South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

The Beginning of Agriculture
inthe Ryukyu Archipelago
takamiya Hiroto1 and Nakamura Naoko2

1: Research Center for the Pacific Islands, Kagoshima University, 1-21-24 Korimoto,Kagoshima, 890-8580, Japan
2: Archaeological Research Center, Kagoshima University
Corresponding author: e-mail takamiya@cpi.kagoshiama-u.ac.jp

Abstract

The transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture has been one of the major
concerns in archaeology, anthropology, and other related fields, since this transitionin subsistence economy is almost invariably associated with tremendous cultural andsocietal changes. For example, in the case of mainland Japan, the introduction of wet
rice agriculture during the 9th century BC (Miyamoto 2018, 2019) brought fundamental
changes in every aspect of culture and society. this resulted in, for example, thebeginning of hierarchical societies for the first time in Japan, eventually leading to theevolution of state societies.
Archaeologists, anthropologists, and other researchers such as ethnographers andbotanists have also paid considerable attention to the transition from hunting, gathering,and fishing to agriculture in the Ryukyu archipelago, located in the southernmost regionof Japan. Three distinctive prehistoric cultures appeared in the archipelago during
the Holocene epoch: Northern, Central, and Southern Ryukyu cultures. In Northern
Ryukyu, written documents state that rice agriculture was practiced during the 7 th
century AD. In the Central and Southern Ryukyus, archaeological data recovered in
the 1960s indicated that agriculture, involving rice, wheat, and barley, was practiced
during the Gusuku period. While archaeological data suggest that agriculture began
during the Gusuku period, various hypotheses proposed that it began before the Gusuku
period. Recent applications of flotation and impression replica analyses have been usedas evidence to estimate the timeframes when agriculture began on the archipelago.
Based on the latest data, this paper discusses the beginning of agriculture in these three――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
Received: 15 September, 2020
Accepted: 13 October, 2020

2South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

cultural regions.
Key words: agriculture, flotation, impression replica analysis, the Ryukyu archipelago

Introduction
A well-known archaeologist, the late Bar-Yosef, once stated that “the Neolithic
Revolution, or the Agriculture Revolution, was a major ‘point of no return’ in human
evolution” (Bar-Yosef 2011: S175). Because this “Revolution” transformed many aspectsof global cultures and societies around the world, when, why, and how the transition fromhunting and gathering to agriculture took place has been one of the most important themesin archaeology and anthropology, as well as in related fields such as botany. For example,
the world witnessed the emergence of ancient civilizations in Egypt, Mesopotamia, India,
China, Mesoamerica, and the Andes. the foundations of these civilizations were agriculture.
In other words, without agriculture, these civilizations probably never would have evolved.
Furthermore, since “the Revolution” brought such significant changes in various
aspects of culture and society in the world, not only Western scholars but also Eastern
scholars have paid a lot of attention to this theme. This has also been true of Japan. For
example, as early as 1886, Kamada (in Tozawa 1982) analyzed Jomon chipped stone axes
and speculated that these artifacts might have been used as digging tools for land tilling
purposes. The possibilities of Jomon agriculture and the nature of Yayoi rice agriculture
have been the center of major debates among scholars (e. g., Miyamoto 2019, Nakayama
2010, Obata 2016). Thanks to the introduction and development of new technologies andapproaches over the last two decades, the nature of the Jomon “agriculture (or cultivation)”and the timing of the introduction of Yayoi agriculture have been much more clearly
understood. For example, while some scholars speculated that rice may have been grown
during the Jomon period, it is now understood that rice was not cultivated during thisperiod. Interestingly, new findings suggest that soya bean and adzuki bean are cultivated(Nakayama 2010, Obata 2016). In addition, as will be discussed, the nature of the Initial
Yayoi agriculture was unraveled by recent archaeobotanical analysis.
Archaeologists, anthropologists, and scholars from related fields have also paid
great attention to the beginning of agriculture in the southernmost region of the Japanesearchipelago, the Ryukyu archipelago. The archipelago is located between the Kyushu and
taiwan islands, stretching approximately 1,200 km. By the middle Holocene epoch, threeprehistoric cultural regions emerged in the archipelago: Northern, Central, and Southern
Ryukyu cultural regions (Fig. 1). Historical documents confirm that rice agriculture wasintroduced to the Northern Ryukyu cultural region during the 7th century AD. Archaeological
data collected in the 1960s showed that the subsistence economy of the Gusuku period (ca.
late 11th to 15th centuries)—characterized by the use of iron; the practice of long-distance
trade with Japan, Korea, China, and Southeast Asian countries; and the emergence ofchiefdoms—was based on crops such as rice, wheat, and barley. However, some hypotheses
proposed between the 1950s and the 1990s suggested that agriculture emerged before the

3

RY
U

KY

U

AR

CH

IPE

LA
GO

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

Fig. 1: Map of the Ryukyu archipelago with three cultural regions: Northern, Central, and Southern
cultural regions.

Gusuku period in all three Ryukyu cultural regions.
When did the transition to agriculture take place in the Ryukyu archipelago? the
purpose of this paper is to use the latest archaeobotanical data obtained by flotation andimpression replica methods to examine the agricultural origin hypotheses proposed in thelate 20th century. the results of the application of these methods to prehistoric sites in thearchipelago have shed light on the timing of the introduction of agriculture in this region.
to present archaeobotanical data and evaluate the hypotheses, this paper consistsof four sections. The first section deals with the explanations of flotation and impression
replica methods because most readers of the South Pacific Studies are not familiar withthese methodologies. the second section presents the background section. In this section,
the agricultural origins of northern Kyushu, where Yayoi agriculture was first introduced,
is described. From here, the Yayoi agriculture spread to the rest of Japan. To understand4South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

