Lineages of Deer Antler Sword Ornaments
YAMADA Shunsuke1
ABSTRACTThis article discusses the historical signiﬁcance of deer antler sword ornaments with reference tothe sites from which they were excavated and the shapes of the ornaments. Three lineages (A, B, andC) were detected and the periods when the ornaments were made and used were clariﬁed based onreference artifacts in the same site. It was found that early lineage A deer antler sword ornaments
were more frequently excavated from salt-making and settlement sites than in kofun sites andthat some of the sites were the ornament production sites. Most of the lineage B and C ornaments
were excavated from kofun as opposed to underground corridor and cave tombs, and there was atendency especially for those of lineage C to be excavated from kofun with strong traits indicating
immigration from the continent. Early deer antler sword ornaments appear to have been made andused by itinerant people, while the later lineage B and C ornaments were manufactured by rulers
and local ruling elites, who imitated and enhanced items of lineage A and distributed improved
versions to people of itinerant occupations and immigrants in order to construct or strengthen
relationships with them.
KEYWORDS: deer antler sword ornaments, Kofun period, Japan

Editor’s note (by SASAKI Ken’ichi)
This is a full translation of YAMADA Shunsuke’s paper published in No. 42 (2017)of Nihon Kōkogaku, the Japanese-language journal of the Japanese Archaeological
Association. Yamada received the Japanese Archaeological Association Award for thispublication in 2018. This paper is a good contribution to Kofun-Period (middle third to
early seventh centuries A.D.) archaeology, as sword ornaments made from deer antler had
previously been rarely investigated. Based on careful analyses of the sword ornaments, theauthor has proposed a convincing hypothesis on the historical background of these rather
unusual artifacts.
Because this paper was originally written in Japanese and intended for a Japaneseaudience, its structure and logical ﬂow are of Japanese style, i.e., the author takes a strictly
inductive approach. The author ﬁrst conducts analysis of the deer-antler sword ornaments,
paying attention to their morphologies and the parts of the deer antler from which the raw
1 Faculty of Letters, Chiba University, 1–33 Yayoi-cho, Inage Ward, Chiba 263–0022, Japan (s-yamada@chiba-u.jp)
Category: Original Article Received: 2 May 2016; Accepted: 25 May 2016; Translated: January 2019
Originally published in ‘Nihon-kokogaku: Journal of the Japanese Archaeological Association’ 42
JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 7 (2019): 3–31

YAMADA Shunsuke

materials for the ornaments were taken. Correlation between the two attributes lead theauthor to distinguish three “lineages” of the ornaments. The author then investigates theassociation of ornaments of each lineage with other artifacts whose dates are relatively
known. This allows the author to determine when the ornaments of the three different
lineages were produced and used: lineage A from the late fourth century to the beginningof the ﬁfth century; lineage C from the middle ﬁfth century to the beginning of the sixth
century; and lineage B, albeit lacking sufﬁcient data, probably appearing at the beginningof the ﬁfth century.
Finally, the author investigates the nature of the archaeological sites where these sword
ornaments were discovered. He ﬁnds that those of lineage A have been predominantly
discovered at salt-production sites and settlement sites in the coastal region. Meanwhile,
those of lineages B and C have been discovered at burial sites. Particularly noteworthy isthat the burial sites where those of lineage C have been discovered are underground corridor
and cave tombs, which are very unusual in the context of the Kofun Period, during which
the construction of mounded tombs was predominant. These rather unusual burial sites areoften associated with immigrants. The author concludes that lineage A ornaments were ﬁrst
produced by itinerant people and that those of lineages B and C, which were modelled after
the lineage A ornaments, were distributed to strengthen the relationship with itinerant andimmigrant peoples in peripheral regions.
As is the case with this paper, the ﬁrst two-thirds of a Japanese archaeology paper are
devoted to typological and chronological analyses of artifacts in detail. Reading the ﬁrst
two-thirds might give readers from the English-speaking world the impression that Japanesearchaeologists pay little attention to theory. As this paper demonstrates, however, the author
successfully sheds light on the nature of Kofun-Period society. The editor hopes that readers
outside Japan will not only gain some understanding of Kofun-Period history, but will also
become familiar with the Japanese style of writing.

Introduction
Research on deer antler sword ornaments dates back to a 1905 study by Ōno Nobutarō1 (1905)
and to the ensuing discussion concerning the use of the ornaments for sword decoration
among Takahashi Kenji (1908, 1913), Umehara Sueji (1920), Suenaga Masao (1938), andothers. More recently, drawing on ﬁndings from new excavations and reexamining many
© Japanese Archaeological Association

4

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

speciﬁc artifacts, Kobayashi Yukio (1976a) published a study that corrected errors in previous
studies on the restoration of deer antler sword ornaments. However, he focused his attention
solely on the arc-and-straight-line patterns (chokkomon) engraved on the ornaments, and did
not provide an adequate chronological perspective and view of production and distributionof sword ornaments. Research came to a halt for over 30 years, but basic study has again
progressed in the past decade. Inoue Kazuki (2010a), for example, produced a complete
compendium of the study of deer antler sword ornaments excavated from some 292 sites,
thereby laying ﬁrm foundations for study in this ﬁeld. Nagatomo Shin (2011) presented athorough analysis mainly of the deer antler parts chosen for crafting ornaments. The authorof the present paper, too, provided basic data on some 60 deer antler sword ornaments in thecollection of the Tokyo National Museum, as well as outlined the changes that took place inthese ornaments based on examination of the deer antler parts used for the ornaments andthe methods of engraving the chokkomon patterns (Yamada 2013).
This paper charts the lineages of deer antler sword ornaments and organizes theornaments chronologically. It clariﬁes the historical signiﬁcance of the ornaments based ona typological study of artifacts by excavation site.

Typological Examination
Deer antler sword ornaments are located at the pommel, the collar of the sword grip, themouth of the scabbard, and at the tip of the scabbard (see Figure 1 for the terminologyof this paper). Kobayashi Yukio (1976a) further divides the collar ornament into threeparts—“protruding handguard” (hamidashi-tsuba, the central widest part), “collar” (tsuba;
the pommel-side part decorated with arc and straight-line patterns), and the “blade collar”(habaki, the scabbard-side part), but here I describe these three parts as “grip side,” “center,”and “scabbard side,” respectively.

Pommel Ornament

Pommel ornaments can be roughly divided in two in terms of shape: cylindrical and wedgeshaped. Among wedge-shaped ﬁnds, however, no example preserves their original shape inentirety, so this analysis will examine cylindrical pommel ornaments.
Cylindrical pommel ornaments are of four types, as shown in Figure 2. Type A consistsof the pommel, grip (tsuka’ai), and collar made from a single piece of antler. The piece is cut
from the section from the antler base and ﬁrst tine base to the beam between the ﬁrst andsecond tines. This type corresponds to Type A II of wooden sword hilt ornamentation asclassiﬁed by Okita Masaaki (Okita 1985a). Among Type A artifacts are those excavated at theŌi Hirano site S01 No. 5 burial facility, Fukuoka prefecture (Shiraki 2004), Shakameyama
tomb No. 1, Ehime prefecture (Sakamoto 1981), Kozakaai site, Osaka prefecture (Yao-shi© Japanese Archaeological Association

5

YAMADA Shunsuke

Figure 1. Deer Antler Sword Ornaments and Antler Parts(Compiled by altering a ﬁgure in Inoue and Yamada eds. 2013)© Japanese Archaeological Association

6

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

Figure 2. Cylindrical Pommel Ornaments: Classiﬁcation by Shape and Antler Location(Complied by altering ﬁgures in Inoue and Yamada eds. 2013, Iwase et al. 2010, Kai et al. 2004,
Katada 1994, Sata et al. 1984, Shiraki 2004, Hirose 1977, Fukami et al. 2003, and Yabe 1986)© Japanese Archaeological Association

