Cultural contact and trade between the Ainu andJapanese prior to 1667: Provenance of kiseru in an
Ainu burial at the Iruekashi site, Hokkaido
FUKASAWA Yuriko1
ABSTRACT

Focusing on the production and circulation of kiseru (Japanese smoking devices), the aim of thispaper is to discuss cultural contact and trade between the Ainu and Japanese in the 17th century.
The archaeological discovery of several examples of kiseru, at the Iruekashi site including an
Ainu burial that predates 1667, implies that these artefacts were diffused to Ainu by as earlyas the ﬁrst half of the 17th century. Furthermore, results of a comparative chronological study
on the morphological characteristics of artefacts suggest that they most likely originated from
Kyoto. Ethnographic and historical sources have elucidated a long history of the production ofsuch handicrafts in Kyoto, where metal materials were manufactured at specialized workshops
concentrated in a speciﬁc area. Data from historical documents and archaeological excavations
have also revealed how processes of technological production have changed over time. Finally,
the results of this study indicate that a marine trade route connecting western Japan andHokkaido along the cost of the Japan Sea was already in use by the middle of the 17th Century,
before the establishment of the Kitamaebune trade route to the North.
KEYWORDS: kiseru, smoking device, Ainu, Iruekashi site, Kyoto handicrafts, 1667

Introduction
All over the world, the presence of devices for smoking including kiseru, Europeanand clay pipes are signiﬁcant in an archaeological context in order to understandcultural contact, trade, and the diffusion of cultural commodities. The presence of theseobjects evidences the social aspects of a culture, as smoking indicates the sharing of acommon taste, and reveals local differences though characteristic features and handicraft
technologies.
Kiseru are Japanese smoking devices used with Japanese tobacco called kizami thatis very ﬁne and shredded. People began to use these smoking devices commonly in the
period between 1596 and 1615 when the domestic production of tobacco started in Japan,
although the practice of smoking is known to have started much earlier. The available
1 Professor,

Graduate School of International Cultural Studies, Tohoku University (yuriko.fukasawa.
e7@tohoku.ac.jp)
Category: Original Article (solicited) Received: 30 December 2016; Accepted: 2 March 2017
JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 4 (2017): 129–146

FUKASAWA Yuriko

Figure 1.

Diagram showing the details of different kiseru parts

evidence suggests that while the Portuguese introduced tobacco to Japan, as well as
guns, subsequent to their arrival in 1543, although the precise date remains unclear.
Kiseru smoking devices have metal at each end (gankubi and suikuchi) connected witha bamboo shaft. As shown in Figure 1, a kiseru made up of three parts, (1) gankubi(a neck-like goose) which, includes hizara (bowl), aburagaeshi (curved neck), kata(shoulder), and hokyotai (reinforcement band), (2) suikuchi (the mouth piece), and (3) ashaft between gankubi and suikuchi.
Examples of Kiseru have been found at archaeological sites across Japan, including
both burials and dwelling places. Usually these objects are found separated into distinct
pieces, with the exception of burials. This is because gankubi and suikuchi are madeof metal, connected together by an organic material like bamboo, for this reason, eachcomponent inevitably separates when they are excavated from archaeological sites. This
is inevitable in the case of archaeological artefacts. This paper is focussed on examplesof gankubi only but mentions them kiseru.
In this article I discuss examples of kiseru which were excavated from the Iruekashi site
(Biratori-cho Iseki Chosakai 1989), in Hokkaido (Figure 2), an Ainu habitation site that isdated to before 1667 and which, includes a burial. The signiﬁcance of these archaeologicalartefacts is that, because they are Japanese-made smoking devices, they demonstrate thatsmoking was practiced among the Ainu, and that these people somehow obtained kiseru
from the Japanese. The excavated Iruekashi site has been dated by correlation with a
1667 volcanic ash fall enabling the possibility to understand aspects of the Ainu culture
prior to this time, during the ﬁrst half of the 17th century. Tephrochronology in Hokkaido
is a vital method in order to establish material culture chronological sequences during
the historical period. This is because identiﬁed volcanic ash falls can be correlated withJapanese historical documents, revealing exact dates. This Iruekashi site is particularly
signiﬁcant because this period predates the inﬂuence of the Basho-Ukeoi system, (trading
posts established by the Matsumae domain and controlled by their merchants). Thus, this© Japanese Archaeological Association

130

CULTURAL CONTACT AND TRADE BETWEEN THE AINU AND JAPANESE PRIOR TO 1667

Figure 2.

Map of Japan to show locations discussed in the text

time period was before the Ainu culture was inﬂuenced by commercial capitalism.
It is important to determine how kiseru reached Hokkaido and where they came from,as this will contribute to an understanding of cultural contacts and trade at the time.
According to ethnological evidences, smoking was common among both Ainu men
and women. The Ainu had particular smoking customs and they used original Ainu
smoking device made of wood called nikiseri as well as wooden-tobacco cases decorated
with characteristic traditional carvings (Utagawa 1991).
Examples of kiseru from Hokkaido are examined in this study based on the discussionof 1) chronological sequences of material typology, 2) technological aspects, and 3)
ethnographic and historical documents. The aim of this paper is to discuss evidence forinteractions and trade between the Ainu people and the Japanese.