the origins of agriculture in the Ryukyu archipelago, it is necessary to understand when it
reached southern Kyushu, Kagoshima, and Miyazaki prefectures. The section summarizes
the agricultural origins in southern Kyushu. In this section, the cultural history of the
Ryukyu archipelago is briefly provided.
the background section is followed by hypotheses about prehistoric agriculture, whichwere proposed during the late 20th century (the third section). Since the hypotheses were
proposed for three Ryukyu cultural regions, they will be explained separately. It should
be noted that these hypotheses were proposed on the basis of secondary data, such as theintroduction of foreign pottery and site locations, which to some suggested suitable localities
to conduct agriculture. At this time, some hypotheses appear to have been based merely on
speculation or subjective opinion.
the fourth section examines the proposed hypotheses. For the last three decades,
flotation and impression replica methods have been introduced in the archipelago. themain purpose of flotation is to elucidate prehistoric plant consumption, based on theanalysis of carbonized seeds collected by this method. the purpose of the latter has been
to verify the beginning of agriculture in the Japanese archipelago. As will be presented in
the methodology section, the most crucial advantage of the impression replica method isthat, since pottery chronology has been firmly established in Japan (including the Ryukyu
archipelago), the relative date of the impressed materials (such as rice) in the potsherd canbe estimated. Carbonized plant remains recovered by flotation, on the other hand, should becarbon 14 dated even in small quantities (such as just one rice grain) in order to obtain an
accurate date. In other words, with 14C dating, the dates of plant remains can be precisely
determined. these two approaches will provide a better understanding of the origins ofagriculture in the Ryukyu archipelago. the combined applications of these two methods
successfully evaluated the prehistoric agricultural hypotheses proposed. In addition,
applications of these methodologies have more or less pinpointed when agriculture wasintroduced to the Ryukyu archipelago. Agriculture was introduced to the Northern Ryukyu
cultural region by the Middle Yayoi period. It spread into the Central Ryukyu region
between the 8th and 12th centuries AD. In the Southern Ryukyu cultural region, agriculture
was accepted between the 12th and 13th centuries AD.

Methodology
The methodologies applied in this study were flotation and impression replica analysis.
Since most of the readers of South Pacific Studies are not familiar with these methodologies,
in the following sections, we will briefly introduce their history, usefulness, and procedures.
Flotation
Because animal bones and shellfish remains are sturdy and relatively large in size,
they are visible during the course of excavation. Faunal remains are thus often picked up
as the excavation progresses; however, reconstruction of prehistoric animal consumption
based on hand picking itself provides a skewed view (Grayson 1984, O’Connor 2008).

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

5

Unlike faunal remains, collecting plant remains, such as wheat and barley seeds, during the
excavation period is nearly impossible because of their small size and fragility. Researchers
may get lucky enough to encounter extraordinary sites, such as wet sites or dry caves, which
may present opportunities to recover plant remains during the course of excavation.
To extract carbonized plant remains (mainly seeds), flotation was introduced into
archaeology and popularized by Struever (1968) in North America. According to Watson(1976), the introduction of this method into archaeology revolutionized this discipline.
For example, Hokkaido, located in the northernmost region of Japan, is the home of theindigenous Ainu people. The Ainu people were documented as hunter-gatherers by Japanesescholars and visitors to the island during early historic times (after the Meiji Era, ca. 1860s).
Consequently, both in Japan and in the West, the Ainu are usually described as huntergatherers of Japan (Watanabe 1968). Furthermore because of this widespread image of
the Ainu as hunter-gatherers, Hokkaido had (and has) been thought to have been occupied
by hunter-gatherers for thousands of years. Hokkaido is one of the regions where flotation
was introduced for the first time in Japan. It has been conducted intensively since the 1970s(Crawford 1983, Yamada and Tsubakisaka 2005). Two important findings are described
below.
Crawford (1983) collected soil samples from archaeological sites for flotation
dating back to the Initial Jomon to Middle Jomon. Meticulous analysis of carbonized seeds
recovered from flotation revealed two interesting trends. First, during the earlier phases,
nut remains were identified abundantly but decreased in the later phases. Nut remains were
replaced by grass seeds such as Chenopodium. Second, the average size of barnyard grasscaryopses increased by approximately 20% from the Early Jomon to the Middle Jomon
period. Crawford (1983) suggests that at the beginning, nuts were important but were later
replaced by grasses. Furthermore, he hypothesizes that among grass species, barnyard grassmight have been an important source of plant food and that the Jomon people were on theverge of cultivating barnyard grass.
Crawford and Yoshizaki (1987) applied flotation to the Satsumon period (ca. the 7th
to 13th centuries AD) sites. The Satsumon culture and people were direct ancestors of the
Ainu. The application of flotation to many Satsumon sites has revealed that the Satsumon
people practiced agriculture and consumed cultivated plants, such as barley, wheat, foxtail
millet, and broomcorn millet. the series of applications of flotation demonstrated thatthe ancestors of the Ainu adopted food production. What about the Ainu? Recent studies
have demonstrated that the Ainu had succeeded in Satsumon agriculture (Yamada andTsubakisaka 2005). Thus, the introduction of flotation to reconstruct the prehistoric
subsistence economy in Hokkaido has changed our understanding in the last half century.
The application of the flotation method to an Initial Yayoi site revealed the nature of
the subsistence economy of this period. Takamiya’s personal question regarding the earliest
rice-related sites (i.e., the Initial Yayoi period sites) concerned whether the reconstructedrice-centered Yayoi agriculture might have been biased, since flotation had not been applied
to the Initial Yayoi sites. Without flotation, it is almost impossible to recover small-sized
seeds, such as foxtail millet and broomcorn millet. What is the nature of Initial Yayoi

6

South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

agriculture? Was rice a major crop grown and consumed during the Initial Yayoi period, as
many scholars feel? Or did small-sized crops, such as foxtail millet and broomcorn millet,
also play an important role in the Initial Yayoi?
For the last three years, Takamiya (in press) had the opportunity to analyze plantremains recovered by flotation from the Ukikunden site, located in Saga prefecture. During
the 1980s, the site was excavated by Kyushu University and the Karatsu Board of Education,
and at least 89 soil samples were collected. Between 2016 and 2018, 89 soil samples were
processed by flotation. The plant remains collected were analyzed by Takamiya (in press).
Out of approximately 1700 plant remains, the analyzed samples were found to contain morethan 1000 grains of rice. Thus, approximately 60% of the plant remains were identified
as rice. On the other hand, only 18 and 6 specimens were identified as foxtail millet andbroomcorn millet, respectively. In addition, almost all the samples yielded rice remains.
More precisely, rice remains were found among at least 75 out of 89 samples. The results ofthe plant remain analysis suggest that the Initial Yayoi agriculture probably consisted mainlyof rice cultivation. Interestingly enough, they did not yield barley and wheat, suggesting thatthese cultigens might not have been grown and consumed during the Initial Yayoi period(Takamiya in press).
Analytical method: Flotation
The principle behind flotation is simple. Carbonized plant remains, such as seeds, float,
when soil samples collected from archaeological sites are immersed in water. to collectcarbonized plant remains,
1) Soil samples are collected from archaeological sites (Fig. 2-1).
2) The soil samples were dried considerably (but not completely) (Fig. 2-2).
3) The volume (or weight) of the soil samples is recorded.
4) Several flotation methods are known (Crawford 1983, Watson 1976). Among them,
we adopted one shown in Fig. 2-3. This apparatus consists of outer ( ①) and innertanks (②), which are placed on a stand. Water was supplied from a rubber hose. The
bottom of the inner tank is a 1 mm sieve that enables the collection of heavy materials
including small artifacts, bones, and shells (we call these collected from a 1 mm sieve

Fig. 2-1: Soil samples collected from anarchaeological site.