7

YAMADA Shunsuke

Bunkazai Chōsa Kenkyūkai 2007), and Shitomiya Kita site, Osaka prefecture (Iwase et al.
2010). Type A objects with the pommel missing include that from underground corridor
tomb No. 7 at Kashino site, Miyazaki prefecture (Yabe 1986), Hamane site, Fukui prefecture(Ishibe et al. 1966, Morikawa and Ōmori 1971, Irie et al. 1985), Kojima Higashi site, Osaka
prefecture (Hirose 1977), Nishinoshō site, Wakayama prefecture (Fukami ed. 2003), andTobayama Cave, Nagano prefecture (Seki and Nagamine 2000). There are also artifacts withdamaged surfaces and missing pommels, which may make it difﬁcult to judge whether they
are of Type A, but the pieces excavated in the south casket at the Aizu Ōtsukayama site,
Fukushima prefecture (Itō and Itō 1964) and from the cofﬁn at the Shukinzuka kofun in
Osaka prefecture (Suenaga ed. 1991, Hosokawa 2007) are most likely of Type A.
Regarding the beginnings of Type A, some researchers hold that Type A originates in theDeer Antler Y-shaped swords found in eastern Japan that date back to between the second
half of the Middle Yayoi period and the Early Kofun period (Ōmae 2001, Kikuchi 2013).
Considering signiﬁcant differences in shape, distribution, and period, however, it is difﬁcult
to regard those artifacts as belonging to the same lineage as Type A (Toyoshima 2010), and I
consider the Deer Antler Y-shaped swords as representing a different lineage from the TypeA deﬁned here.
Artifacts consisting of the pommel alone are divided into three other types: cylindricalpieces with plain antler surface, no chokkomon (arc and straight-line pattern) (Type B),
cylindrical pieces with a chokkomon pattern (Type C), and cylindrical pieces tha open
outward toward the pommel end, with a chokkomon pattern (Type D). Types B and C are
like Type A in that the porous core of the antler is hollowed out. With Type D, the porous
core is carved out in a conical shape but not hollowed out completely, and a pattern is carved
on the wide pommel side.
Artifacts of Type B include those found at Egeyama tomb No. 2, Tokushima prefecture(Suenaga and Mori 1966), the Shitomiya Kita site, and the Nihon Matsuyama kofun, Fukui
prefecture (Takahashi 1908, Saitō 1986, etc.). Belonging to Type C are those from the
Kitsunezuka kofun, Ōita prefecture (Takeda 1901), the Tsukayama kofun, Nara prefecture(Date and Kitano 1957), and the Nihon Matsuyama kofun. Both Types C and D are made of
the beam between the ﬁrst and second tines. Type D are those that ﬂare out toward pommel
end. The piece from the Sesudono kofun in Fukuoka prefecture (Sada et al. 1984) shows theburr (basal area) of the antler used for the edge around the pommel end, indicating that it ismade of the area from the burr to the base of the antler. Among Type D objects are many
that have grooved or dotted lines along both edges of a chokkomon pattern, as found in those
excavated at the Sesudono kofun, Wakayama prefecture’s Isoma Iwakage site, (Katada 1970,
Kobayashi 1976a, Katada 1994), and Tochigi prefecture’s Sukedo Jūniten kofun (Takahashi
1913, Mochizuki 1981).
Of the four types of pommel ornaments, Types A, B, and C are all alike in that they are© Japanese Archaeological Association

8

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

cylindrical and made of almost the same part of the antler. Type D is different from themnot only in shape and antler section used but also in that Type D has a pattern engraved on
the pommel end.

Collar Ornaments

For collar ornaments (Figure 3), the section of antler from the base of the ﬁrst tine to thebeam segment at the base of the ﬁrst tine fork is used. There are two cases, one in which thecollar ornament is made as an integrated part of the collar projection (Type α) and the otherin which they are made separately (Type β). Most of the Type α pieces have no engraved
pattern, with a few exceptions including the ones found at the Egeyama tomb No. 2 site(with a hook pattern [kagite-mon] engraved on the back side of the collar projection), atthe Shimauchi underground tunnel tomb cluster ST105 tomb in Miyazaki prefecture (withchokkomon pattern) (Nakano 2010), and dagger A (with a chokkomon pattern) at the Isoma
Iwakage site (Kobayashi 1976a).
Types α and Type β can be further divided by the way the antler is cut. There are threepatterns: Type 1 is cut so that the central part of the antler beam forms the blade collar. The

Figure 3. Collar Decoration: Classiﬁcation by Shape and Antler Location(Complied by altering ﬁgures in Inoue 2010a, Inoue and Yamada eds. 2013, Kai et al. 2004, andSugawara et al. 1994)© Japanese Archaeological Association

9

YAMADA Shunsuke

porous core of the beam falls at the central portion of the collar projection, the scabbard
side of the collar projection, and the base of the front side of the collar projection, while
the porous core of the ﬁrst tine falls on the upper side of the collar projection. This cutting
conﬁguration is the same as for Type A, in which the decorated portion from pommel tocollar is made of a single piece of antler. Type 1 and Type A, therefore, can be considered
to be of the same lineage. As for the second pattern of cutting (Type 2), the hard bone at
the base of the ﬁrst tine is cut for the blade collar. The porous core of the antler beam falls
on the lower side of the grip side of the collar projection and on the lower side of the centerof the collar projection, while the porous core of the ﬁrst tine falls on the upper end of thecenter of the collar projection and the upper end of the tenon-like stub inserted into the collar
projection. Regarding the third cutting pattern (Type 3), only the antler beam is cut for thecollar ornament; the ﬁrst tine is basically not used. The porous core of the beam falls on thelower end of the scabbard-side portion of the collar projection and on the upper and lower
ends of the central portion of the projection; the porous core of the ﬁrst tine also falls on theupper end of the central portion of the projection. Type 3 is recognizable for the use of theporous core for both ends of the upper area of the central portion of the collar projection.
The types of shapes and cutting conﬁgurations may be combined into several types—
Types α1, α2, α3, β1, β2, and β3. Examples of Type α1 include those from the Sannō site,
Miyagi prefecture (Satō et al. 1994), Type α2 from Egeyama tomb No. 3 and the Shimauchi
underground corridor tomb cluster ST105 tomb, Type α3 from the Isoma Iwakage site(dagger A), Type β2 from the Kitsunezuka kofun and the Nihon Matsuyama kofun, andType β3 from the Shimauchi underground corridor tomb cluster ST20 tomb (Nakano 2001),
the Nagayu corridor tomb cluster No. 7 tomb (Kai et al. 2004), the Sesudono kofun, theIsoma Iwakage site’s dagger B (Kobayashi 1976a), and Nagano prefecture’s Mizoguchi-notsuka kofun (Straight Sword 3) (Kobayashi et al. 2001). No example of Type β1 has yet been
conﬁrmed.

Scabbard Tip Ornaments

There are two types of scabbard tip ornaments (Figure 4)—one in a spindle shape (Type I),
the other in an isosceles triangle shape (Type II), as viewed from the scabbard tip end. TypeI has a shape that ﬁts a dagger but is also used for the larger sword (as in the case of Straight
Sword 2 from the Mizoguchi-no-tsuka kofun). Type II has a shape intended for a sword. The
ornamental piece is cut from the antler in two ways—cut diagonally at the base of the ﬁrst
tine, the ﬁrst tine fork base, and the antler base (Type a) and cut vertically across the antler
base, the burr, and the ﬁrst tine fork base (Type b). These two types can be distinguished by
the presence or absence of the burr.
As in the case of the collar ornaments, we may put together the types of shapes and cutting
conﬁgurations into several combinations—Types Ia, Ib, IIa, and IIb. Examples of Type Ia© Japanese Archaeological Association

10

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

Figure 4. Scabbard Tip Decoration: Classiﬁcation by Shape and Antler Location(Complied by altering ﬁgures in Inoue and Yamada eds. 2013)

include those from the Egeyama tomb No. 2, the Shitomiya Kita site, the Nishitaniyama
tomb No. 2 in Fukui prefecture (Ueda 1919, Kubo ed. 1984), and the Namani site in Nagano
prefecture (Ono ed. 2001). Among Type Ib examples are those found at the Kitsunezuka
kofun and the Nihon Matsuyama kofun. Type IIb items include one at the Aokihimezuka
kofun, Chiba prefecture (Ozawa 2003). As for Type IIa, there are likely objects such as one
found at the Enshōji Hakayama kofun (Inoue 2010b), but they are not preserved in their full,
original form, which makes it difﬁcult to conﬁrm.

Combinations

The various types discussed above can be organized as shown in Figure 5. In the table, sitenames are arranged in chronological order from oldest to newest and, in the case of pieces
that can be considered to come from the same period the site names are given from west toeast in the country.
The poor state of many deer antler sword ornaments is such that not all the combinations
can be determined. But, if we focus on pommel and collar ornaments the following fourcombinations can be conﬁrmed.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

11

Figure 5.

Combinations of Types for Deer Antler Sword Ornaments

YAMADA Shunsuke© Japanese Archaeological Association

12

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

Combination I. The pommel and collar are combined as a single piece (Type A). Examples
are from the Ōi Hirano site S01 No. 5 burial facility, the underground corridor tomb No. 7 at
Kashino site, the Shakameyama tomb No. 1, the Kozakaai site, the Shitomiya Kita site, theKojima Higashi site, the Nishinoshō site, the Hamane site, the Tobayama cave, and so forth.
This combination corresponds to Nagatomo’s “Ōi Hirano-style technique” (Nagatomo2011).
Combination II. This is a combination of a Type B pommel ornament and a Type α2 collar
ornament. The only authentic example of this combination is an artifact excavated from
Egeyama tomb No. 2, although there is a good possibility that such pieces may be foundin the Shingū Higashiyama tomb No. 2, cofﬁn No. 1 (Kishimoto 1996) and Uchioroshi
kofun, Shiga prefecture (Takashima Museum of History and Folklore ed. 2004). Opinions
about the ornament found at the Sannō site are divided, but Combination II corresponds to
Nagatomo’s “Egeyama-style technique” (Nagatomo 2011).
Combination III. This combination of a Type C pommel ornament and a Type β2 collar
ornament is observed among artifacts from the Kitsunezuka kofun, the Tsukayama
kofun, and the Nihon Matsuyama kofun. This combination corresponds to Nagatomo’s“Tsukayama-style technique” (Nagatomo 2011).
Combination IV. This combination of Type D pommel ornament and Type α3 and β3
collar ornament is observed among artifacts from the Shimauchi underground corridor
tomb cluster ST20 tomb and the Sesudono site, and in Isoma Iwakage site daggers A and B.
Although a pommel ornament is missing, Straight Sword 3 from the Mizoguchi-no-tsuka
kofun likely belongs to Combination IV. This combination corresponds to Nagatomo’s“Isoma-style technique” (Nagatomo 2011).