Archaeological evidence of kiseru in Hokkaido
To date, nine examples of gankubi and eight examples of suikuchi from kiseru havebeen excavated from the Iruekashi site, not just from the burial but also from theoutside and insides of dwellings. In total, 20 Ainu dwellings have been excavated that
© Japanese Archaeological Association

131

FUKASAWA Yuriko

contain examples of ceramic fragments, including bowls, a plate, and mortars, that were
produced in potteries at Hizen, Karatsu, and Bizen. Archaeological evidence for metal
products at this site also includes a large range of artefacts, including Ainu daggers,
knives, ﬁshing hooks, harpoons, nails, iron arrowheads, drills, sickles, hoes, axes, points,
iron pots, swords, and scraps of iron, comprising miscellaneous plates, bars, rings,
and chains. In addition, a hearth for forging iron has also excavated associated withtuyeres, hammer scales and slag, which indicates an existence of reﬁning process ofiron technology. This discovery implies that the Ainu practiced iron metal-working prior
to 1667. It is noteworthy that prior to the excavation of this site in 1988, there was no
archaeological evidence for whether or not iron technology existed in the Ainu culture,and it was thought that the Ainu did not practice iron-working (Fukasawa 1998).
In particular, the burial at this site (Figure 3) contains kiseru (both gankubi andsuikuchi) that were clearly individual possessions, associated with other burial goods
including an iron pot, a hoe, a sickle, knives, and lacquer-ware. The position andstructure of grave-post hole as well as burial goods that include an iron pot indicate that

Figure 3.

The Ainu burial at the Iruekashi site (Biratori-cho 1989)© Japanese Archaeological Association

132

CULTURAL CONTACT AND TRADE BETWEEN THE AINU AND JAPANESE PRIOR TO 1667

the deceased was an Ainu female based on the study of Ainu ethnology. Morphologicalstudy of the bones further conﬁrms that this individual was a mature female; thepresence of kiseru demonstrates that woman was smoking prior to 1667.
Examples of kiseru both with and without hokyotai (a reinforcement band) have been
excavated from the Iruekashi site and include one type with perforated hizara as well
as a type with a long curved neck (aburagaeshi) lacking a shoulder. These discoveries
indicate that the Koizumi chronology (Koizumi 1983) does not apply to this region as
kiseru are placed in this sequence within the ﬁrst half of the 18th century.

Chronology of kiseru in Hokkaido
Study on kiseru in archaeological context in Hokkaido were carried out by Baba (1942),
Koshida (1988), Utagawa (1991), Mori (1993), and Sekine (2003, 2014). A number of
earlier studies were undertaken in order to determine chronological sequences based on
typological studies of kiseru and tephrochronology. Thus, one chronological sequence
was created based on the morphological characteristics of kiseru compared to the
Koizumi chronology, a framework based on chronological and typological studies ofkiseru in Tokyo, the centre of the Edo period (1603–1868). Because kiseru have been
excavated from archaeological sites in the Edo period, the Koizumi chronology was used
to calibrate in order to create a chronological order for kiseru in Hokkaido (Koshida
1988, Mori 1993). However, as archaeological evidence increases, particularly frombefore 1667 (for example, the Ainu burial at Iruekashi), correlated with the Koizumi
chronology has become increasingly problematic (Utagawa 1996), as kiseru without
hokyotai can be dated by correlation with a volcanic ash which fell in 1667.
Important such ash layers that have been identiﬁed using tephrochronologicalapproach include the Oshima Ooshima-a ash (Os-a) from Oshima, deposited in 1741,
the Tarumae-a ash (Ta-a), deposited in 1739, and the Tarumae-b ash (Ta-b), deposited in
1667. The latter two of these erupt from Mt. Tarumae near Tomakomai, while anotherlayer is Komagatake-d ash (Ko-d) from Mt. Komagatake, deposited in 1640.
Four distinct phases have been identiﬁed based on these ash layers: 1, the period, prior
to 1640, 2, the period between 1640 and 1667, 3, the period between 1667 and 1739, and,4, the period subsequent to 1739 and 1741. The result of tephrochronological dating andthe time sequence of selected kiseru from Hokkaido are presented in Figure 4, while thenames of sites are listed in Table 1. The chronological sequence within which excavatedsites are placed can thus be correlated and dated using volcanic ash deposits as exact
dates for these events were recorded in historical times.
Nevertheless, it is necessary to examine such as the presence and absence of hokyotai
from a technological point of view as well as the development of holes on hizara as© Japanese Archaeological Association

133

FUKASAWA Yuriko

Figure 4.