Fig. 2-2: Soil sample being dried.

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

7

②
③

①

Fig. 2-3: Flotation apparatus used in this study.

Fig. 2-4: Soil samples removed into flotation.

Fig. 2-5: Light fraction.

Fig. 2-6: Collecting light fraction.

5)
6)
7)
8)

as the heavy fractions). Water is filled in the outer tank up to approximately 5 cm fromthe lip. The soil sample was then dumped into the inner tank (Fig. 2-4). Light materials
such as carbonized seeds float from the soil matrix (Fig. 2-5).
The floated materials were then collected by coarse (2 mm) and fine (0.42 mm) sieves(Fig. 2-6).
The floated materials (referred to as the light fraction) are then dried.
The heavy fractions are sorted. Artifacts and ecofacts are collected and identified.
The light fraction is usually examined under a microscope. From the light fraction,
carbonized plant remains were collected and identified.

Impression Replication Analysis
Using the following procedure, the impression replica method attempts to identify thesubstance that created a cavity (impression) left on the surface of an artifact. First, the model(replica) of the cavity is made by impression material, and then the replica is identified
under a Scanning Electric Microscope. the impression replica method was introduced
to archaeology in Europe and Japan as early as the beginning of the twentieth century. In
Japan, Yamanouchi (1967), using clay and plaster as the impression material, attempted
to identify rice husks on potsherds. The present-day impression replica method adopted by
Japanese archaeology was developed from the research conducted by Ushino and Tagawa

8South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021(1991). They applied this method to identify impressions left on potsherds, use-wear
patterns on lithics, and markings on the perforation in beads.
Nakazawa (2005) investigated the beginning of agriculture in Japan by applying thismethod to identify rice husk impressions of Jomon and Initial Yayoi potsherds. In 2005,
Yamasaki (2005) conducted the impression replica method on every potsherd collected froma site. Yamasaki (2005) successfully identified rice and rice weevils from Jomon potsherds(however, it should be noted that recent reanalysis of the “Jomon rice impressions” havedemonstrated that all of them are inconclusive). Consequently, their work has encouraged
and attracted many archaeologists to investigate the presence/absence of cultigens andcultigen-related insects, and other organic materials such as shells, which generally
cannot preserve well in archaeological sites. Furthermore, because the impressions were
produced when pottery was wet and fired, and because precise pottery chronology has been
established in Japan, a more precise relative date of the replica can be grasped.
One major purpose of the impression replica method during the early stage is tounderstand the beginning of rice agriculture. this method has been applied to not only
the Yayoi period but also to other periods and is used not only in Japan but also inother countries as well. For example, Obata et al. (2007) and Nakayama and Kaimon(2009) attempted to apply this method to examine cultivation during the Jomon period.
Consequently, Obata et al. (2007) recognized cultivated soya bean among the Jomon
potsherds; Nakayama and Kaimon (2009) have indicated that soya bean and adzuki
bean were utilized and cultivated as early as the Middle Jomon period in central Japan.
Furthermore, Obata et al. (2011a) identified the earliest rice weevil impression on pottery in
the world from Tanegashima Island, Japan. It was dated to be more than 10,500 years ago. In
addition, Obata et al. (2011b) elucidated the presence of foxtail millet and broomcorn millet
in potsherds, which pre-date the C14 dates of the carbonized foxtail millet and broomcorn
millets in Korea. Thus, this method has been established as one of the major approaches forour understanding of the beginning and spread of agriculture in Japan and other countries.
Recently, distinctions have been suggested between exposed and unexposed
impressions. the former describes cavities on the pottery surface and is usually recognizedby the naked eye; the latter are those located inside the pottery. The latter are notrecognizable with the naked eye. In order to extract and identify unexposed impressions,
X-rays, CT, and soft X-rays have been applied (Manabe and Obata 2011, Nakayama 2010,
Obata 2016). Examination of unexposed impressions demonstrated that more unexposed
impressions were found than exposed ones. Furthermore, it is said that the analysis of
unexposed impressions sheds light on the process through which seeds and insects could
become entangled inside potsherds, the environment where pottery was fired, and whether
or not these materials entered the pottery on purpose or accidentally.
Analytical method: Impression Replica Analysis
the following are procedures for exposed impression analysis (Cf. Hisa and Katata2005).
1) Impressions on the surface and cross section of the potsherd are examined.

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

2)
3)
4)
5)
6)

9

Fig. 3-1: Silicon material: Blue Mix.

Fig. 3-2: Injecting silicon into the impression.

Fig. 3-3: Detaching a replica.

Fig. 3-4: An example of a replica (rice). The
replica will be identified using a
Scanning Electric Microscope.

While cleaning the potsherd, the impressions are examined by the naked eye and/or
under a microscope.
The areas in and around the impressions are coated by a release agent (such as paraloid
solvent melted by acetone) so that silicon is easily peeled off from the potsherd.
Silicon (Fig. 3-1) is injected into the impressions to make replicas (Fig. 3-2).
The replica is detached (Fig. 3-3), and the mold release agent is removed from thereplica.
The replicas (Fig. 3-4) are examined and identified using a Scanning Electron
Microscope.

When this method is applied, we record basic data, such as the number of potsherds
examined, the date of the potsherds based on pottery chronology, and the location of theimpression. We also photograph the potsherd prior to examination and the location of theimpressions. By doing so, we not only photographically record the necessary data, but wealso double check the possibility of contamination and/or damage before and/or after theexamination. Drawings of potsherds are conducted when an impression is located on themouth or decorated area of pottery that provides the date of pottery.

