Hensen Vol. 2,Ryuukyuu Rettou Senshi/Genshi Jidai ni okeru Kankyou to Bunka no Hensen ni kansuru
Jisshou teki Kenkyuu Ronbunshuu (The Cultural and Environmental Changes during thePrehistoric and Protohistoric Times in the Ryukyu Archipelago Vol. 2, The Collectionsof Papers on the Empirical Studies on the Cultural and Environmental Changes during
the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Times in the Ryukyu Archipelago) (Eds. TAKAMIYA, H.
and SHINZATO, T.), 71–86, Rokuichi Shobou, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
TSUJI, S., OMATSU, S. and TSUJI, K. 2007. Ireibaru Iseki no Shokubutsu Itaigun (The Plant
Remains Recovered from the Ireibaru Site). In: Ireibaru Iseki (The Ireibaru Site) (Ed.
CHATAN-CHO KYOUIKU IINKAI), 433–444, Chatan-Cho Kyouiku Iinkai, Chatan Town,
Okinawa, Japan (in Japanese).
WATANABE, M. 1991. Kyuna Higashibaru Nubataki Iseki Shutsudo no Shokubutsu Itai (Plant
Remains Recovered from the Nubataki Site). In: Nubataki (The Nubataki Site) (Ed.
GINOWAN-SHI KYOUIKU IINKAI), 114–121, Ginowan-Shi Kyouiku Iinkai, Ginowan City,
Okinawa, Japan (in Japanese).
YONEDA, M. 2010. Shokuseitai ni miru Joumon Bunka no Tayousei (The Cultural Diversity ofJomon Based on Consumption Ecology). Kagaku, 80(4): 383–390 (in Japanese).