Attributions of kiseru within chronological sequence for Hokkaido and Kyoto

characteristic features. This necessitates a revaluation of the chronological sequence ofkiseru in Hokkaido, discussion of how kiseru in the Ainu burial at Iruekashi arrived in
Hokkaido, as well as their most likely place of production within Japan. The subsequentdiscussion presented in this paper is based on the chronological sequence establishedabove.
The earliest evidence of kiseru in Hokkaido has been excavated from the Morikawa-3
site (Mori-cho), (Hokkaido Maizobunkazai Centre 2005, 2006), and has been dated to
1600±30 AD on the basis of C-14 isotope analysis. This kiseru has a hole on the hizara,
associated with burned soil, while the presence of hokyotai indicates an early stage in thedevelopment of this device, as seen at the Moyoro Kaizuka site (Abashiri-shi) (Utagawa
1984), and the Irifune site (Yoichi-cho), (Yoichi-cho Board of Education 1999). All ofthese sites probably date to before 1640.
A similar type of kiseru with a long curved neck (aburagaeshi), but lacking a shoulder
has also been excavated from the Yuoichashiato site (Hokkaido Maizobunkazai Centre
1986) near Iruekashi also older than 1667, while another similar example has beencollected from the Shibecharichashi site (Shin-Hidaka-cho). Although older kiseru withhokyotai from other localities are indicative of an old type of uncertain date, because
it is known that Shibecharichashi was related to Shiakushiain, a local Ainu leader who© Japanese Archaeological Association

134

CULTURAL CONTACT AND TRADE BETWEEN THE AINU AND JAPANESE PRIOR TO 1667

Table 1.

List of Hokkaido site names

No.

Site nameHokyotai

Kata

Hole

(1)

Morikawa 3

◎

◎

◎

(2)

Irifune◎◎(3)

Irifune◎(4)

Moyoro◎(5)

Shibecharichashi◎(6)

Iruekashi◎(7)

Iruekashi (burial)(8)

Iruekashi(9)

Iruekashi

◎

◎
◎

(10)

Iruekashi(11)

Iruekashi(12)

Iruekashi(13)

Iruekashi(14)

Yuoichashi(15)

Bibi 8(16)

Bibi 8(17)

Bibi 8(18)

Setanaicashi(19)

Setanaichashi(20)

Setanaichashi(21)

Setanaichashi

◎

(22)

Setanaichashi

◎

(23)

Setanaichashi

◎

◎

◎

◎

revolted against the Matsumae domain in 1669, these examples likely date from around,or before, this time.
Another example of a kiseru without hokyotai, lacking a shoulder, and with a shortcurved neck (aburagaeshi) was recovered from a burial at the Bibi 8 site (Chitoseshi), (Hokkaido Maizoubunkazai Centre 1989, 1992) that has been dated to the period
between 1667 and 1739. This discovery includes gankubi and suikuchi that comprisea set, found together within the grave. One interesting fact about this kiseru is that adifferent material has been used for each part, an iron gankubi and a copper suikuchi,
which indicates that components were treated separately and may also suggest that repair
and remaking were carried out at this time.
In terms of their materials, kiseru were generally made of copper and brass according
to the excavation reports, but as discussed above, there are also some examples madefrom iron. The existence of brass (the copper-zinc alloy) kiseru at Setanaichashi site isvery problematic as the existing chronological sequence would date these artefacts earlier© Japanese Archaeological Association

135

FUKASAWA Yuriko

than 1640 based on ash from Komagataek-a (Mori 1993). However, there is an alternativeinterpretation, this site was covered with Oshima-ooshima ash (Os-a) following aneruption in 1741 (Mineyama 1979). The latter interpretation of a 1741 date seems more
likely in the context of the chronological sequence, because kiseru made of brass havealso been found at this site, also suggestive of a later period.
As a result of these discrepancies, technological aspects of kiseru production in bothtime and space are discussed in order to set them within a chronological sequence thatcan be used to demonstrate cultural contact between the Ainu and the Japanese.

Technological aspects of kiseru
Morphological attributions of kiseru can be made on the basis of characteristic features
related to the manufacturing process and make it possible to place these artefacts inchronological sequence in both time and space. For example, there is the presence orabsence of a small hole on a hizara and the presence or absence of hokyotai which canbe seen the bottom of hizara. It is also possible to characterise neck (aburagaeshi) length
as either long or short, as well as the angle of curvature of gankubi.
Yoshida Shogo, a kiseru craftsman, noted that the most difﬁcult aspect of making akiseru is to make a curve in part of the gankubi and to join the hizara to the top (Nakae
1986). The function of the hokyotai was clearly to ﬁx and reinforce the joint between the
hizara and gankubi by brazing. Interestingly, however, because examples of an isolated
hizara were found at the Iruekashi site, this nevertheless implies that hizara can become
easily separated from gankubi. Later, technological improvements occurred to kiseru
led to the disappearance of hokyotai on gankubi demonstrating the appearance of newer
types. Evidence from genre paintings suggests that these technological improvements
took place around 1634 (Tanaka 1988); these paintings show that the presence of kiseru
lacking hokyotai were common in society, in use around 1634. This evidence does notpreclude the existence of kiseru lacking hokyotai at the Iruekashi and the Yuoichashiato
sites predating 1667, and it remains important to determine where these objects were
manufactured.