Arc-and-Straight-Line Patterns

The chokkomon (arc and straight line patterns) (Figure 6) can be divided into four groups
according to the depth of engraving and forms. Group 1 consists of examples of deepengraving, Group 2 is those with shallow engraving and three-dimensional patterns, andGroup 3 are those with shallow engraving and ﬂat patterns. While the chokkomon patterns
for these three groups are three-dimensional, Group 4 show examples in which the pattern
is formed mainly of thick vertical and horizontal lines (tossen). Examples of Group 1 arefrom the Tsukayama kofun, the Nihon Matsuyama kofun, Nishitaniyama tomb No. 2, andMiyagi prefecture’s Kyōnozuka kofun (Hasebe 1924), those of Group 2 from the Sesudono
site, the Kitsunezuka kofun, the Mizoguchi-no-tsuka kofun, and the Sukedo Jūniten kofun,
those of Group 3 from Hyōgo prefecture’s Minamiyama kofun (Kitani 1972), and those ofGroup 4 from the Aokihimezuka kofun. As to the composition of the pattern, there is notmuch difference between Groups 1, 2, and 3, but with Group 4 the composition seems tohave been reduced to the bare essentials.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

13

YAMADA Shunsuke

Figure 6. Deer Antler Sword Ornament Arc-and-Straight-Line Pattern Types(Cited from Yamada 2013)

A comparison of the chokkomon pattern among the groups shows there are three types, i,ii, and iii. The pattern on the artifacts from Group 1 sites like the Tsukayama kofun and the
Kyōnozuka kofun is engraved on a rectangular surface that is stepped from the upper edge
to the lower edge, and this is Type i. In the case of the Nihon Matsuyama kofun example,
which also belongs to Group 1, the chokkomon is engraved on a smooth, rectangular surface,
and this is Type ii. As for Type iii, the pattern is depicted on a trapezoidal surface that has awide upper edge and decreases in width toward the bottom as found in objects from Group
2 sites such as the Kitsunezuka kofun and the Isoma Iwakage site (dagger A) and Group 3
sites like the Minamiyama kofun. From the chokkomon pattern we not only know how muchcare was given by looking at the depth of engraving; we can also assume that the surface on
which it is engraved evolved from a stepped rectangle, to a smooth rectangle, and then to a
trapezoid.
With some ornaments, grooves and/or dotted lines are engraved on both sides of the
chokkomon pattern. Grooves are found in artifacts from such sites as the Isoma Iwakagesite (dagger A), the Mizoguchi-no-tsuka kofun, the Sukedo Jūniten kofun, and Ibaraki
prefecture’s Sanmaizuka kofun (Saitō and Ōtsuka 1960). Both grooved and dotted lines
are executed on examples from the Sesudono kofun, Okayama prefecture’s Tenguyama
kofun (Matsugi et al. 2014), and Osaka prefecture’s Minegazuka kofun (Shimoyama andYoshizawa 2002). Dotted lines presumably began being used under the inﬂuence of sword
ornaments made of metal.

© Japanese Archaeological Association

14

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

Lineages and periods
This section organizes the various types discussed above into several lineages. We canalso identify periods of production and use of speciﬁc ornaments as suggested by the otherartifacts excavated with them.
The three patterns of cutting pieces for collar ornaments from an antler were explained
above. They show signiﬁcant differences in understandings of the characteristics of deer
antler parts and the idea of cutting, suggesting that the ornaments were made by different
groups of people. Only cutting pattern Type 3 shows grooved lines and/or dotted lines onboth sides of the chokkomon, indicating a correlation between decorative pattern and cutting
conﬁguration. Based on ways of cutting antler for collar ornaments, we can establish thefollowing three lineages.
Lineage A: Type A pommel ornament and Type 1 pattern of cutting for collar ornament.
Corresponds to [abovementioned] Combination I.
Lineage B: Type B pommel ornament and Type 2 pattern of cutting for collar ornament.
Corresponds to Combinations II and III.
Lineage C: Type D pommel ornament and Type 3 pattern of cutting for collar ornament.
Corresponds to Combination IV.
Among items of lineage A there are differences in the details of the contour of theornament (Figure 7). For example, some have a clear step or steps in the grip-side and central
portions of the collar ornament (Shakameyama tomb No. 1, Kojima Higashi site, Nishinoshōsite), and others show only grooves on the grip-end and central portions (Ōi Hirano site S01
No. 5 burial facility, Nishinoshō site, Sannō site). On the back side of collar projection somehave two steps (Kojima Higashi site), others have one step (Nishinoshō site, Sannō site), stillothers have no step (Ōi Hirano site S01 No. 5 burial facility). Such differences can be taken
to indicate that the crafting of these deer antler sword ornaments was not concentrated in
speciﬁc workshops. All the examples of lineages B and C, on the other hand, have a step or
steps on the grip-side and center of the collar ornament and these are demarcated by grooved
lines. The upper side of the collar projection has two steps in all the examples. These twolineages each have a high level of uniformity as well as precise engraving of a complicatedchokkomon pattern, suggesting the high possibility that the artifacts of these lineages might
have been produced at speciﬁc workshops.2
Among the early artifacts of lineage B are those of Combination II that are thought tobe faithful imitations of lineage A items like one from Egeyama tomb No. 2. Combination
II items are few in number, perhaps because designs were still in the process of being
standardized. No examples of lineage C suggest any direct relationship with lineage A.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

15

YAMADA Shunsuke

Figure 7. Diversity in Lineage A and Uniformity in Lineage B and in Lineage C(Complied by altering ﬁgures in Inoue and Yamada eds. 2013, Kai et al. 2004, Katada 1994, Shiraki
2004, Sugawara et al. 1994, and Hirose 1977)

Objects of lineage C and those of lineage B look alike, but they are vastly different interms of where in the antler, the piece was cut to make pommel and collar ornaments. Thatsuggests that they were manufactured by different groups of people. Lineage C items arehighly decorative, as found in the engraving of a pattern on the pommel end of pommel
ornament and in the adding of grooved and dotted lines to both sides of a chokkomon
pattern. While apparently modeled after lineage B precedents, lineage C artifacts added
various elements and, therefore, are estimated to have emerged the latest.
When lineage A appeared can be learned from the Shitomiya Kita site and the Kozakaaisite, among other places. At the Shitomiya Kita site, lineage A examples were excavatedfrom the lower layer of ditch 11 in excavation area H, the layer that is estimated to dateto the second half of the early Kofun period (Fujita 2010). At the Kozakaai site (the 41stinvestigation area), too, a deer-antler ornamented dagger of lineage A was unearthed fromthe site of a river dating to the second half of the early Kofun period. Such discoveries led
to the conclusion that lineage A emerged in the second half of the early Kofun period. A[slender, S-shaped-bladed] arrowhead (chōzetsuzoku) found at the Ōi Hirano site S01 No.
5 burial facility can be dated to the TK73 phase [beginning of the ﬁfth century; the oldeststage of Middle Kofun period] according to the Sue-ware typo-chronology.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

16

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

The oldest item of lineage B is from Egeyama tomb No. 2. Lineage B is thought to haveemerged around the TK73 phase. Objects of the standardized Lineage B with an engraved
chokkomon can be dated from accompanying artifacts found at the Tsukayama kofun and
the Nihon Matsuyama kofun. From an iron arrowhead and armor excavated there, theTsukayama kofun is estimated to have been built during the TK216 phase [second quarterof the ﬁfth century; the newer-stage middle of Middle Kofun period] (Tanaka 2004) and theﬁnds such as haniwa ﬁgurines have placed the date of the Nihon Matsuyama kofun in the
TK208 phase [middle ﬁfth century; middle stage of Middle Kofun period].
Lineage C can be dated from accompanying artifacts found at the Mizoguchi-no-tsuka
kofun and the Sukedo Jūniten kofun. The former is presumed to have been built during the
TK208–TK23 phases [third quarter of the ﬁfth century; middle to late stages of Middle
Kofun period]. Finds such as horse harness and haniwa placed the estimated date of theSukedo Jūniten kofun during the TK47 phase [late ﬁfth century; terminal Middle Kofun
period]. The newest item of lineage C is one from the Minegazuka kofun. This tomb,
judging from its iron arrowheads and haniwa, can be dated to the MT15 phase [beginningof the sixth century]. A deer-antler-ornamented long sword (tachi) with a wedge-shaped
pommel appeared in the TK10 phase [second quarter of the sixth century], objects fromwhich were excavated at the Mozume Kurumazuka kofun in Kyoto prefecture. The longsword has grooved and dotted lines on both sides of a chokkomon pattern, as in the case of
lineage C, and can be presumed to have been made by a group of people of lineage C. That
is to say, between the MT15 and TK10 phases the deer-antler ornamented swords of lineage
C evolved into the deer-antler-ornamented long sword.
The three lineages of deer antler sword ornaments can be organized as follows. Lineage
A made its appearance in the second half of the Early Kofun period. There are detailed
differences in shape among artifacts of this lineage, which makes it unlikely that they were
produced by the same group of people. Lineage B faithfully emulated lineage A pieces,producing Combination II pieces, such as one found at the Egeyama tomb No. 2, and led tostandardized forms such as seen in Combination III pieces engraved with the chokkomon.
Lineage C appeared in the time between the TK208 and TK23 phases and led to innovateddeer-antler-ornamented long swords engraved with the chokkomon pattern. Lineages B andC have a high level of uniformity and their production appears to have been concentrated
at speciﬁc workshops. These two lineages, however, differ in form and decorative pattern,
as well as in terms of what parts of the deer antler were used, and therefore are thought tohave been produced by different groups of people. Especially, there is a good possibility thatlineage B artifacts found at such sites as the Kitsunezuka kofun and Minamiyama kofun
might have been made prior to the emergence of lineage C, suggesting that lineages B and C
existed together for a certain period of time. Proper estimation of the three lineages requires
further examination of the sites where artifacts of these lineages were excavated.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