10South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

Background
Northern Kyushu: Beginning of Yayoi Agriculture
The northern region of Kyushu, mainly Saga and Fukuoka prefectures, is thought to be
the cradle of rice agriculture (Oryza sativa japonica) in Japan, which had been introduced
from the Korean peninsula during the Initial Yayoi period (ca. 9th century BC, Miyamoto
2018, 2019). For example, the Itatsuke site in Fukuoka city yielded not only numerous rice
remains but also agriculture-related tools such as wooden hoes and plows. Ultimately, rice
paddy fields were also unearthed at the site. Similar findings have been reported from the
Nabatake and Ukikunden sites located in Saga prefecture.
Yayoi agriculture then spread to the east and south of northern Kyushu. When did it
reach southern Kyushu, Kagoshima, and Miyazaki? To understand when food production
spread into the Ryukyu archipelago, it is crucial to know the situation in southern Kyushu.
We will discuss the situation in southern Kyushu below. While flotation has not been applied
to Yayoi sites in this region, we have obtained the following information.
Agriculture origin in southern Kyushu: Kagoshima and Miyazaki prefectures(See Fig. 4 for site locations)
As early as 1962 and 1963, an archaeological excavation at the Takahashi shellmidden
in Kimpo town (now, Kimpo Town, Minami Satsuma city) in Kagoshima prefecture
unearthed Early Yayoi pottery, a polished stone sword, stone sickles, and stone knives. Thishas been argued to indicate that wet rice agriculture reached the western part of Kagoshima
during the Early Yayoi period (Kawaguchi 2002:38). Moreover, in 1986, the Shimohara
site, which is also located in Kimpo town, yielded Early Yayoi pottery, stone knives, andrice husks (Kawaguchi 2002:38). The excavation revealed that rice agriculture reached
Kagoshima within three hundred years after it appeared in northern Kyushu.
However, a question arises from the above findings. That is, while one can speculate on
the presence of rice agriculture based on these findings, it is difficult to determine whether
it was wet or dry rice agriculture. Which was it? The Kagoshima University Campus site at
the Korimoto Housing Complex sheds light on this question. The layer dated to the Early
Yayoi period yielded paddy fields with numerous human footprints (Kawaguchi 2002:39).
this piece of evidence demonstrates that wet rice agriculture spread to this area by the Early
Yayoi period.
Rice agriculture also diffused into Miyazaki prefecture at about the same time.
The Kurotsuchi site, the Hijiana site, and the Sakamoto A site, all of which are locatedin Miyakonojo city, provided archaeological data on rice agriculture. The Kurotsuchi
site yielded stone knives, rice-tempered potsherds, and a large amount of rice phytoliths(Kawaguchi 2002:39, Kuwahata and Yokoyama 2000:7, Nakamura et al. 2013:17).
Interestingly, Fujiwara (in Kuwahata and Yokoyama 2000:7) who examined rice
phytoliths from the site thought that the rice cultivated at or near the site was dry field rice
agriculture. The Hijiana site also produced stone knives and chipped stone axes, which were
probably used for digging, and large amounts of rice phytoliths (Kuwahata and Yokoyama

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

7

6
8

1～3
5

4

9

10・11

12

13
14

15

Tanegashima
Yakushima

Tokara Islands

Amami Oshima

24
26

25

19・20

16・17
18

21

23

22

Kikaijima

Tokunoshima

27
28 Okinoerabu
0
1 Sakamoto A・B

8 Kusumoto

2 Hoshihara

9 Kagoshima University Campus

3 Tsuruhami

10 Shimohara

4 Hijiana

11 Takahashi

5 Kurotsuchi

12 Hashimuregawa

6 Suitenmukai

13 Shimohagimine

7 Kyoden

14 Izumibaru

15 Kamiyokino
16 Yomisaki
17 Arago
18 Matsunoto
19 Akakina Gusuku
20 Sauchi
21 Hango
22 Gusuku site group

100km
23 Kuzuri
24 Nakagumi, Tobaru
25 Kawaminetsuji
26 Omonawa 2・4, Kannate
27 Sumiyoshi
28 Kamino

Fig. 4: Site locations mentioned in the text (in Kagoshima and Miyazaki prefectures).

11

12

South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

2000:7). Kuwahata and Yokoyama (2000) thought that wet rice agriculture was practiced
at or near the site. these two sites also yielded Paniceae phytoliths, suggesting that foxtail
millet, broomcorn millet, and/or barnyard millet might have been cultivated. Finally, a
wet rice paddy field was recovered from the Sakamoto A site. these pieces of evidence
demonstrate that both wet and dry rice agriculture was practiced in Miyakonojo city,
Miyazaki prefecture, during the Early Yayoi period.
Recently, Nakamura et al. (2013) conducted an impression replica study at the
Kurotsuchi site and the Sakamoto B site, both of which are located near the Sakamoto A
site. Based on pottery chronology, these two sites are dated to the Early Yayoi. From theformer, they identified foxtail millet or green foxtail, rice, shiso (Perilla sp.), and unknown
species. Nakamura et al. (2013:17) agree with Fujiwara’s remark on dry rice agriculture
being practiced at or near the site. From the Sakamoto B site, they identified rice andpossible foxtail millet (Nakamura et al. 2013:16). Based on this study, Nakamura et al.
(2013:17) concluded that rice and foxtail millet were cultivated during the Early Yayoi in
Miyazaki. they also suggest that foxtail millet might have been cultivated during the Final
Jomon period.
Thus, it appears that, during the Early Yayoi period, both wet and dry rice agriculture
may have been practiced in Kagoshima and Miyazaki prefectures. In addition, it islikely that millets were cultivated. While sufficient archaeological data have not yet been
accumulated, available data suggest that food production was continuously practiced. In
Miyazaki, for example, at the Sakamoto A site, rice paddy fields have been identified in thelate Early Yayoi period, late Middle Yayoi period, Final Yayoi period, and the Medieval
period layers (Kawaguchi 2002:42). Nakamura et al. (2013) identified rice impressions
from the Early Yayoi period pottery and the Middle Yayoi period pottery at the Sakamoto B
site (Nakamura et al. 2013:16). In addition, foxtail millet impressions from the Early andMiddle Yayoi pottery recovered from the Kurotsuchi site (Nakamura et al. 2013:16). They
reported foxtail millet and broomcorn millet impressions from the late Late to Final Yayoi
potsherds from the Hoshihara site. the site also yielded rice, broomcorn millet, and foxtail
millet impressions on the Middle Kofun period pottery as well as potsherds dating to the
9th to 10th centuries AD. A rice-impressed potsherd was reported from the Tsuruhami site,
dating to the Late Kofun period.
In Kagoshima prefecture, the Kagoshima University Campus site at the Korimoto
Housing Complex yielded wet rice paddy fields dating to the Middle Yayoi period (Ohnishi
et al. 2012:99). The Kyoden site in Satsumasendai city, which corresponds with the Middle
Yayoi period, produced wet rice paddy fields and numerous rice phytoliths. The Kusumotosite near the Kyoden site, which dates to the final Yayoi period, also yielded numerous rice
phytoliths. Furthermore, both the Kyoden and Kusumoto sites produced various wooden
tools used for agriculture, such as wooden hoes (Kawaguchi 2002:40-41). According to
Honda (in Kawaguchi 2002:43), the number of stone knives tends to increase during theLate Yayoi period in southern Kyushu. This suggests that rice agriculture had become more
important in the subsistence economy toward the end of the Yayoi period.
Corresponding to the Kofun period, the Kagoshima University Campus site atTakamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