The location of kiseru handicrafts production
To understand where and how kiseru were made, a number of possible places were
examined to determine the earliest production location as well as places where
technological improvements were likely carried out. To date, the location that is best
known as a place for kiseru manufacture is Tsubame in Niigata Prefecture, a place where
two craftspeople still survive and produce these objects. However, kiseru production© Japanese Archaeological Association

136

CULTURAL CONTACT AND TRADE BETWEEN THE AINU AND JAPANESE PRIOR TO 1667

technology was introduced to Tsubame between 1764 and 1772 from Aizu in Fukushima
Prefecture, Sendai in Miyagi Prefecture and Edo in present-day Tokyo, even though atechnological background was already in place as a result of metal production such asiron nails for ship and copperware (Tsubame-shi Sangyo Shiryokan 1999). Thus, it iscertain that kiseru were made in Edo between 1764 and 1772 as well as in Aizu andSendai.
In the ﬁrst place Edo was considered to be most likely the place of origin for kiseru
production as it was the centre of the Edo Period from 1603. However, the centralisationof politics, culture, merchants, and manufacture in this region did not take place until theso-called the Genroku period, between 1688 and 1704, and the production of handicrafts
did not ﬂourish here until after 1688. It has been suggested that a present-day retailer
called Tanbaya that sells fashion goods in Tokyo occupies the site of the ﬁrst wholesale
kiseru shop, established in Edo in 1690 (Nakagawahouzando 1824). This shop produced
and retailed these objects throughout the Edo Period and subsequently, until 1973 when it
was replaced with a fashion outlet.
Thus, the region that was actually the centre of handicraft production prior to 1688
may actually be the region of Kyoto and Osaka. As the former was a capital before Edo,
Kyoto was a place where smoking became fashionable and also the location of the ﬁrst
Japanese smoking ban in 1605. It is of note that several smoking prohibition orders were
put in place around this time and lasted until 1623 (Tabako Sangyo Kosaikai 1985).

Archaeological evidence for kiseru chronology in Kyoto
A chronological sequence for the archaeological material culture in Kyoto has been
established based on typological studies on Haji pottery and Kawarake earthenware(Komori and Kamimura 1996). The existence of these artefacts over a long andcontinuous time span has enabled the establishment of a chronological sequence inKyoto extending from ca. AD 750 to AD 1820, divided into fourteen phases, I to XIV.
These phases are related to dates of historical events and documents and thus can be
temporally correlated and approximately aged. Thus, this established Kyoto chronologicalsequence is used here to correlate the available sequence of kiseru artefacts with the 17th
century encompassing chronological phases 11-A (1590–1620), 11-B (1620–1650), 11-C
(1650–1680), and 12-A (1680–1710).
Some examples of kiseru artefacts excavated from sites in Kyoto are listed in Table
2. These objects were identiﬁed and attributed in the same way as discussed above forkiseru from Hokkaido.
Artefacts were placed into a chronological sequence by relating to cultural layers in
the chronology of Kyoto in order to determine relative dates for kiseru (Figure 4).
© Japanese Archaeological Association

137

FUKASAWA Yuriko

Table 2.

List of Kyoto site names

Phase11-A (1590–1620)
No.

Site nameHokyotai

1

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Sanbo Junicho

◎

Kata

Hole

Kata

Hole

Phase 11-B (1620–1650)
No.

Site nameHokyotai◎

2

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Sanbo Junicho

3

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Sanbo Junicho

4

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Sanbo Junicho

5

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Sanbo Junicho

6

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Nibo Jucho

7

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Yonbo Juchome

◎
◎

◎
◎

◎

8

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Yonbo Juchome◎

9

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Yonbo Juchome◎

10

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Nibo Juyoncho

11

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Nibo Juyoncho

12

Heiankyo Sakyo Sanjo Yonbo Juchome◎

Phase 11-C (1650–1680)
Site nameHokyotai

Kata

Hole

◎

13

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Sanbo Junicho

14

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Sanbo Junicho◎

15

Heiankyo Sakyo Sanjo Sanbo Junicho◎

16

Heiankyo Sakyo Sanjo Sanbo Junicho◎

17

Heiankyo Sakyo Nijo Sanbo Junicho◎

18

Heiankyo Sakyo Nijo Sanbo Junicho

◎

◎

19

Heiankyo Sakyo Nijo Sanbo Junicho

Hokyotai

Kata◎

Phase 12-A (1680–1710)
Site name20

Hole

Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Sanbo Junicho

Having examined the kiseru excavated from Kyoto, placing them into a chronology
on the basis of attribution, it is possible to note that types with, and without, hokyotai(reinforcement band) existed in the phase 11-B, some of these examples had both kata(shoulder), while holes were also present on both types. Thus it seems likely that thepre-1667 present kiseru in Hokkaido correlate to phase 11-B in the Kyoto chronology
both in terms of type and date. This result implies that no large hiatus in chronological© Japanese Archaeological Association

138

CULTURAL CONTACT AND TRADE BETWEEN THE AINU AND JAPANESE PRIOR TO 1667

sequence is seen between Hokkaido and Kyoto. It seems to be more appropriate to take
into account the Kyoto chronology than the Koizumi Chronology. For example, kiseru
5 in phase 11-B resembles examples 7, and 10 from Iruekashi, while kiseru 14 from the
Yuoichashi site is an example that lacks a hokyotai. Some of these examples also havehizara holes, while kiseru 10 from phase 11-B resembles specimen 9 from Iruekashi,
another example of kiseru that lacks a hokyotai. Similarly, kiseru 4 from phase 11-B andspecimen 16 from phase 11-C resemble kiseru 11 from Iruekashi, additional examples
of artefacts with hokyotai but not hizara holes. Kiseru 6 from phase 11-B resembles
specimen 2 from irifune, an example with both hokyotai and kata, while kiseru 1 fromphase 11-A resembles specimen 5 from Shibecharichashi, and specimen 3 from Irifune.
Finally, kiseru 6 resembles number 2 from Irifune, examples that possess kata. This
comparative chronological examination of morphological characteristics indicates thatkiseru collected from the Iruekashi site most likely originated from Kyoto.
The following section examines archaeological ﬁnds at the workshop site in order tounderstand an area, where kiseru were handcrafted in Kyoto.