17

YAMADA Shunsuke

Sites yielding artifacts of the three lineages
Let us ﬁrst look at the sites that yielded lineage A objects, that is, early deer antler sword
ornaments. Many more deer antler sword ornaments of lineage A were excavated at saltmaking and settlement sites—such as Hamane, Kojima Higashi, Shitomiya Kita, andNishinoshō sites—than kofun sites. At the Hamane and Nishinoshō sites not only deer antler
sword ornaments but iron arrowheads were also discovered. Early swords with lineage A
ornaments were short and both the sword blades and lineage A ornaments were most likely
made at these sites.
At the Hamane site, unﬁnished deer antler sword ornaments were found in Layer 1,
excavated by the Wakasa Kōkogaku Kenkyūkai (Morikawa and Ōmori 1971). Deer antler
ornaments that were in the process of being made were excavated from Layers 6 and 7 bythe Ōi town commission for protection of cultural properties and the Doshisha University
group for the Ōimachi archaeological excavation (Ishibe ed. 1966). Layer 7 yielded no Sueware but only Haji ware while Layer 6 yielded TK23-phase Sue ware. Remains of various
kinds of ﬁsh and shellﬁsh were excavated at the Hamane site, but it is notable that manyremains of boar, deer, and other animals were also found. They include parts of the skulls of
two deer (Figure 8).3 Both artifacts were from Layer 7 and both are the left side of the skull
from which the antler was cut off (see cut lines 3 and 6). The fore skull was cut verticallyin the middle (cut lines 1 and 4), together with a horizontal cut at a level above the eye (cutlines 2 and 5). This shows that the deer skull was expertly cut, probably to remove the spinal
ﬂuid. Deer are thought to be the source not only of antlers but leather.
A collar ornament found at the Kojima Higashi site that has a decorated tsuka’ai space
between the collar and pommel, belongs to Type A as mentioned earlier in our discussionof pommel ornament. No trace of rust is found in the scabbard-end area around the “blade
collar” (habaki), indicating the possibility that it is an unﬁnished piece. The site resembles
the Hamane site in that both yielded numerous relics of ﬁsh and shellﬁsh and land animals.
At the Shitomiya Kita site, deer antler sword ornaments, bits from horse harness, tōsu
knife handles, and deer antlers were found in the lower layer of a large ditch along thewestern edge of the settlement. Among them is a Type A piece consisting of a pommel withthe tsuka’ai area that was in the process of being made. On its pommel end, too, the centerhas yet to be hollowed out. Obviously the piece was unﬁnished, suggesting that deer antler
sword ornaments were made at the Shitomiya Kita site. No structural remains from the“Shitomiya Kita 1 era,” which can be dated before the TK216 phase [of Sue ware], or fromearlier times were discovered at the site. Located on a natural river bank, the site is thought
to have been surrounded by marshy land. Some point out that various types of Koreanpeninsula style pottery (Kanshiki-kei doki) have been excavated at this site, suggesting that
was a place where people of diverse lineages intermingled.
© Japanese Archaeological Association18

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

Figure 8. Marks of Antler Skull Cutting(Complied by altering ﬁgures in Inoue and Yamada eds. 2013. The photographs of a deer skull at theHamane site are used with the permission of the Doshisha University Historical Museum)

The Nishinoshō site is located at a slight elevation on a dune as well as in a lagoon-likelowland area. The area around the site was low-lying and damp, making cultivating difﬁcult.
Instead of rice farming, people there presumably engaged mainly in pottery salt production
and ﬁshing. The settlement was at its peak during the TK23–TK47 phases (Fukami 2007,
Tanaka 2013). Deer antler sword ornaments of lineage A were excavated from D-district III“Layer c” and F-district III “Layer c.” The former can be dated before the appearance of Sueware because the layer yielded only Haji ware objects, accompanied by legged salt-making
pottery. The only structural remains for this period of time are pits and scorched clay; there
are no remnants of a settlement.
Conspicuously many of the sites that yielded early deer antler sword ornaments areseaside places where salt was made, such as Hamane, Kojima Higashi, and Nishinoshō sites.
© Japanese Archaeological Association

19

YAMADA Shunsuke

Especially at the Hamane and Kojima Higashi sites, numerous remains of ﬁsh and shellﬁshand land animals were found, including the expertly carved remains of animals introduced
earlier.4 There are two possible theories regarding what kind of people lived in the Hamane
and Kojima Higashi sites. One theory goes that people who engaged in salt making andﬁshing also engaged in hunting of land animals; the other holds that groups engaged insalt making and ﬁshing and other groups that hunted land animals mingled at the Hamane
and Kojima Higashi sites. Determining which theory is valid requires a comprehensive
investigation of structural and other remains at the sites, but there is no doubt that the peopleof both sites were not settled, farming people but unsettled people. The same can be said of
the Shitomiya Kita site before the “Shitomiya Kita 1 era.”
At Tobayama Cave, deer antler sword ornaments were excavated in the deepest part of the
cave along with handled bowls of Haji and Sue ware dated to the TK73 phase. Some distanceaway in the cave, a group of objects were found including a “ring” cheek plate of horse bit[環鏡板轡] (one of the oldest items of horse harness found on the Japanese archipelago todate), a deer antler narikabura arrowhead (that makes a whistling sound), koto (zither)bridge-shaped stone objects, grinding stones, a Sue ware double hasō (small wide-mouthed
pot with many holes on the body). The ﬁnds at these two different locations in the cave werefrom more or less the same period. There are various theories as to who was buried in the
cave, one holding that it was a graveyard for a group of local people who traveled to andfrom China and the Korean peninsula (Nagamine 2000), and another theory suggesting it
was a burial place for a group of ﬁsherfolk from other areas who settled there (Seki 2000).
The theories agree on the point that the graveyard was for people who moved about widelyon the Japanese archipelago and/or China and the Korean peninsula.
Study of the excavated sites indicates that early deer-antler-ornamented swords weremade and used by itinerant people, most likely people engaged in marine ﬁshing over abroad region. Accompanying objects found at the Tobayama Cave suggest that the area of
people’s activity extended beyond the Japanese archipelago to the continent as well.
The vast majority of lineages B and C were excavated from tombs and tumuli. A few
exceptions include an object from the Nangō Kadota site in Nara prefecture (Ban ed. 1996).
At this site no ﬁnished objects were found, all being fragments. The chokkomon are deeply
engraved, indicating fragments that belong to Group 1 as discussed in the section “Arcand-Straight-Line Pattern.” There are small and large types of collar ornament, indicating
the presence of multiple standards for making deer-antler-ornamented swords. Nangō
Kadota is a site of the early phase of Sue ware, and the items found there can be seen as
among the oldest standardized deer antler sword ornaments with chokkomon patterns. Withno grooved line on either side of the pattern, they are thought to be sword ornaments oflineage B. Although no clearly unﬁnished pieces were discovered, the number of excavatedornaments is quite large for a single site, indicating the high possibility that the Nangō© Japanese Archaeological Association

20

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

Kadota site was a place where lineage B deer antler sword ornaments were made.
Lineage C ornaments include items found at the Shimauchi underground corridor tombcluster and Nagayu corridor tomb cluster tomb No. 7, among other sites. It has been pointed
out that underground corridor tombs differed from kofun in that (1) few farming tools
are found in the former, suggesting that hunting and gathering was the major source of
livelihood, and (2) multiple burial was the norm, suggesting that the tombs were not those oftribal heads (Hashimoto 2012). Lineage C items were also unearthed in seaside cave gravesat such sites as Isoma Iwakage and Chiba prefecture’s Ōderayama caves (Okamoto et al.
1999). Given the locations, the graves were most likely those of people engaged in marinerelated activities including coastal or overseas trade. From the Uedomari site on Hokkaido’s
Rebun Island, too, lineage C scabbard tip ornaments were discovered (Ōba 1977). This isa good evidence that lineage C items were supplied to people who moved about widelyin the archipelago. Elsewhere, lineage C items were found from kofun with strong links
to immigration from the continent, such as the Mizoguchi-no-tsuka, Tenguyama, andSesudono kofun. The Minegazuka kofun is also considered to have links to migrationfrom the continent because its stone chamber was constructed at the same time as the earth
for the upper part of the mound was piled up (kōchiku bokō) and clay was used to ﬁll thegaps between the rocks used for the walls (Yoshizawa 2002). These two practices are very
unusual among keyhole-shaped mounded tombs. As the above shows, lineage C items tend
to be found either from tombs other than kofun such as underground corridor tombs andseaside cave graves or from kofun with strong links to immigration from China and the
Korean peninsula.

