ARCHAEOLOGIA JAPONICA

Jomon Period
OSADA Tomonari1
This ﬁscal year continued to see various research activities on the Jomon period. While
many excavation reports on the Jomon period were published, release of excavation
reports on websites such as Repository of Archaeological Reports (Comprehensive
Database of Archaeological Site Reports in Japan from June 2015 [http://sitereports.
nabunken.go.jp/]) and others is also progressing. Fiscal 2014 study trends of Jomonarchaeology were overviewed; referring to such released reports and existing overviewsof Jomon archaeological study.
Since the 1990s, regional Jomon study groups have been active mainly in westernJapan, but this ﬁscal year saw regional study in eastern Japan. In the Kanto region,studies of subsistence, utilization of resources, and trade are being developed under
the concept of regional resources. The 2014 convention of the Japanese Archaeological
Association held in Hokkaido had two symposia entitled “Kaizuka Kenkyu no Sin-Shiten(New Viewpoints of Shell Midden Study)” and “Haka to Monumento (Graves andMonuments).” In the latter, stone circles, circle mound graves and mounded features were
examined by organization of grave systems, and KOSUGI Yasushi pointed out that “theexistence of social regions, roles and nature” as well as “increasing complexity of socialrelationships and social structures” could be assumed from this examination. Whileregional study is maturing, there were studies on the framework of the Jomon period
itself. There were studies on time range such as the beginning and end of the Jomon
period, as well as spatial range of Hokkaido and the Nansei Islands.
For pottery typology, there is a decline in the establishment of new pottery types
and indications of stage classiﬁcation, and there were studies on regional distribution oftypology.
On features study, TANIGUCHI Yasuhiro expressed the necessity of socioecological
viewpoints in settlement study, and ABE Yuji examined stone paving features of stonepaved dwellings. Also, Archaeology Quarterly No. 130 had feature article on grave
systems. For artifact study, there were efforts to understand artifacts as a whole or withina site rather than individual studies, but it stayed somewhat low key.
Cooperation with related sciences progressed, and especially the study of plant1 1–109–2 Yatsuya-cho, Nakagawa Ward, Nagoya 454–0835 Japan

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 4 (2016): 94–95© Japanese Archaeological Association94

TRENDS IN●●●●
ARCHAEOLOGYTitle ●●●● IN JAPANmaterial stood out. Research results of “Joint Research: History of the Relationshipbetween Human and Plants in the Jomon Period” by National Museum of Japanese
History was published as Kokomade Wakatta Jomonjin no Shokubutsu Riyo (PlantUtilization of Jomon People). It explains well the current studies of plant utilization inthe Jomon period. Progress of the pressed mark replica method was outstanding, andNAKAYAMA Seiji and others pointed out utilization of Glycine, Ceratotropis and Perillaas plant utilization in the Chubu region during Middle Jomon, proposing Jomon typecultivation in the Chubu highlands. YAMADA Masahisa who leads plant utilization
study of the Jomon period, advocated Jomon period study through research of plant
artifacts, and he stated the necessity to discuss “formation of residential areas” in sites,such as promotion of the relationship within a region between groups by development of“small space economy,” including forest utilization as a space and resource.
Thus, the 2014 Jomon period study could be overviewed as a grouping of new research
directions based on existing studies. Organization of timelines in pottery study andcreation of regional culture represented by deepening of regional study seems to show
an inclination of the study to reevaluation of “the Jomon period.” At the same time, it iscreating a new problem of how people understood and shared other regional culture thatexisted side by side in time and space.

© Japanese Archaeological Association95