An excavated metal workshop in Kyoto
A metal workshop was excavated at the Heiankyo Sakyo Sanjo Shibo Jucho ato site
(Figure 5), (Kyoto-shi Maizobunkazai Kenkyujo 2004). Examination of this site places
it within phase11 (1650–1680) of the Kyoto chronology. The signiﬁcance of the site isthat the technological process of metal production from copper to brass can be identiﬁedarchaeologically at this workshop. Evidence for this technological change includes
the presence of artefacts related to metal working, including crucibles, lids, stands,
and tuyeres, as well as pieces of a wall, lids, furnaces structures. Of these, the lattercomprise three different kinds of furnaces; small and large in size as well as rectangularin shape. In addition, a wheel, ditches, a line of crucibles, and post holes were also
excavated along with a disposal pit at the north side of the workshop area that containedhuge amounts of debris from crucibles, charcoal, and the by-products of metal working.
The working period evidenced by this site was approximately 30 years, divided into
ﬁve stages (A–E) from the earliest to the end of workshop based on structural analyses.
One signiﬁcant observation is that by the time of stage C, metal was probably reﬁned
using the small rectangular structure and big furnaces, while by the time of stage D,
further evidence of an increase in the number of furnaces and other structures suggeststhat this was a prosperous time for the workshop. Finally, during stage E, archaeologicalevidence points to reduction in the size of the workshop as the number of furnaces was
reduced and this facility gradually declined.
Archaeometallurgical analyses carried out on artefacts such as slag and crucibles,© Japanese Archaeological Association

139

FUKASAWA Yuriko

as well as some residue from furnaces surfaces, indicates that a change in the reﬁning
process from copper to brass production occurred during stage D. Results indicate that
copper was reﬁned during stages A and B, the early phases of the workshop, while brasswith an 8 : 2 ratio between copper and zinc occurred from stage C onwards. Evidence
for zinc metal was also found on the workshop ﬂoor from stage C onwards, as well as
adherence to crucibles and the furnace lids. The presence of zinc indicates that brass, abinary alloy of copper and zinc, was reﬁned in this workshop from stage C onwards.
Additional archaeometallurgical analyses also demonstrate the presence of slightly
different copper: zinc ratios within the brass slag from the workshop, including 9 : 1,
8 : 2, and 7 : 3. These differences indicate that different qualities of brass were being
used for different purposes and it is clear that a transition took place at this site fromthe production of copper-objects reﬁned in small furnaces during stages A and B, to the
production of brass-objects during the stages C and D. It is also clear that brass handicraft
was practiced at this site during phase 11-C (1650–1680). Finally, it is important to notethat zinc as a raw material does not occur in Japan but must be imported; the earliest
records of zinc imports are in 1636 and 1640 from the Dutch, and in 1641 from China(Hara 2000), time periods that are consistent with the presence of a brass handicraft
being carried out in Kyoto at this time.
Additional archaeological evidence includes the presence of 12 further sites related tometal work scattered around the area of the primary workshop site. Artefacts excavatedfrom these sites that are associated with metal work including metal and copper slag,
tuyeres, wall of furnaces, grinding stones, crucibles, molds, including for mirrors andsword- accessories, as well as copper pieces, fragments of other metals, and a copperladle.
The Kyoto handicraft area encompassed almost 300 m2 and was bounded by thestreets between Sakyo-Ichijo and Sanjo to the north and south, the streets between
Sanbo-Kyucho and Jugocho in the west, and those between Shibo Rokucho, and Jucho
to the east. The metal workshop itself was located in the area bounded by the streets
between Oike-dori and Oshikoji-dori in a west-east direction, and those between
Yanaginobanba-dori and Tominokoji-dori in a south-north direction (Figure 5).
Since the street names in present-day Kyoto are the same as they were in the 17th
century, it is possible to locate exactly where these sites were, and as well as to identify
them in historical documents published at the time. Furthermore, an interview with apresent-day metal craftsman, Chikueido Eishin, revealed that his work also includes the
production of metal kiseru. Thus, technology for kiseru production remains intact inpresent-day Kyoto, enabling a direct understanding of this handcrafts process within aworkshop in the same area of the city. Chikueido Eishin’s workshop is in fact located just
one street behind the archaeological site of original metal workshop.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