Conclusion: Historical signiﬁcance of deer antler sword ornaments
Our examination of various sites from which deer antler sword ornaments were uncovered
indicates that early lineage A ornaments were made and used by people who moved widelyaround the Japanese archipelago and likely had contact with people of China and the
Korean peninsula. Among the sites where lineage C ornaments were found as burial goods,
conspicuously many are underground corridor tombs and seaside cave graves rather than
kofun, or kofun with strong links to immigration from the continent. People who made andused lineage A items and people who were buried with lineage C items were alike in thatthey both were peripheral to the rulers and local ruling elites. The lineage A deer antler
sword ornaments these people made and used seem to have been remade by rulers and local
ruling families into lineage C ornaments with the addition of engraved arc-and-straight line
patterns. It is most likely that the ruling and local ruling elites distributed the refurbishedswords to people in the attempt to build relationships. The Nangō Kadota site, where lineage
B ornaments were made, was a place where weapons were made in the Nagara and Nangō© Japanese Archaeological Association

21

YAMADA Shunsukesite cluster, part of the territory of the Katsuragi family. The activities of the Katsuragi
ranged over a very broad region including the Korean peninsula, and these activities
were presumably supported by seafarers (kaimin). In order to construct and/or strengthen
relationships with these seafarers, the Katsuragi made and distributed swords with improved
versions of deer antler ornaments. That is to say, the deer antler sword ornaments of lineages
B and C were quite likely produced at workshops of the rulers of the kingdom of Wa andlocal ruling families and distributed selectively to speciﬁc people.
The presence of such widely roving people, while considered peripheral by the rulers andlocal ruling elites, created links among scattered agricultural communities and, in islandnation Japan, they were also seafarers who played an important role in connections with themaritime areas of East Asia. Tomizawa Hisao (1997) has observed that the peripheral areasof states in the eastern part of the Southeast Asian maritime world partly overlapped andthat it was the seafaring people of those overlapping areas engaged in ﬁshing and trade whoheld the keys to the survival of those states. A similar connection is worthy of attention inconsidering the ancient state in the context of the Japanese archipelago. Ishimoda Shō (1971;
p. 11) argues that “the signs of the incipient state apparatus ﬁrst appeared in the border areas
between states.” Amino Yoshihiko (1990; pp. 331–332) suggests that “the way ‘border areas’
were controlled or the relation [of those border areas] to society may have determined thecharacter of individual states.” In order to enhance our understanding of the Kofun period
as a formative period of the state, it is necessary not only to study the central polity (chūshin
seitai) but also to deepen investigations of such peripheral or “border areas” (kyōkai ryōiki).
This article addresses the possibility that the ﬁfth-century rulers and local ruling elites
held the people of peripheral areas in high esteem, and skillfully enhanced the deer antler
sword ornaments made and used by these people and distributed the refurbished versions tothem in the effort to strengthen relationships with them. To further clarify the relationshipsof rulers and local ruling elites with people on the periphery requires further research.

Acknowledgements
In writing this article, I received valuable advice and suggestions as well as cooperationin examining source materials and artifacts from the many individuals and organizations
listed below. I would like to express special thanks to Dr. Kaneko Hiromasa for instructing
me on the basics of deer antlers.
Abe Akinori, Akiba Jun, Ban Yasushi, Fujii Yōsuke, Fujita Michiko, Fukumoto Hiroshi,
Haginoya Masahiro, Hamanaka Kunihiro, Hashimoto Tatsuya, Hidaka Shin, Hikino
Kyōsuke, Hirabayashi Hiroki, Iwaki Takahiro, Kawachi Kazuhiro, Kobayashi Kō, Miki
Hiroshi, Mochida Daisuke, Nakatsuji Keita, Okada Toshihiko, Okamoto Tōzō, Ōmine
© Japanese Archaeological Association

22

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

Mari, Ozawa Shigeo, Shibuya Emiko, Shimizu Akira, Shinagawa Yoshiya, Tagomori
Chiko, Tanno Taku, Teshima Mika, Tezuka Hitoshi, Uchiyama Naoki, Umemoto Yasuhiro,
Wakabayashi Kunihiko, Yamaguchi Takuya
Archaeological Institute of Kashihara Nara Prefecture
Chiba-shi Maizō Bunkazai Chōsa Sentā (Chiba Municipal Buried Cultural Properties
Research Center)
Chikuma-shi Rekishi Bunkazai Sentā (Chikuma Municipal Center for History and Cultural
Properties), Doshisha University Historical Museum
Ibaraki Prefectural Archives and Museum, Iida City Board of Education
Iida-shi Kōkogaku Shiryōkan (Iida Municipal Archaeological Museum)
Kansai University Museum, Mukō City Center for Archaeological Operations
Osaka Prefectural Board of Education, Tagawa-shi Coal and History Museum
Tohoku History Museum, the Museum, Ueda City Maruko Cultural Museum
Umi no Michi Munakata Hall, Wakayama Prefectural Board of Education
Wakayama Prefecture Kii-fudoki-no-oka Museum of Archaeology and Folklore.
This article is based in part on the results of a study conducted by the 2015 Chiba University
Research Support Program.

Notes
1) Throughout this paper, Japanese names are mentioned according to the Japanese order;
i.e. the family name ﬁrst, given name last.
2) Finds from Fukuoka prefecture’s Takaueyama 高上山 kofun (Inoue 2010b) and Miyazaki
prefecture’s Ōhagi 大荻 No. 3 underground corridor tomb (Hongō et al. 1984) have aseparately-made tenon for connecting the collar with the collar projection as well as a
chokkomon pattern that is somewhat different from others. They were probably made as
local imitation objects. But such examples are rare.
3) I would like to thank Wakabayashi Kunihiko and Hamanaka Kunihiro of the Doshisha
University Historical Museum for their permission to use these previously unpublishedobjects, as well as Teshima Mika of the museum for her help with paperwork.
4) At Nishinoshō site, too, many remains of land animals were found. Since no items fromthe same period as “Layer c” of D-district III or “Layer c” of F-district III are listed in thereport of the site, this article excludes them.

© Japanese Archaeological Association

23

YAMADA Shunsuke

References
Akiyama Kōzō 秋山浩三 and Yamanaka Akira 山中章 eds. 1988 Mozume Kurumazuka『物集女車塚』[Mozume Kurumazuka]. Mukō City Board of Education 向日市教育委員会

Amino Yoshihiko 網野善彦 1990 Nihonron no shiza 『日本論の視座』 [A New Standpointon Nihonron]. Shōgakukan 小学館
Ban Yasushi 坂 靖 ed. 1996 Nangō iseki-gun I 『南郷遺跡群 I』 [Nangō Site Cluster I].
Nara Prefectural Board of Education 奈良県教育委員会
Chōsen Sōtokufu Koseki Chōsa Iinkai 朝鮮総督府古蹟調査委員会 [Government-Generalof Korea Historical Site Investigation Committee] 1920 Taishō roku-nendo koseki
chōsa hōkoku 『大正六年度古蹟調査報告』[1917 Historical Site Investigation Report].
Government-General of Korea 朝鮮総督府
Date Muneyasu 伊達宗泰 and Kitano Kōhei 北野耕平 1957 Tsukayama kofun 「塚山古墳」[The Tsukayama Kofun]. Nara-ken maizō bunkazai chōsa hōkokusho 『奈良県埋蔵文化財調査報告書』[Report on the Investigation of Buried Cultural Properties in
Nara Prefecture], Vol. 1, pp. 16–51. Nara Prefectural Board of Education 奈良県教育委員会

Fujita Michiko 藤田道子 2010 Shitomiya Kita iseki Kofun jidai no shutsudo doki to ikō nokentō 「蔀屋北遺跡古墳時代の出土土器と遺構の検討」 [A Study of Kofun-period
Earthenware and Structural Remains from the Shitomiya Kita Site]. Shitomiya Kita
iseki I—Sōkatsu bunseki hen 『蔀屋北遺跡 I—総括・分析編—』[Shitomiya Kita Site
I, Overview and Analysis], pp. 1–102. Osaka Prefectural Board of Education 大阪府教育委員会

Fukami Yasuhiko 冨加見泰彦 2007 Kii ni okeru ama shūdan no dōtai 「紀伊における海人集団の動態」[The Movements of the Ama Diver Groups of Ise]. Kofun jidai no ama
shūdan o saikentō suru: “Umi no seisan yōgu” kara nijūnen 『古墳時代の海人集団を再検討する—「海の生産用具」から20年—』[Reexamination of Kofun-period Ama
Diver Groups: Twenty Years after the Meeting on “Tools of Marine Production”], acollection of summaries of presented papers, pp. 41–56. Maizō Bunkazai Kenkyūkai,Executive Committee of 56th Buried Cultural Property Research Meeting 埋蔵文化財研究会・第56回埋蔵文化財研究集会実行委員会
Fukami Yasuhiko, ed., 2003 Nishinoshō iseki 『西庄遺跡』[The Nishinoshō Site]. Centerfor Cultural Properties in Wakayama Prefecture 和歌山県文化財センター
Hasebe Kotondo 長谷部言人 1924 Rikuzen Natori-gun, Masuda-mura, Shimo-masuda
Kyōnozuka shutsudo rokkaku-sei tō sōgu ni tsuite, Sekki jidai rokkaku-sei koshi
kazari 「陸前名取郡増田村下増田経の塚出土鹿角製刀装具に就て 附、石器時代鹿角製
腰飾」[Deer Antler Sword Ornaments Excavated at the Shimo-masuda Kyōnozuka
Burial Mound in Masuda, Rikuzen Natori-gun: Along with Deer Antler Waist
Ornaments]. Jinruigaku zasshi 『人類学雑誌』 39-4, 5, 6, pp. 141–164.
Hashimoto Tatsuya 橋本達也 2012 Kyūshū nanbu ni okeru Shimauchi chikashiki ōketsubo© Japanese Archaeological Association