13

the Korimoto Housing Complex yielded a large amount of rice phytoliths. Rice grains
were recovered from pit No. 71 (Ohnishi et al. 2012:99, Shimoyama 1995:184). At theHashimuregawa site in Ibusuki city, hoe marks, Paniceae, and rice phytoliths were found.
At the site, archaeologists have recovered ridge marks dating to the Heian period. theMizumoto site, dating from the Medieval to the early Modern period, yielded rice, wheat,and possible millets. Thus, in the southern Kyushu area, agriculture was practiced during the
Early Yayoi period and has been continuously practiced since. Then, when did agriculture
begin in the Ryukyu archipelago? Before discussing this topic, it is necessary to present thechronology and cultural history of the archipelago.
Chronology and cultural histories
the Ryukyu archipelago was occupied by Homo sapiens during the Paleolithic period(10,000-36,000 BP). For example, sites dating to ca. 30,000-35,000 years ago have beenreported from tanegashima Island. Sites dating approximately 30,000 years ago have beenreported from the Amami-oshima and Tokunoshima Islands. Several sites were found fromthe Okinawa archipelago dating between 14,000 and 36,000 years ago. Miyako and Ishigaki
Islands yielded sites dating from 14,000 to 25,000 years ago. While only a handful ofislands in the world were occupied by Homo sapiens during the Paleolithic period (or prior
to 10,000 years ago), it is astonishing to recognize that at least eight islands in the Ryukyu
archipelago witnessed the presence of Homo sapiens during the Paleolithic period (Takamiya
et al. 2019).
During the beginning and mid-Holocene, three prehistoric cultures emerged in the
Ryukyu archipelago. they are called the Northern, Central, and Southern Ryukyu cultural
regions (Fig. 1). The Northern Ryukyu cultural region, consisting of Tanegashima andYakushima Islands, was strongly influenced by Kyushu Island during most of the prehistoric
period because of its proximity to Kyushu Island. It should be remembered, however, that
cultural contact between mainland Kyushu and the Northern Ryukyu region appears to havebeen minimal or none (at least based on archaeological data) from the late Late Yayoi to
Kofun periods. Written history began in the Northern Ryukyu culture around the 7th century
AD. The late Late Yayoi and Kofun periods in the Northern Ryukyu exhibited different
cultural features in the Kagoshima and Miyazaki regions. Japanese archaeologists often callthis period the Yayoi/Kofun Parallel. However, native speakers of English informed one of
the current paper’s authors that “parallel” is not an accurate terminology for use in academic
writings. Therefore, the concerned periods will be called Yayoi and Kofun in this paper (Table
1).
the Amami and Okinawa archipelagos constitute the Central Ryukyu cultural region.
During the early Holocene, this region was first impacted by Kyushu Island culture, likethe Northern Ryukyu. However, because of the considerable distance between Kyushu andCentral Ryukyu, a distinctive culture emerged in the latter region. the chronology here
consists of the Paleolithic, Shellmidden, and Gusuku periods. the Shellmidden period isfurther subdivided into Early and Late periods (Table 1). The former is further subdivided
into five periods, and the latter into two periods.

14South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

table 1: Chronology of the Northern, Central, and Southern Ryukyu Cultural Regions.

The Southern Ryukyu cultural region (consisting of the Miyako and Yaeyamaarchipelagos) was independent of the Northern and Central Ryukyu cultural regions during
most of the prehistoric period. No prehistoric cultural contact has been identified between
the Central and Southern Ryukyu cultures prior to the 12th century AD. Both the Miyako
and Yaeyama archipelagos witnessed presence of Homo sapience prior to 10,000 years ago(the Paleolithic period). It is said that they probably migrated from the south. The Holocene
prehistoric culture here begins with the Shimotabaru period, which was followed by several
hundred years of hiatus in the Yaeyama archipelago. While the Miyako archipelago wasthought to have undergone this hiatus, archaeological data from the Nagabaka site indicate
remnants of this hiatus (Hudson 2014). The non-pottery period followed this hiatus period(Table 1). The Central and Southern Ryukyu cultural regions were unified at about the 12th
century AD for the first time. These cultural regions have distinctive chronologies, as shownin table 1 (Ishido 2014, Okinawa Koko Gakkai Ed. 2018, Shinzato 2014).

Prehistoric Agricultural Hypotheses
Prehistoric agricultural hypotheses in the Northern, Central, and Southern Ryukyu
cultural regions will be briefly introduced here.

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

15

Northern Ryukyu Cultural Region
Prehistoric culture in this region was strongly influenced by the neighboring southern
Kyushu region from the Paleolithic to Historic period. The only period during which theregion was culturally independent from southern Kyushu was between the late Late Yayoi
and Kofun periods (ca. AD 2nd to AD 7th centuries). Based on historical written documents
such as the Nihonshoki, Torao (2006 in Nakamura 2015) and Nakamura (2006 in
Nakamura 2015) wrote that, by the late 7th century AD, rice agriculture was practiced inthis region. Nihonshoki is the earliest historical record produced during the Nara period.
this historical document indicates that rice was growing abundantly during the late 7th
century AD. thus, according to the written documents, at least by this time, agriculture
was practiced in the Northern Ryukyu cultural region (However, we need to examine thepresence or absence of rice agriculture after the 7th century based on a scientific approach—namely, archaeologically). As described above, in Kagoshima, rice remains and rice paddy
fields have been recovered from the Early Yayoi, Kofun, and Medieval sites. Did people in
the Northern Ryukyu cultural region adopt agriculture prior to the late 7th century AD? In
Tanegashima Island, as early as the 1950s, an interpretation of the so-called Yayoi “stone
sickles” hinted at the presence of rice agriculture on the island. In addition, in 1955, Kokubu
and Morizono (Kokubu and Morizono 1955 in Ishido 2014) reported rice-impressed
potsherd dating to the Kofun period. Since 2000, some sites have yielded agriculturerelated features, rice-impressed potsherds, and agriculture-related tools. However, thesefindings are indecisive. Some potsherds were found with rice impressions, but they did notprovide precise dates. Some stone tools look like stone knives, but it is difficult to makefinal determinations because their morphologies are not exactly like those used in mainland
Japan.
Ishido (2014) examined several lines of archaeological evidence and concluded
that food production was practiced before the 7th century AD. the following two lines ofevidence have been suggested by Ishido (2014) to argue that agriculture was introduced
prior to the 7th century AD. First, Ishido (2014) analyzed stone tools recovered from
Tanegashima Island and noticed that, during the Jomon period, grinding stones and stonedishes (metate) were prevalent among stone tool assemblages. He interprets that thesestone tools were used for processing nuts. During the Yayoi period to the Kofun period,
these two types of stone tools almost disappear in the stone tool assemblage. He argues
that this change in stone tool assemblage is similar to that of southern Kyushu. In addition,
the isotopic values from human bones from the Hirota site were similar to those of rice
agriculturists in Kyushu (Ishido 2014). Accordingly, Ishido (2014) feels that agriculture
was practiced on Tanegashima Island during the Yayoi to Kofun periods. Hashimoto(2012:22) believes that since Yayoi pottery diffused to Tanegashima Island, agriculture was
likely accepted there. However, he also suggests that people on the island quit farming andbecame hunter-gatherers again during the Kofun period since only little influence can bedetected from the mainland Kofun culture to Tanegashima Island.
Since few archaeological excavations have been conducted on the other islands inthis region, it is not yet understood when food production was introduced other than in16South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

