ARCHAEOLOGIA JAPONICAJomon Period
NAKAMURA Oki1
There is an increase in studies that try to picture Jomon society and its changes moreclearly. Use of radiocarbon dating is progressing in order to pursue social change
more accurately. Yano Kenichi compared the increase/decrease of the number of sites
over 100-year periods in Early Jomon in Kansai region and Middle Jomon in Nagano
Prefecture. He noted that change was slow in the ﬁrst location over a few hundredyears, whereas the latter saw a drastic change in about 100 years [‘Oshigatamon DokiIseki no Kazu no Henka (Change in the Number of Sites with Oshigatamon Pottery)’In Dai 10-kai Tokai Jomon Kenkyukai: Tokai Chihou ni Okeru Jomon Soki Zenyo noShomondai (10th Conference of Tokai Jomon Kenkykai: Problems of Early Late Jomonin Tokai Region)]. The First Symposium of Tokai Jomon Kenkyukai held at Nagoya
University, was an ambitious challenge to picture regional society by consolidating
studies on residence, subsistence, funeral rituals, and distribution [Dai 1-kai Tokai Jomon
Kenkyukai Shinpojiumu Yokoshu: Tohoku Chiho ni Okeru Jomon Jidai Banki Zenhanno Shakai (Proceedings for the First Symposium of Tokai Jomon Kenkyukai: Early
Late Jomon Society in Tokai Region)]. There is a study to discuss social relationships
from the perspective of distribution of resources. Toizumi Takeji theorized fromsubsistence analysis a ﬂexible residence system where people moved from village tovillage for seasonal subsistence activities on the eastern coast of Tokyo Bay in LateJomon [‘Dobutsu Shigen Riyo kara Mita Jomon Koki ni Okeru Tokyowan Togan noChiiki Shakai (Regional Society on the Eastern Coast of Tokyo Bay, Seen From Useof Animal Resources)’ Dobutsu Kokogaku (Zooarchaeology) 30]. TSUMURA Hiroomi
and TATEISHI Toru’s ‘Jomon Jidai no Kanto Chiho ni Okeru Kokuyoseki no Idokeiro/
Nettowaku no Hensen: Sanchi Bunseki to Kukan Bunseki no Yugo (Distribution Pathof Obsidian and Transition of Networks in the Jomon Period Kanto Region: Fusion ofProduction Site Analysis and Species Analysis)’ [Dobutsu Kokogaku (Zooarchaeology)30] discussed distribution change in each production site from trend surface analysis
using GIS, based on obsidian ratio data and where it came from at different sites. An
important problem was pointed out for funeral system study. YAMADA Yasuhiro
1 ResearchCenter for Pan-Paciﬁc Civilizations, Ritsumeikan University, 56–1 Tojiinkitamachi, Kita
Ward, Kyoto 603–8577, Japan(r-ppc@st.ritsumei.ac.jp)
JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 3 (2015): 52–53© Japanese Archaeological Association

52

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 3 (2015): 52–53

TRENDS IN ARCHAEOLOGY
Title
IN JAPAN

expressed a concern that since a kinship structure theory on human bones excavated inTokai region analyzed collective data that covers a few hundred years in time, it may
have misunderstood chronological change. One example is differences in teeth extraction
between contemporary groups [‘Jomon Jidai no Shinzoku Kozoron ni Okeru Mondaiten:
Kokogakuteki Hohoron no Kihon ni Kaiki Surutameni (Problem of Kinship Structure
Theory in the Jomon Period: Returning to the Basics of Archaeological Methodology)’
In Watashino Kokogaku: Niwa Yuichi Sensei Tainin Kinenn Ronshu (My Archaeology:
Memorial Theses for Retirement of Prof. NIWA Yuichi)].
There is a big gap between individual researcher’s opinions on the hierarchy of Jomon
society. Takahashi Ryuzaburo assumes that Jomon society had a hierarchy based on
individual rank, or was in the process of constructing the hierarchy [‘Jomon Shakai noFukuzatsuka (Complication of Jomon Society)’ In Koza Nihon no Kokogaku 4: Jomon
Jidai Ge (Lecture on Japanese Archaeology 4: Jomon Period 2)]. On the other hand,
Imamura Keiji strongly criticized the hierarchy hypothesis saying that is based more on
researchers wishful thinking than concrete evidence [‘Jomon Jidai Kenkyushi (StudyHistory of the Jomon Period)’ In Koza Nihon no Kokogaku 3: Jomon Jidai Jo (Lectureon Japanese Archaeology 3: Jomon Period 1)]. Yamada Yasuhiro thinks that Jomon
society did not always have a hierarchy, but it moved between complicated and simple
phases and gradually made the transition to complicated society [‘Jomon no Haka kara
Mita Kaiso Shakai (Hierarchical Society Seen from Jomon Graves)’ In Jiten Haka noKokogaku (Dictionary on Grave Archaeology)].
In order to discuss the relationship between the natural environment and humanactivities, attention should be given to inﬂuence of time-space scale. Tamada Yoshihideand Shoda Shin’ya interpreted activation of rituals in east Japan during Late and Final
Jomon as social measures to counter a deteriorating natural environment [‘Jomon Bunkano Teitai to Henshitsu (Stagnation and Deterioration of Jomon Culture)’ In Koza Nihonno Kokogaku 3: Jomon Jidai Jo (Lecture on Japanese Archaeology 3: Jomon Period 1)].
On the other hand, Yamamoto Naoto interprets the appearance of circled wooden pillars
in Hokuriku region in Final Jomon as a cultural inﬂuence from other regions [JomonJidai no Seigyo to Shakai (Subsistence and Society in Jomon Period)]. It seems elementsof human society tend to be stressed more in micro scale space-time.

© Japanese Archaeological Association53