24

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

no ichizuke 「九州南部における島内地下式横穴墓の位置づけ」 [The Signiﬁcanceof the Shimauchi Underground Corridor Tombs in Southern Kyushu]. In Shimauchi
chikashiki ōketsubo-gun no shutsudohin no hyōka to hisōsha-zō 『島内地下式横穴墓群の出土品の評価と被葬者像』[Evaluation of Artifacts and Images of the Deceased
Buried in the Shimauchi Underground Corridor Tomb Cluster], pp. 27–32. Ebino City
Board of Education 宮崎県えびの市教育委員会
Hirose Kazuo 広瀬和雄 1978 Kojima Higashi iseki 「小島東遺跡」 [Kojima HigashiSite]. Misaki-machi isekigun hakkutsu chōsa gaiyō: Kojima Higashi iseki, Tannowa
iseki 『岬町遺跡群発掘調査概要—小島東遺跡・淡輪遺跡—』[An Overview of the
Excavation and Investigation of the Sites in Misaki-machi: Kojima Higashi and
Tannowa Sites], pp. 1–24. Osaka Prefectural Board of Education 大阪府教育委員会
Hirose Yukishige 廣瀬時習 ed. 2009 Kawachi heiya no shūraku to kofun: Nazo no yon-seikio saguru 『河内平野の集落と古墳—謎の4世紀を探る—』[Villages and Kofun in the
Kawachi Plain: Exploring the Riddles of the Fourth Century]. Osaka Pref. ChikatsuAsuka Museum 大阪府立近つ飛鳥博物館
Hongō Hiromichi 北郷泰道 ed. 1984 Ōhagi chikashiki yokoanabo-gun 「大萩地下式横穴墓群」[Ōhagi Underground Corridor Tomb Cluster]. Miyazaki-ken bunkazaichōsa hōkokusho 『宮崎県文化財調査報告書』[Report on Investigation of Cultural
Properties in Miyazaki Prefecture]. Miyazaki Prefectural Board of Education 宮崎県
教育委員会

Hosokawa Shintarō 細川晋太郎 2007 Kofun jidai chūki no tekken to tettō no kōzō:Shukinzuka kofun nankaku shutsudo tōken no kansatsu 「古墳時代中期の鉄剣と鉄刀の構造—珠金塚古墳南槨出土刀剣の観察—」[The Structure of Middle-KofunPeriod Iron Daggers and Swords: A Study of Swords Excavated from the South Cofﬁn
at Shukinzuka Kofun]. Kobunka dansō 『古文化談叢』 58, pp. 97–137. Kyūshū
Kobunka Kenkyūkai 九州古文化研究会
Inoue Kazuki 井上一樹 2010a Rokkaku-sei tōken sōgu 『鹿角製刀剣装具』[Deer Antler
Sword Ornaments]. Ritsumeikan Kōkogaku Ronshū Kankōkai 立命館大学考古学論集
刊行会

Inoue Kazuki 2010b Kansai Daigaku Hakubutsukan shozō rokkaku-sei tōken sōgu no
chokkomon 「関西大学博物館所蔵鹿角製刀剣装具の直弧文」[The Arc-and-StraightLine Pattern on Deer Antler Sword Ornaments in the Collection of the Kansai
University Museum]. Ritsumeikan Daigaku kōkogaku ronshū 『立命館大学考古学論集』 V, pp. 169–184. Ritsumeikan Daigaku Kōkogaku Ronshū Kankōkai
Inoue Yōichi 井上洋一 and Yamada Shunsuke 山田俊輔 eds. 2013 Kokkakuki shūsei 2『骨角器集成2』[Collected Bone Artifacts 2]. Dōseisha 同成社
Irie Fumitoshi 入江文敏 2011 Wakasa Etsu kofun jidai no kenkyū 『若狭・越古墳時代の研究』[A Study of the Kofun Period in Wakasa and Etsu]. Gakuseisha 学生社
Irie Fumitoshi and Hatanaka Kiyotaka 畠中清隆 eds. 1985 Ōshima Hamane, Miyadome
iseki 『大島浜禰・宮留遺跡』[Ōshima Hamane and Miyadome Sites]. Ōi Town Boardof Education 大飯町教育委員会© Japanese Archaeological Association

25

YAMADA Shunsuke

Ishibe Masashi 石部正志 ed. 1966 Hamane iseki 「浜禰遺跡」 [Hamane Site], Wakasa
Ōi 『若狭大飯』[Ōi in Wakasa], pp. 79–114. Ōi-chō, Fukui prefecture 福井県大飯町
Ishimoda Shō 石母田正 1971 Nihon no kodai kokka 『日本の古代国家』[The AncientJapanese State]. Iwanami Shoten 岩波書店
Itō Nobuo 伊東信雄 and Itō Genzō 伊藤玄三 1964 Aizu-Ōtsukayama kofun 『会津大塚山古墳』[Aizu-Ōtsukayama Kofun]. Aizu Wakamatsu-shi 会津若松市
Iwamoto Takashi 岩本 崇 2006 Kofun shutsudo tekken no gaisō to sono hensen 「古墳出土鉄剣の外装とその変遷」[Iron Sword Ornaments Found in Kofun and How They
Changed]. Kōkogaku zasshi 『考古学雑誌』 90-4, pp. 1–35. Nihon Kōko Gakkai 日
本考古学会

Iwase Tōru 岩瀬 透, Fujita Michiko 藤田道子, Miyazaki Yasushi 宮崎泰史, and Fujinaga
Masaaki 藤永正明 eds. 2010 Shitomiya Kita Iseki I 『蔀屋北遺跡 I』[Shitomiya Kita
Site I]. Osaka Prefectural Board of Education 大阪府教育委員会
Katada Tadashi 堅田 直 1970 Isoma Iwakage iseki chōsa gaiyō 『磯間岩陰遺跡調査概要』[An Overview of the Investigation of the Isoma Iwakage Site]. Tezukayama
Daigaku Kōkogaku Kenkyūshitsu 帝塚山大学考古学研究室
Katada Tadashi 1994 Isoma Iwakage iseki 「磯間岩陰遺跡」[The Isoma Iwakage Site].
Tanabe shishi 『田辺市史』 4, pp. 214–233. Tanabe-shi. 田辺市
Kai Hisayoshi 甲斐寿義 ed. 2004 Nagayu yokoanabo-gun Kuwahata iseki 『長湯横穴墓群
桑畑遺跡』[Nagayu Corridor Tomb Cluster, Kuwahata Site]. Ōita Prefectural Board of
Education 大分県教育委員会
Kikuchi Yoshio 菊地芳朗 2013 Kokkaku seihin 「骨角製品」[Bone and Antler Artifacts],
Kofun jidai no kōkogaku 『古墳時代の考古学』 4, pp. 219–231. Dōseisha 同成社
Kishimoto Michiaki 岸本道昭 1996 Shingū Higashiyama kofun-gun 『新宮東山古墳群』[Shingū Higashiyama Kofun Cluster]. Tatsuno City Board of Education 龍野市教育委員会

Kitani Yoshinobu 喜谷美宣 1972 Kakogawa seigan 「加古川西岸」[The West Coast of the
Kakogawa River], Kurodashō-chō shi 『黒田庄町史』[A History of Kurodashō-chō],pp. 56–59. Kurodashō-chō 黒田庄町
Kobayashi Masaharu 小林正春, Sasaki Yoshikazu 佐々木嘉和, and Shibuya Emiko 澁谷恵
美子 2001 Mizoguchi-no-tsuka kofun 『溝口の塚古墳』[Mizoguchi-no-tsuka Kofun].
Iida City Board of Education 飯田市教育委員会
Kobayashi Yukio 小林行雄 1976a Rokkaku-sei tōken sōgu 「鹿角製刀剣装具」[DeerAntler Sword Ornaments]. Kofun bunka ronkō 『古墳文化論考』[Essays on Kofun
Culture], pp. 431–482. Heibonsha 平凡社
Kobayashi Yuki 1976b Chokkomon 「直弧文」 [Arc and Straight Line Patterns], Kofun
bunka ronkō [Essays on Kofun Culture], pp. 483–540. Heibonsha.
Kubo Tomoyasu 久保智康 ed. 1984 Nishitaniyama kofun-gun Nishitaniyama 2-gō fun
hakkutsu chōsa hōkoku 『西谷山古墳群 西谷山2号墳発掘調査報告』[Report on theInvestigation of the Nishitaniyama No. 2 Tomb in the Nishitaniyama Mounded Tomb
Cluster]. Cultural Affairs Division, Fukui Prefectural Board of Education 福井県教育© Japanese Archaeological Association

26

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

庁文化課

Maezawa Terumasa 前澤輝政 ed. 1985 Sukedo Jūniten kofun dai-ichiji hakkutsu
chōsa 「助戸十二天古墳第1次発掘調査」[The First Excavation Survey of the Sukedo
Jūniten Kofun], Shōwa 59-nendo maizō bunkazai hakkutsu chōsa gaihō 『昭和59年度
埋蔵文化財発掘調査概報』[An Overview of the 1984 Excavation and Investigation ofBuried Cultural Properties], pp. 21–30. Ashikaga City Board of Education 足利市教育委員会