tanegashima Island. From a study of stone assemblages, Ishido (2014) found that thestone tool assemblage on Yakushima Island was mostly dominated by grinding stones andstone dishes. Since these types of stone tools were frequently recovered from Jomon sites,
he suggests that Yakushima Island was occupied by hunter-gatherers—at least through the
Kofun period.
While Ishido (2014) has intensively reviewed all available archaeological andhistorical data, as of 2014, no hard evidence of rice grains and/or rice paddy fields has beenfound in this region. thus, it was not possible to suggest exactly when food production was
introduced into the Northern Ryukyu cultural region.
Central Ryukyu Cultural Region
Because the intensity of excavation has been substantial in this region comparedwith the Northern and Southern Ryukyu cultural regions, extremely large amounts ofarchaeological data have been collected. Based on these archaeological data, at least six
Shellmidden agriculture hypotheses have been proposed (Itoh, K. 2007).
The Late 1 agriculture hypothesis
this hypothesis was proposed by Hiroe Takamiya in 1985. During the Late 1 period,a spectacular cultural phenomenon known as the Shell Road emerged in the Okinawa
archipelago. The Shell Road is a long-distance exchange system conducted between the
Okinawa archipelago and mainland Japan via the Amami archipelago. Mainland Yayoi
was eager to obtain large gastropod shells (Strombus latissimus and cone shells), which areavailable in Amami and further south in Japan. The Yayoi people produced bracelets fromthem, and the Yayoi chiefs used them as status objects. In addition, since Yayoi pottery andother Yayoi cultural elements were recovered from Amami-oshima Island, it was interpreted
that Yayoi culture diffused to this island. Based on these findings, Hiroe Takamiya (1985)
thought that wet rice agriculture might have reached the Amami and Okinawa archipelagos
by the Late 1 period (see Table 1 for chronology).
The Early 5 agriculture hypothesis
this hypothesis was proposed by Nitta in 1969. He recognizes three features thatcharacterize the Early 5 period. First, he notes that the Early 5 sites yield larger amounts ofstone dishes, compared with Late 1 and Early 4. Second, while archaeological sites in thisregion usually unearth abundant faunal remains such as wild boar, fish bones, and shells,
the Early 5 sites tend to contain much fewer numbers (and species) of animal remains.
First and second observations have indicated to Nitta (1969) that plant resources weremore important during the Early 5 compared to the Early 4 and Late 1. Third, Nitta (1969)
realizes that the Early 5 sites are mostly found at higher elevations and in open areas, suchas mountain ridges and hilltops. He believes that agriculture was practiced in such locations.
The Early 4 agriculture hypothesis
Itoh, S. (1993) compared site locations of the Early 4 period and contemporaneousTakamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

17

site locations in mainland Japan (that is, Late Jomon). Accordingly, he notes that the sites
in the Okinawa archipelago are found at higher elevations than the Late Jomon period sites.
For example, he states that most archaeological sites in Japan are reported at elevations lessthan 50 m. On the other hand, the Early 4 Okinawan sites are often discovered at higher
elevations, usually more than 50 m. Furthermore, he also recognized that many Early 4 sites
yielded numerous land snails (Cyclophorus turgidus turgidus), which inhabit open areas.
these pieces of information suggest that slash and burn agriculture was practiced during thisperiod.
The “Early 4” agriculture hypothesis
this hypothesis was proposed by Hiroto Takamiya (1993). He investigated whenpeople first successfully colonized the islands of the Okinawa archipelago. To understandthe timing of successful colonization, he attempted to reconstruct the palaeodemography. A
pattern of population increase was perceived during the Early 4 period, which suggests thetiming of successful island colonization. Based on these indicators, Takamiya thought thatthe islands of Okinawa were successfully colonized for the first time during the late Early
3 and Early 4 periods. He terms this period the “Early 4.” In addition, he learned that mostislands in the world were successfully colonized by agriculturalists. the Mediterranean,most Oceania, and the Caribbean islands were settled by farmers. Based on these pieces of
information, he proposes that the “Early 4” people were farmers.
these four hypotheses were proposed by archaeologists and anthropologists. thebeginning of agriculture in the Amami and Okinawa archipelagos also attracted scholars
from different fields. Two influential hypotheses have been proposed: one by a distinctive
folklorist and another by a rice geneticist.
The Ocean Road hypothesis
This hypothesis was proposed by the pioneer of Japanese folklore studies, Kunio
Yanagita (1961). As a Japanese folklorist, Yanagita considered the foundation of modern
Japanese culture. The conclusion he reached was that wet rice agriculture must have been
the foundation. He speculated when and how wet rice agriculture was introduced into Japan.
This resulted in the proposition of the well-known Ocean Road hypothesis. He hypothesized
that, sometime between the end of the Jomon period and at the beginning of the Yayoi
period, wet rice agriculture based on Oryza sativa japonica was introduced to mainland
Japan from southern China and/or Taiwan via the Ryukyu archipelago.
The New Ocean Road hypothesis
Yoichiro Sato (1992), a distinguished rice geneticist, suggested the introductionof rice agriculture during the Jomon period. He paid special attention to the fact that by
the Early Yayoi period wet rice agriculture was practiced in Aomori, the northernmost
prefecture of Honshu Island. He thought that, for rice to grow in such a region, the ricemust have been an early ripening variety. However, rice cultivated during the Yayoi period(Oryza sativa japonica) is a late ripening variety. O. s. javanica, the other variety of Asian