140

CULTURAL CONTACT AND TRADE BETWEEN THE AINU AND JAPANESE PRIOR TO 1667

Historical documents that discuss kiseru in Kyoto
The metal workshop site discussed above was clearly mentioned in a number ofhistorical documents. Of these one noted that “copper craftspeople were on the street of
Yanaginobanba, down to the south from Oshikoji” (Asai 1678), while another mentions
that the “wholesale of brass was on the street of Yanaginobanba, down to the southfrom Oshikoji, Shichiuemon” (Suiundo 1689). These descriptions match exactly the
Yanaginobanba street name as well as the period between 1665 and 1685 when themetal workshop site encompassed Kyoto phase 11-C. These records also imply thatthe transition from copper handicraft to brass handicraft took place at this location(Kyoto-shi Maizobunkazai Kenkyujo 2004). Historical documents also describe how
craftspeople who made “mirrors,” “ornaments,” “copper handicrafts,” and “brass
handicrafts” gathered together in order to reﬁne and produce metal work, and that theirworkshops were located within the area bordered by streets such as Imadegawa-dorito the north, Shijo-dori to the south, Tominokoji-dori to the east, and Saidoin-dori to
the west. The most interesting description, however, that can be gleaned from available
historical records is that, in this area, a component of kiseru production was located ina block two streets further down from Ainomachi-dori street. In this block, kiseru shops
were located side-by-side on both the east and west sides of the street, and all produced
kiseru professionally (Asai 1665). In addition, documents subsequently written in 1830
(Kitamura 1830) suggest that numerous kiseru shops were also located near Daibutsu at
the Sanjo Ohashi Bridge, and that two streets down the Sakuraya workshop was locatedat Tominokoji. This latter point is important because Sakuraya-made kiseru were wellknown at this time in particular they were made of brass. This location is exactly the area
where the excavated metal-working workshop discussed above between Tominokoji and
Yanaginobanba (Figure 5). Although, there is the obvious time gap between terminationsof the 1680, it is possible that production of brass kiseru was continued subsequently byother artisans around this location until 1830.
Thus, for all the reasons discussed above, it must be considered likely that kiseru werebeing manufactured in Kyoto by 1605, around the same time that smoking practices
became fashionable. It is also possible to hypothesise that kiseru from the Iruekashisite dated to before 1667 were produced somewhere in the surroundings or near to Nijo,
Sanjo, or Tominokoji in Kyoto. Kiseru excavated from the Shibechiari site are made ofcopper, predating the introduction of brass production, these artefacts can be dated tobefore 1650 based on the archaeological evidence. Based on the chronology and typologyof these objects and their close resemblance to kiseru from Hokkaido, it can be concluded
that kiseru from the Iruekashi and Shibechiari sites would be equivalent to phase 11-B in
the Kyoto chronology. Finally, brass kiseru excavated from the Setanaichashi site must be© Japanese Archaeological Association

141

FUKASAWA Yuriko

Figure 5. Archaeological excavation site of the metal workshop site superimposed onto a street
map of and Kyoto showing Ainomachi-dori, Yanaginobanba-dori, Tominokoji-dori and Oshikoji-dori

not dated to 1640, but dated to the period before 1741, as discussed previously due to thedate that the production of brass material was ﬁrst initiated.

The existence of a northern trade route
One important ethnographic record relevant to this research is the diary of the voyage
of Captain Maarten Gerritsz Vries, a Dutch captain who sailed in 1643, from Batavia,
Java, to look for the ‘gold and silver island’ (Leupe 1858, Baba 1942, Kitagamae 1983,
Fukasawa 1998). Vries’s ship was, however, driven off course to the north by a storm andarrived near the coast of Hiro, at Tokachi on the south- east coast of Hokkaido (Figure2).
This record mentions that the Ainu were very fond of tobacco, which they called© Japanese Archaeological Association

142

CULTURAL CONTACT AND TRADE BETWEEN THE AINU AND JAPANESE PRIOR TO 1667

“tanpack,” and discusses the fact that tobacco leaves were traded alongside rice, cloth,sake-alcohol, and lead-rings, by ships travelling from Matsumae to the bay of Atsukeshi
on the north-east coast of Hokkaido. On the basis of this ethnographic evidence, it isclear that the Ainu who inhabited the east of Hokkaido were already enjoying tobacco
traded from Japan by 1643. What remains unclear, however, is whether they used
Japanese-made metal kiseru as smoking device or ones made by the Ainu locally. It is
not impossible to hypothesise that metal kiseru, used by traders and sailors themselves
were among the goods exchanged with the Ainu, since Basho (the trading post of the
Matsumae domain) at Atsukeshi on the north-east coast was established in 1635, andships could travel further north from Atsukeshi (Figure 2), to trade.
The 18th century Kitamaebune trade route was a westward shipping and trade route run
by merchants in the Kyoto–Osaka region that was established by direct shipping between
Hokkaido and Osaka. When this Kitamaebune trade was ﬁrst initiated, Hokkaido
products reached Osaka by ship directly via the Inland Sea of Japan, while Japanese
products from Kyoto and Osaka were traded back to Hokkaido. However, it is also clearthat a westward shipping and trade along the coastline of the Sea of Japan existed prior
to the Kitamaebune trade route. This route, referred to here as pre-Kitamaebune trade,must have been existed to Hokkaido by 1600, because the port of Yoichi had been built
by this time by the Matsumae domain to serve Basho (Kaiho 1985).
Marine navigation along the Sea of Japan coastline is known to extend back to theMiddle Ages and has been referred to as the konbu-trade (seaweed-trade) route. For
example, a Matsumae historical document written in 1646 called the Shinra no kiroku(vol.one), mentioned that, at the height of the prosperity of Usukeshi (present-day
Hakodate), (Figure 2), ships came and went regularly three-times a year from Wakasa(in Fukui Prefecture) (Figure 2), (Kaiho 1985). In addition, the Teikin Ourai document
written sometime between the 14th and 15th centuries mentions that when konbu products
from Uga in present-day Hakodate (Figure 2), were brought into Obama, in Wakasa bay,
their name was subsequently amended to Wakasa-konbu (Kaiho 1985).
It seems clear that pre-Kitamaebune marine trade took place between Hokkaido
and Kyoto via the ports of Tsuruga, Wakasa, and Obama, the nearest ports to Kyoto,necessitating a crossing of Lake Biwa by boat (Figure 2). Thus products from the north
were brought into Kyoto via this route, and vice versa. Consequently, such marine tradeintroduced the Japanese products to Ainu society.