Matsui Masanobu 松井政信編 . 2005 Ishifuneyama kofun, Torigoeyama kofun, Nihon『石舟山古墳・鳥越山古墳・二本松山古墳』[Ishifuneyama,
Matsuyama
kofun
Torigoeyama, and Nihon Matsuyama Kofun]. Matsuoka Town Board of Education 松
岡町教育委員会 and Eiheiji Town Board of Education 永平寺町教育委員会
Matsugi Takehiko 松木武彦, Wada Tsuyoshi 和田剛, and Teramura Hirofumi 寺村裕史 eds.
2014 Tenguyama kofun 『天狗山古墳』[The Tenguyama Kofun]. Okayama Daigaku
Kōkogaku Kenkyūshitsu 岡山大学考古学研究室 and Tenguyama Kofun Hakkutsu
Chōsadan 天狗山古墳発掘調査団
Mochizuki Mikio 望月幹夫 1981 Tochigi-ken Ashikaga-shi Jūniten kofun no saikentō 「栃木県足利市十二天古墳の再検討」[Reexamination of the Jūniten Kofun, Ashikaga-shi,
Tochigi Prefecture]. Museum 『MUSEUM』 361, pp. 4–19. Tokyo National Museum
東京国立博物館

Morikawa Masakazu 森川昌和 and Ōmori Hiroshi 大森 宏 1971 Hamane iseki 『浜禰遺跡』[Hamane Site]. Wakasa Kōkogaku Kenkyūkai 若狭考古学研究会
Murai Iwao 村井イワ雄 1972 Okayama-ken Tenguyama kofun shutsudo no ibutsu「岡山県天狗山古墳出土の遺物」[Artifacts Excavated at Tenguyama Kofun, Okayama
Prefecture]. Museum 『MUSEUM』 250, pp. 4–17. Tokyo National Museum 東京国立博物館

Nagamine Mitsukazu 永峯光一 2000 Zaichi-kei to torai-kei 「在地系と渡来系」[Local
and Immigrant Lineages], Tobayama dōkutsu no chōsa: Kofun jidai sōjo no sobyō
to kenkyū 『鳥羽山洞窟の調査—古墳時代葬所の素描と研究—』[Investigation of
Toboyama Cave: An Outline and Study of Burial Places in the Kofun Period], pp.
62–65. Shinmai Shoseki Shuppan Sentā 信毎書籍出版センター
Nagatomo Shin 長友 信 2011 ‘Rokkaku-sei’ tōken sōgu no seisaku gihō no hensen 「『鹿角製』刀剣装具の制作技法の変遷」[Changes in the Techniques of Making Deer Antler
Sword Ornaments]. Aoyama kōko 『青山考古』 27, pp. 7–31. Aoyama ArchaeologicalSociety 青山考古学会
Nakano Kazuhiro 中野和浩 2001 Shimauchi chika-shiki yokoana bogun 『島内地下式横穴墓群』[Shimauchi Underground Corridor Tombr Cluster]. Ebino City Board of
Education 宮崎県えびの市教育委員会
Nakano Kazuhiro 2010 Shimauchi chika-shiki yokoana bogun II [Shimauchi Underground
Burial Chanber Cluster II]. Ebino City Board of Education
Ōba Toshio 大場利夫 1977 Rebuntō shutsudo no rokkaku-sei tō sōgu 「礼文島出土の鹿角製刀装具」[Deer Antler Sword Ornaments Excavated on Rebun Island]. Kōkogaku© Japanese Archaeological Association

27

YAMADA Shunsuke

jānaru 『考古学ジャーナル』 133, pp. 2–3. New Science Sha ニューサイエンス社
Okamoto Tōzō 岡本東三, Ui Yoshinori 宇井義典 and Totani Atsushi 戸谷敦司 eds. 1999Ōderayama dōketsu dai-7-ji hakkutsu chōsa gaihō 『大寺山洞穴 第7次発掘調査概報』[Summary Report on the 7th Excavation Survey of the Ōderayama Cave Grave].
Kōkogaku Kenkyūshitsu, Chiba University Faculty of Letters 千葉大学文学部考古学
研究室

Okita Masaaki 置田雅昭 1985a Kofun jidai no mokusei tōha sōgu 「古墳時代の木製
刀把装具」[Wooden Sword Hilt Decoration in the Kofun Period], Tenri Daigaku
gakuhō 『天理大学学報』 36-3, pp. 39–63. Tenri Daigaku Gakujutsu Kenkyūkai,天理大学学術研究会

Okita Masaaki 1985b Kofun jidai no mokusei tōken saya sōgu 「古墳時代の木製刀剣鞘装具」 [Wooden Sword Scabbard Decoration in the Kofun Period]. Kōkogaku
zasshi 『考古学雑誌』 71-1, pp. 23–36. Nihon Kōko Gakkai 日本考古学会
Ōmae Atsuko 大前篤子 2001 Tōken sōgu no sōshoku to sono shakaiteki igi: Mokusei rokusei
tōken sōgu o chūshin ni 「刀剣装具の装飾とその社会的意義—木製・鹿製刀剣装具を中心に—」[Sword Decoration and Its Social Signiﬁcance: With Focus on Wooden andDeer Antler Sword Ornaments]. Shiga Shigakkai-shi 『滋賀史学会誌』 13, pp. 69–88.
Shiga Shigakkai 滋賀史学会
Ono Norio 小野紀男 ed. 2001 Namani iseki IV 『生仁遺跡 IV』[Namani Site IV]. Kōshoku
City Board of Education 更埴市教育委員会
Ōno Nobutarō 大野延太郎 1905 Rokkaku no kentō ni tsuite 「鹿角の剣頭について」 [DeerAntler Sword Caps]. Tōkyō Jinruigakkai zasshi 『東京人類学会雑誌』 21-236, pp.
62–64. Tokyo Anthropological Society 東京人類学会
Onoyama Setsu 小野山節, Morishita Shōji 森下章司, Takahashi Katsuhisa 高橋克壽, andYoshii Hideo 吉井秀夫 1995 Biwako shūhen no rokuseiki o saguru 『琵琶湖周辺の6世紀を探る』[Exploring Sixth-century Lake Biwa and Its Vicinity]. Kyōto Daigaku
Bungakubu Kōkogaku Kenkyūshitsu 京都大学文学部考古学研究室
Ozawa Hiroshi 小沢 洋 2003 Dairizuka kofun-gun 「内裏塚古墳群」[The Dairizuka Kofun
Cluster], Chiba-ken no rekishi 『千葉県の歴史』[A History of Chiba Prefecture],“Shiryō-hen Kōko 資料編考古 2,” pp. 500–522. Chiba-ken 千葉県
Sada Shigeru 佐田 茂, Yanagida Yasuo 柳田康雄, and Sano Hajime 佐野 一 1984 Sesudono
kofun 『セスドノ古墳』[The Sesudono Kofun]. Tagawa City Board of Education 田川
市教育委員会

Saitō Masaru 斎藤 優 1986 Nihon Matsuyama kofun 「二本松山古墳」[The Nihon
Matsuyama Kofun], Fukui-ken shi 『福井県史』[A History of Fukui Prefecture],“Shiryō-hen 資料編” 13, pp. 249–251. Fukui-ken 福井県
Saitō Tadashi 斉藤 忠 and Ōtsuka Hatsushige 大塚初重 1960 Sanmaizuka kofun 『三昧塚古墳』[The Sanmaizuka Kofun]. Ibaraki Prefectural Board of Education 茨城県教育委員会

Sakamoto Yasumitsu 坂本安光 1981 Shakameyama isekigun 「釈迦面山遺跡群」[Shakameyama
Sites], Ehime-ken Sōgō Undō Kōen kankei maizō bunkazai chōsa hōkokusho 『愛媛県総合© Japanese Archaeological Association

28

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

運動公園関係埋蔵文化財調査報告書』 [Ehime Prefectural Sports Complex-related Buried
Cultural Properties Investigation Report], vol. III. Ehime Prefectural Board of Education 愛媛県教育委員会
Satō Noriyuki 佐藤則之 and Sugawara Hiroki 菅原弘樹 ed. 1994 Sannō iseki I 『山王遺跡 I』[Sannō Site I]. Miyagi Prefectural Board of Education 宮城県教育委員会 andConstruction Ministry Tohoku Regional Bureau 建設省東北地方建設局
Seki Kōichi 関 孝一 2000 Tobayama dōkutsu no bakusō shūdan ni tsuite 「鳥羽山洞窟の曝葬集団について」 [Groups Practicing Aerial Sepulture in the Tobayama Cave],

Tobayama dōkutsu no chōsa: Kofun jidai sōjo no sobyō to kenkyū [An Investigationof Toboyama Cave: An Outline and Study of Burial Places in the Kofun Period], pp.
66–77. Shinmai Shoseki Shuppan Sentā 信毎書籍出版センター
Seki Kōichi and Nagamine Mitsukazu 2000 Tobayama dōkutsu no chōsa: Kofun jidai sōjo
no sobyō to kenkyū [An Investigation of Tobayama Cave: An Outline and Study of
Burial Places in the Kofun Period], Shinmai Shoseki Shuppan Sentā 信毎書籍出版センター