18

South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

rice, is also a late ripening variety. thus, neither variety of Asian rice could have beengrown in the northern region of Japan. Experimentally, when he crossed O. s. japonica andO. s. javanica, he successfully produced an early ripening variety of rice. Based on thisexperiment, he proposes that O. s. javanica was introduced from Southeast Asia, the cradleof O. s. javanica, to Japan via the Ryukyu archipelago during the Jomon period, that is,
before the Yayoi period. Then, it was crossed with O. japonica, which was brought from the
Korean peninsula to Kyushu at the beginning of the Yayoi period.
the differences between the Ocean Road and the New Ocean Road hypotheses arethat Yanagita (1961) thought that O. s. japonica was introduced sometime at the end of the
Jomon and the beginning of the Yayoi period. On the other hand, Sato (1992) felt that O. s.
javanica was introduced during the Jomon period. Sasaki (2003) supports Sato’s hypothesis
and believes that either foxtail millet and/or rice was introduced.
Southern Ryukyu Culture Region
Proponents of the Ocean and New Ocean Road hypotheses, such as Yanagita (1961),
Sato (1992), and Sasaki (2003), presume that the Southern Ryukyu islands are the routeof entry of agriculture to the Central and Northern Ryukyus and finally to mainland Japan.
therefore, according to these theorists, the Southern Ryukyu culture region must havewitnessed agriculture during the Shimotabaru period and/or the non-pottery period.
As early as 1955, Kanaseki (1955) considered prehistoric agriculture in this area. He
examined lithics recovered from the Shimotabaru shellmidden and found morphologicalsimilarities between the adzes recovered from the site and the so-called pira (a traditional
iron spatula used for digging). Accordingly, he suggests that stone adzes were used for
agriculture during the Shimotabaru period. As has been explained in the background section,prehistoric culture here was not introduced from the Central Ryukyus, but from further south(i.e., Taiwan and/or the Philippines). While we have not been able to identify the sourceof the Southern Ryukyu culture, it is possible that the colonizers might have brought crops
with them to the Southern Ryukyu area.

Examination of Hypotheses and the Beginning of Agriculture
Northern Ryukyu Cultural Region
During the 7th century AD, rice agriculture was documented to have been practiced inthis region. How much earlier than this date was agriculture introduced? While Ishido (2014)
strongly feels that agriculture was introduced to the Northern Ryukyu cultural region before
the 7th century AD, no direct data had been known until 2015. In 2015, Nakamura (2015)
conducted an impression replica analysis. She has analyzed potsherds recovered from theIzumibaru site, Shimohagimine site, and Kamiyokino site, located in the northern part ofTanegashima Island (Fig. 4). She analyzed 1098 pieces, 1080 pieces, and 3444 pieces ofpotsherds. The Izumibaru site dates mainly to the Middle Yayoi period. From the site, she
successfully identified eight potsherds with impressions. Two of them were rice impressions(Fig. 5). Four of them were unknown seeds, one had a wood chip, and the other had possible

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

19

Fig. 5: A rice replica found from the Izumibaru site.

Fig. 6: A rice replica found from the Shimohagimine site.

Fig. 7: A foxtail millet replica found from the Shimohagimine site.

Fig. 8 A rice replica found from the Kamiyokino site.

leaf fragments. The Shimohagimine site dates to the Middle Yayoi period. Three potsherds
with impressions were recognized. One was with rice (Fig. 6), the other was with foxtail
millet (Fig.7), and the third was with a possible beetle. The Kamiyokino site is dated to theMiddle Yayoi and the late Kofun period. Three potsherds, dating to the late Kofun period,
exhibit plant impressions. Two were rice (Fig. 8), and the third could not be identified.
the analysis demonstrates that people on the island knew rice and foxtail millet by
the Middle Yayoi to the late Kofun period. The question is whether rice and foxtail millet
were cultivated on the island or imported from nearby Kyushu. While Nakamura (2015)
considers the possibility that this was a result of exchange, she thinks that rice and foxtail
millets were cultivated on the island for the following two reasons. First, the fact that rice
was more or less constantly recovered from the Middle Yayoi to Kofun period potsherds
indicates that rice was likely an important plant food. Second, according to Nakamura(2015), among these rice- and foxtail millet-impressed potsherds, only one piece wasintroduced from Kyushu, and other potsherds were locally manufactured. This also suggeststhat food production was practiced on the island.
the following pieces of information support Nakamura’s conclusion: As mentioned
above, carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis of human bones from the Hirota site indicatedthe consumption of agricultural products, likely rice (Ishido 2014). Second, the so-calledshoe-shaped axe was recovered from the Shimohagimine site. Mitomo et al. (1953 in

20South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

Nakamura 2015) felt that the shoe-shaped axe was used as a digging tool for dry field rice
agriculture. Two other sites, the Atake cave site and the Izumibaru site, also yielded a shoeshaped axe, which was dated to the Middle Yayoi period. Furthermore, as mentioned in
the southern Kyushu section, agriculture diffused into mainland Kagoshima, including theOsumi peninsula, by the Early Yayoi period. The distance between the Osumi Peninsula andTanegashima Island is approximately 40 km. Thus, it is most likely that food production was
accepted on Tanegashima Island by the Middle Yayoi period.
Central Ryukyu Cultural Region
the hypotheses presented in the earlier section imply that agriculture might have beenpracticed during prehistoric times. Flotation was conducted more intensively in this region
than in the other two regions. Consequently, the timing of the transition from hunting,gathering, and fishing to agriculture has been elucidated. to examine the hypotheses
presented above, archaeobotanical remains recovered from each period will be discussed
here (Takamiya and Chida 2014). See Table 1 for the relevant periods, Fig. 4 and Fig. 9 forsite locations and Fig. 10 for major plant remains recovered from the respective sites.
The Late 1 period
The Takachikuchibaru Shellmidden is located on Okinawajima Island in Yomitan
village. the 14C dates of the nut fragments were 375 -560 cal. AD and 115-425 cal. AD(2σ) (Takamiya and Chida 2014). Thus, the site is dated from Late 1 to early Late 2.
28

30
31 32
33 34

29

35

Okinawajima

37
38

36

Miyakojima
39

Iriomotejima

40

Ishigakijima
0

29 Mebaru

30 Takachikuchibaru

31 Uganhira hoppo

32 Kumuibaru

33 Ireibaru
37 Nagabaka

34 Aragusukushichabaru No.2
38 Minuzuma

35 Nazakibaru
39 Birosuku

36 Arafu
40 Shinzatomura higashi

Fig. 9: Site locations mentioned in the text (in Okinawa prefecture).

100km

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

21

Fig. 10: major plant remains from the Shellmidden Period(Size: Length x Thickness)

Vitis sp.

Castanopsis sieboldii Hatushima
Outside5.7x3.4x2.0 mm

DorsalInsideMachilus thunbergii
OutsideInside4.2x6.1x3.5 mm

Ventral3.5x2.4x2.1 mm

Actinidia rufa Planch.
2.2x1..2x0.9 mm

Fig. 10: Major plant remains identified from the Shellmidden sites.