Conclusions
In conclusion, having examined the archaeological evidence for kiseru from both
Hokkaido and Kyoto, it is clear that these objects lacking hokyotai appear by phase© Japanese Archaeological Association

143

FUKASAWA Yuriko

11B of Kyoto chronology, dated between 1620 and 1650. Kiseru of this type were ﬁrst
recognized in society around 1634 following technological improvements. Thus it is,therefore, possible to determine that kiseru lacking hokyotai present at Iruekashi prior
to 1667 originated in Kyoto, a hypothesis that is, corroborated by a series of historical
documents. This conclusion implies that kiseru had diffused to the Ainu at Iruekashi
sometime between 1634 and 1667, which were utilising metal versions of these smoking
devices at the same time as Japanese. As marine trade along the coastline of the Sea
of Japan had been in existence for a long time connecting the main island of Japanand Hokkaido, the presences of Japanese-made products indicate close cultural contact.
Therefore, Ainu society prior to 1667 was already inﬂuenced, at least to some extent, byJapanese economic expansion.

Acknowledgements
This research was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant number JP22242024). I
wish to gratefully acknowledge all those who allowed me to examine kiseru in theircollections and gave me advice during the course of this work. Thanks are also due
to: Otachime Hajime, and Hirao Masayuki of Kyoto-shi Maizobunkazai Kenkyujo,
Okamura Katsuyuki of Osaka Bunkazai Kenkyujo, Yabunaka Koji of the Shin Hidakacho Board of Education, Ogawa Yasukazu of the Yoichi-cho Board of Education, andthe Hokkaido Maizobunnkazai Centre. I also thank Chikueido Eishin who provided
a number of important technological comments on kiseru, as well as Ilona Bausch ofTokyo University who offered valuable comments on writing this paper.

References
Asai, R. 1665. (1993 re-print), Kyo suzume (Town guidebook for Kyoto), Shinsyukyouto
jusho. Kyoto: Rinsenshoten.
Asai, R. 1678. (1993 re-print), Kyo suzume ato oi (Town guidebook in Kyoto), Shinsyukyouto
jusho. Kyoto: Rinsenshoten.
Baba, O. 1942. Nihon hokutan chiiki no Ainu to tabako (Ainu and tobacco in northern
Japan). Kodai Bunka 13-11: 592–603.
Biratori-cho Iseki Chosakai. 1989. Iruekashi iseki (Excavation report of the Iruekashi site).
Biratori-cho.
Fukasawa, Y. 1998. Ainu archaeology as ethohistory, Iron technology among the Saru Ainu
of Hokkaido, Japan, in the 17th century. BAR International Series 744. Oxford: British
Archaeological Report.
Fukasawa, Y. 2014. 17 seiki Hokkaido shutsudo no kinzokusei kiseru ni tsuite (Metal kiseru© Japanese Archaeological Association