Shibata Jōe 柴田常恵 1928 Kazusa Kimitsu-gun Aohori-machi no hiratsuka 「上総君津郡
青堀町の平塚」 [Flat Tomb at Aohori, Kimitsu District, Chiba Prefecture]. Kōkogaku
kenkyū 『考古学研究』 2-1, pp. 1–8. Shikai Shobō 四海書房
Shimoyama Keiko 下山恵子 and Yoshizawa Norio 吉澤則男 2002 Shiseki Furuichi kofungun Minegazuka kofun kōenbu hakkutsu chōsa hōkokusho 『史跡古市古墳群 峯ヶ塚古墳後円部発掘調査報告書』[Report on the Excavation and Investigation of the Historic
Site Furuichi Mounded Tomb Cluster, the Round Portion of the Minegazuka Kofun].
Habikino City Board of Education 羽曳野市教育委員会
Shiraki Hidetoshi 白木英敏 2004 Ōi Hirano 『大井平野』[Ōi Hirano]. Munakata City
Board of Education 宗像市教育委員会
Suenaga Masao 末永雅雄 1938 Rokkaku sei tōken 「鹿角製刀剣」 [Deer Antler Swords].
Kōkogaku 『考古学』 9-7, pp. 317–339. Tokyo Archaeological Society 東京考古学会
Suenaga Masao (ed.). 1991 Shukinzuka kofun 「珠金塚古墳」[Shukinzuka Kofun],Tatezuka Kurazuka Shukinzuka kofun 『盾塚 鞍塚 珠金塚古墳』[Tatezuka, Kurazuka,
and Shukinzuka Kofun], pp. 106–173. Yura Yamato Kodai Bunka Kenkyū Kyōkai 由良大和古代文化研究協会

Suenaga Masao and Mori Kōichi 森 浩一 1966 Bizan shūhen no kofun: Egeyama kofungun
Sekkuyama kofungun 『眉山周辺の古墳—恵解山古墳群 節句山古墳群—』[Bizan
Area Kofun: The Egeyama and Sekkuyama Kofun Clusters]. Tokushima Prefectural
Board of Education 徳島県教育委員会
Suzuki Kazunao 鈴木一有 2003 Chūki kofun ni okeru fukusō zoku no tokushitsu 「中期古墳における副葬鏃の特質」[Characteristics of Arrowheads from Middle-Kofun Period
Tombs], Teikyo University Yamanashi Research Institute of Cultural Properties
bulletin 『帝京大学山梨文化財研究所研究報告』 11, pp. 49–70. Teikyo University
Yamanashi Research Institute of Cultural Properties 帝京大学山梨文化財研究所
Takahashi Kenji 高橋健自 1908 Echizen no kuni Yoshida-gōri Iwafuneyama no kofun oyobi© Japanese Archaeological Association

29

YAMADA Shunsuke

hakken ibutsu; Fu: Sakanoue no Karitamaro funbo setsu ni-arazu 「越前國吉田郡石船山の古墳及発見遺物 附 非坂上刈田麿墳墓説」 [Iwafuneyama Tumulus in Yoshida-gōri, Echizen Province and Excavated Artifacts: Denial of a Theory of Sakanoue no
Karitamaro’s Tomb], Kōkokai 『考古界』 7-8, pp. 339–357. Archaeological Society 考
古学会

Takahashi Kenji 1913 Shimotsuke no kuni Ashikaga-machi Sukedo no kofun oyobi
hakkutsu ibutsu 「下野国足利町助戸の古墳及発掘遺物」[Mounded Tombs in Sukedo,
Ashikaga-machi, Shimotsuke Province and Excavated Artifacts]. Kōkogaku
zasshi 『考古学雑誌』 3-6, pp. 14–19. Nihon Kōko Gakkai 日本考古学会
Takashima Museum of History and Folklore 高島町歴史民俗資料館 ed. 2004 Uchioroshi
kofun: Hakogata sekikanbo kara kofunjin fukugan 『打下古墳—箱形石棺墓から古墳
人復顔—』[Uchioroshi Mounded Tomb: The Reconstruction of the Facial Features ofa Kofun Person from Box-shaped Stone Cofﬁn]. Takashima Town Board of Education
高島町教育委員会

Takeda Yasunosuke 武田安之助 1901 Ōita kenka no kofun oyobi yokoana 「大分県下の古墳及横穴」[Kofun and Horizontal Corridor Tombs in Ōita Prefecture]. Tōkyō Jinruigaku
Kai zasshi 『東京人類学会雑誌』 16-180, pp. 232–235. Tōkyō Jinruigaku Kai 東京人類学会

Tanaka Shinshi 田中新史 2004 Kofun jidai chūki zenhan no tetsuzoku (3): Chūsūiki no jirei
bunseki 「古墳時代中期前半の鉄鏃 (3)—中枢域の事例分析—」 [Iron Arrowheads
from the First Half of the Middle Kofun Period: A Case Study of the Chūsūiki [Kinai]Area], Tsukushi 『土筆』 8, pp. 505–599. Tsukushisha 土筆舎
Tanaka Motohiro 田中元浩 2013 Nishinoshō iseki to Isoma Iwakage iseki 「西庄遺跡と磯間岩陰遺跡」[The Nishinoshō Site and the Isoma Iwakage Site], Umi no kofun okangaeru 『海の古墳を考える』 [Thoughts on Kofun by the Sea], III, pp. 39–50. Dai3-kai Umi no Kofun o Kangaeru Kai, 2013. III 第3回海の古墳を考える会
Tomizawa Hisao 富沢寿男 1997 Tōnan Ajia kaiiki sekai no kokka to kaiyōmin 「東南アジア海域世界の国家と海洋民」[The State and Seafarers in the Southeast Asian Maritime
World], Kaiyō tōsho kokka no genzō to henbō 『海洋島嶼国家の原像と変貌』[Prototypes and Changes in Maritime States], pp. 237–262. Ajia Keizai Kenkyūjo(Institute of Developing Economies) アジア経済研究所
Toyoshima Naohiro 豊島直博 2010 Tessei buki no ryūtsū to shoki kokka keisei 『鉄製武器の流通と初期国家形成』[Iron Weapon Distribution and Early State Building]. Hanawa
Shobō 塙書房
Ueda Sanpei 上田三平 1919 Echizen Asuwa-gun Yashiromura Nishitani sanjō hakken no
sekikan ni tsuite 「越前足羽郡社村西谷山上発見の石棺に就て」[The Stone Cofﬁn
Excavated at Nishitaniyama Hill in Yashiromura, Asuwa-gun, Echizen], Kōkogaku
zasshi 『考古学雑誌』 10-2, pp. 33–38. Nihon Kōko Gakkai 日本考古学会
Umehara Sueji 梅原末治 1920 Rokkaku-sei tō sōgu 「鹿角製刀装具」[Deer Antler Sword
Ornaments], Taishō 6-nendo kofun chōsa hōkoku 『大正六年度古蹟調査報告』[1917Archaeological Investigation Report], pp. 260–272. Government-General of Korea 朝© Japanese Archaeological Association30

LINEAGES OF DEER ANTLER SWORD ORNAMENTS

鮮総督府

Yabe Kitao 矢部喜多夫 1986 Kashino chikashiki yokoana, Chikuike chikashiki
yokoana 『菓子野地下式横穴・築池地下式横穴』[Underground Corridor Tombs at
the Kashino and Chikuike Sites]. Miyakonojō City Board of Education 都城市教育委員会

Yamada Shunsuke 山田俊輔 2013 Tōkyō Kokuritsu Hakubutsukan shozō no rokkaku-sei
tōken sōgu”「東京国立博物館所蔵の鹿角製刀剣装具」[Deer Antler Sword Ornamentsin the Tokyo National Museum Collection], Kokkakuki shūsei 2 [Bone and Antler
Artifacts 2], pp. 87–91. Dōseisha 同成社
Yamazaki Takeshi 山崎 健 2015 Wakasa no gyorō to seien: Hamane iseki ni okeru Sakazume
hōkoku (1966) no saikentō 「若狭の漁撈と製塩—浜禰遺跡における酒詰報告 (1966)の再検討—」 [Fishery and Salt Making in Wakasa: Reexamination of the Sakazume
Report (1966) on the Hamane Site], Wakasa no shio saikō: Kodai Wakasa no shio no
seisan to ryūtsū o megutte 『若狭の塩、再考〜古代若狭の塩の生産と流通をめぐって〜』[Wakasa Salt Reconsidered: Ancient Wakasa Salt Production and Distribution],
pp. 95–106. Mihama Town Board of Education. 美浜町教育委員会
Yao-shi Bunkazai Chōsa Kenkyūkai 八尾市文化財調査研究会 [Yao Municipal Cultural
Properties Research Society] 2007 Kozakaai iseki dai-41-ji chōsa genchi setsumeikai
shiryō 『小阪合遺跡第41次調査 現地説明会資料』[Materials for Local Brieﬁng on the
41st Investigation of the Kozakaai Site]. Yao-shi Bunkazai Chōsa Kenkyūkai 八尾市文化財調査研究会

Yoshizawa Norio 吉澤則男 2002 Kōsatsu-hen 1, ikō 「考察編 一 . 遺構」 [Study 1:
Archaeological Features], Shiseki Furuichi kofun-gun Minegazuka kofun kōenbu
hakkutsu chōsa hōkokusho [Report on the Excavation Survey of the Round Portion of
the Minegazuka Keyhole Tomb in the Furuichi Mounded Tomb Cluster], pp. 147–153.
Habikino City Board of Education 羽曳野市教育委員会© Japanese Archaeological Association31