144

CULTURAL CONTACT AND TRADE BETWEEN THE AINU AND JAPANESE PRIOR TO 1667

from Hokkaido in the 17th century). Chu-Kinsei Hoppo koeki to Ezochi no naikokuka
ni kansuru kenkyu (Studies on Japanisation in Ezo island based on the northern tradein the Medieval and early Modern period): 163–169. Academic report of the JSPS
22242024
Hara, Y. 2000. Kinsei no Kinzoku ibutsu (Metal artefacts of the early Modem period).
Kagaden Saibou: 96–101. Tokyo: Tokyo University Press.
Hokkaido Maizobunkazai Centre. 1986. Yuoichashiato, Poromoichashiato, Nibutani iseki(Excavation report of the Yuoichashi, Poromoichashi, and Nibutani sites).
Hokkaido Maizobunkazai Centre. 1989. Bibi 8 iseki. Misawagawa isekigun XIII (Excavation
report of the Bibi 8 site, Misawagawa group of site XIII).
Hokkaido Maizobunkazai Centre. 1992. Bibi 8 iseki, Misawagawa isekigun XV (Excavation
report of the Bibi 8 site, Misawagawa group of sites XV).
Hokkaido Maizobunkazai Centre. 2005. Morikawa 3 iseki (Annual research report). Chosa
Nenpo 18.
Hokkaido Maizobunkazai Centre. 2006. Morikawa 3 iseki (Excavation report of the
Morikawa 3 site). (2). Mori-cho.
Hokkaido Maizobunkazai Centre. 2011. Matsumae-cho Fukuyama jokamachi iseki(Excavation report of the Fukuyama jokamachi site, Matsumae-cho).
Kaiho, M. 1985. Shiryo to kataru Hokkaido no rekishi (History of Hokkaido based on
written sources). Sapporo: Hokkaido Shuppan Kikaku Centre.
Kitagamae, Y. 1983. 1643 nen Ainu shakai tanboki, Fureesu sentai kokai kiroku (Voyage logof Vries in 1643 exploring the Ainu society). Tokyo: Yuzankaku.
Kitahiyama-cho Board of Education. 1980. Setanai-chashi iseki (Excavation report of the
Setanai Chashi site). Kitahiyama-cho.
Kitamura, N. 1830 (1996 re-print). Kiyu shoran (Manners and customs in the Edo period).
Nihon Zuihitsu Taisei. Tokyo: Yoshikawa kobunkan.
Koizumi, H. 1983. Edo o horu (Excavations in the Edo period). Tokyo: Kashiwashobo.
Komori, T. & N. Kamimura. 1996. Kyoto no toshiiseki Kara shitsudosuru doki nohennenteki kenkyu (Chronological studies of pottery typology in Kyoto). Kenkyu kiyo.
3: 187–271. Kyoto: Kyoto-shi Maizobunkazai Kenkyujyo.
Koshida, K. 1988. Hokkaido niokeru Chu-Kinsei kokogaku no genjo to kadai (Perspectivesof Hokkaido archaeology in the Medieval and the early Modern periods). Bushitsu
Bunka 50: 51–64.
Kyoto-shi Maizobunkazai Kenkyujo, 2001. Heiankyo Sakyo Nijo Shibo Jucho ato(Excavation report of the Heiankyo Sakyo Nijo Shibo Jucho ato site).
Kyoto-shi Maizobunkazai Kenkyujo, 2003. Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Nibo Juyocho ato(Excavation report of the Heiankyo Sakyo Shijo Nibo Juyocho ato site).
Kyoto-shi Maizobunkazai Kenkyujo, 2004. Heiankyo Sakyo Sanjo Shibo Jucho ato(Excavation report of the Heiankyo Sakyo Sanjo Shibo Jucho ato site).
Kyoto-shi Maizobunkazai Kenkyujo, 2006. Heian kyo Sakyo Shijo Sanbo Junicho ato(Excavation report of the Heian kyo Sakyo Shijo Sanbo Junicho ato site).
© Japanese Archaeological Association

145

FUKASAWA Yuriko

Leupe, P.A. (ed.) 1858. Reiz van Marten gerritsz Vries in 1643 near het norden en oosten
van Japan, volgens het jornaal gehoden door C.J. Coen, op het schip Castricum.
Amsterdam: Frederik Muller.
Mineyama, I. 1979. Setanai chashi (Excavation report of the Setanai chashi site). Board of
Education, Setana-cho.
Mori, H. 1993. Hokkaido no iseki kara shitsudoshita kinzokusei kiseru no jitsunendai(Dating of metal kiseru in Hokkaido). Hokkaido Kokogaku 29: 57–68.
Nakae, K. 1986. Edo no Shokunin (Craftsmen in Edo-city). Tokyo: Tairyusha.
Nakagawahouzando (ed.) 1824 (1958 re-print). Edo Kaimono Hitori Annai (Shopping
Guidebook in Edo). Tokyo: Kinsei Fuzoku Kenkyukai.
Sekine, T. 2000. Ainu bo no fukusohin (Burial goods of the Ainu). Bushitsu Bunka 76:
38–54.
Sekine, T. 2003. Edo jidai no Kitsuen ni kannsuru koukogakuteki kento (Archaeologicalinvestigation of smoking in the Edo period). Bunnka 64-1, 2: 69–88.
Sekine, T. 2014. Chu-Kinsei no Ezochi to Hoppo Koeki (Ezo island and the Northern tradein the Medieval and early Modern period). Tokyo: Yoshikawakobunkan.
Suiundo, K. 1689 (1993 re-print). Kyo habutae oridome (Guidebook of Kyoto in the Edo
period). Kyoto: Rinsenshoten.
Tabako Sangyo Kosaikai 1985. Tabako to Shio no Hakubutsukan (Booklet of the Tobaccoand Salt Museum).
Tanaka, T. 1988. Kiseru. Kiseru: 234–239. Tokyo: Tabako to shio no Hakubutsukan.
Tsubame-shi Sangyo Shiryokan 1999. Kiseru Yatate no subete (Booklet of the Tubame
Industrial Material Museum).
Utagawa, H. 1984. Kono Hiromichi Noto, Kokohen 5. Sapporo: Hokkaido Shuppan Kikaku
Centre.
Utagawa, H. 1991. Hoppo chiiki no Kiseru to Kitsuen Girei (Kiseru and Smoking mannerin the North). Tokyo Daigaku Bungakubu Kokogaku Kenkyushitsu Kenkyu Kiyo 10:
51–101.
Utagawa, H. 1996. Hoppo chiiki no Kiseru (Kiseru in the northern area). Tabako to
Minzokubunka: 12–16. Abashiri: Hokkaido Museum of Northern Peoples.
Yoichi-cho Board of Education. 1999. Irifune iseki niokeru kokogakuteki chosa (Excavation
report of the Irifune site).

© Japanese Archaeological Association

146