Approximately 2,500 l of soil samples were collected for flotation. the application of
flotation at the site resulted in recovery of the following plant remains: Casatanopsis
sieboldii cotyledons, Actinidia rufa, many nut cotyledon fragments plus nut shells, Machilus
thunbergii cotyledons, and Vitis (grape) species. No rice remains or other cultigens wererecovered from this site.
The Early 5 period
the Sumiyoshi shellmidden on Okinoerabu Island (14C dates on three nut cotyledons(2σ): 1536-1435 cal. BC, 1430-1309 cal. BC, 1392-1212 cal. BC, Takamiya and Chida2014), the Tobaru site (14C dates on a nut cotyledon (2σ): 1014 -895 cal. BC, Takamiya2017), and the Kannate site (no 14C date, takamiya 2018a) on Tokunoshima Island are
the Early 5 sites. these three sites also have yielded Casatanopsis sieboldii cotyledons,
Actinidia rufa, many nut cotyledon fragments plus nut shells, Machilus thunbergii
cotyledons, and Vitis (grape) species. Only plant remains of wild species have been obtained22South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

from these sites.
The Early 4 period
The Kuzuri site on Kikaijima Island belongs to this period (Takamiya 2018b). The
14
C date of a possible Machilus thumbergii cotyledon is 1701-1625 cal. BC (2σ). The
site has yielded possible nut cotyledons, nut shells, Machilus thumbergii cotyledons,possible Machilus thumbergii cotyledon fragments, and Actinidia rufa. the Mebaru site on
Okinawajima Island also belongs to this period (Takamiya and Chida 2014). The 14C dates
on wood charcoals are 2120-2080 cal. BC, 2190-1935 cal. BC, 2300-2140 cal. BC, 13051045 cal. BC and 1135-980 cal. BC (1σ). The site is waterlogged, and the preservation ofplant remains was excellent. Consequently, a large number of plant remains were obtained.
The analysis revealed that more than 30 taxa were identified. The most conspicuous plantremains are nuts, especially Quercus miyagi. No cultivated plants were obtained from thissite.
The Early 3 period
At the present time, there is no known site for this analysis, which only corresponds
to the Early 3 period. The Omonawa No. 4 site, located on Tokunoshima Island, dates fromthe Early 3 to Early 4 periods, based on pottery typology (no 14C date, Takamiya 2016).
Only a small amount of soil samples was collected. Accordingly, the plant remains obtained
are small in quantity. The identified plant remains are Castanopsis sieboldii cotyledons,
nut cotyledon fragments, and possible nut shells. the results of the analysis indicate that
the Omonawa No. 4 people were gatherers of wild plants. The Kamino site, located on
Okinoerabujima Island, is contemporaneous with the Omonawa No. 4 site. Although
flotation was not conducted, the site yielded Machilus thunbergii cotyledons (Kamimura
1984).
The Early 2 period
The Ireibaru site in Chatan Town on Okinawajima Island is a waterlogged site dating tothis period. Several 14C data were collected. They are 4220-3995 cal. BC (1σ) on Pandanus
seed, 3915-3880 cal. BC (1σ) and 3975-3925 cal. BC (1σ) on Castanopsis cotyledons, 42504210 cal. BC (1σ) and 3960-3915 cal. BC (1σ) on carbide materials on potsherds, 39363877 cal. BC (1σ) on nut cotyledons and 3945-3770 cal. BC (1σ) on wild boar bone Tsuji,
Ohmatsu, and Tsuji (in Takamiya and Chida 2014) conducted an archaeobotanical analysis.
They identified at least 60 taxa. Numerous nut remains, such as Quercus miyagi andCastanopsis sp., have been recovered. the only cultigen obtained from the site is Lagenaria
siceraria (bottle gourd) seeds. While a large amount of plant remains are obtained from thesite, no rice or other cultigens are identified, except for Lagenaria siceraria.
The Early 1 period
the Aragusuku Shichabaru No. 2 site is located several kilometers north of the Ireibaru
site (Takamiya and Chida 2014). The site yielded finger-nailed pottery, which is the type

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

23

pottery of this period. Only one 14C date was obtained from a wild boar bone with a dateof 5047-4911 cal. BC (1σ). The site is a waterlogged site. Thus, plant remains were wellpreserved. The analysis successfully identified more than 30 taxa. They all belonged to wild
species such as Myrica rubra.
Recently, archaeological sites older than 7000 years with pottery have been reported
from the Central Ryukyus. The Hango site, located on Amami-oshima Island, has yielded
potsherds dating back to more than 10,000 years ago. In this study because the site yielded
pottery, the site is considered to belong to the Early 1 period (Takamiya 2019). Flotation was
conducted at the site, and numerous nut cotyledons, mostly Castanopsis sp., were obtained.
the 14C dates of nut cotyledons from the site were 9445-9428 cal. BC (2σ), 9463-9297 cal.
BC (2σ), 9296-9214 cal. BC (2σ), and 9296-9218 cal. BC (2σ). Since food production was
not practiced even in Japan at around 9,200 BC, it is expected that the site would contain no
cultigens. Indeed, no cultigen was recovered from the site.
Short summary
Archaeobotanical analysis conducted over the last three decades from sites datingfrom Early 1 to Late 1 yielded only wild plants, except bottle gourd from the Ireibaru
site. The analysis suggested that, from Early 1 to Late 1, nuts were an important source ofcarbohydrates in this region, where several nut-bearing species are known. Furthermore, theagriculture hypotheses presented above (the New Ocean Road, the Ocean Road, the “Early4”, Early 4, Early 5, and the Late 1 agriculture hypotheses; see Prehistoric Agricultural
Hypotheses section for the difference between the “Early 4” and Early 4.) can be all
rejected. Was food production introduced during the Late 2 period?
The Late 2 period
Plant remains were collected from several sites. the Omonawa No. 1 site is locatednear the Omonawa No.4 site mentioned above (Takamiya 2016). The 14C dates on wood
charcoal were 710-750 cal. AD and 770-890 cal. AD (2σ). The site yielded C. sieboldii
cotyledons and nut shells. Yomisaki, Arago, and Matsunoto on Amami-oshima Island areother Late 2 sites where flotation was conducted. Since many 14C datings were collected, we
will not present each date here—only the collective results (Takamiya and Chida 2014). The
dates obtained were between the 5th and 7th centuries AD. Castanopsis sieboldii, Machilus
thumbergii, and nut shells were obtained from the former two sites. No plant remains,
including cultigens, were obtained from the Matsunoto site. Furthermore, archaeobotanicalanalysis was conducted at the Nagarabaru Higashi shellmidden on Iejima Island in the
Okinawa archipelago (Takamiya and Chida 2014). The site is contemporaneous with thefour sites mentioned above. As expected, the shellmidden has yielded similar plant remains,such as Castanopsis sieboldii and Machilus thumbergii cotyledons. thus, the series ofarchaeobotanical studies strongly suggest that people of the Late 2 also consumed wild plantresources. then, when did agriculture begin in the Central Ryukyu region?

24

South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

The Beginning of Agriculture in the Central Ryukyu Region
The Amami Archipelago(Fig. 4 for site locations and Fig.11 for major cultigens recovered)
In 2002, Takamiya (in Takamiya and Chida 2014) had an opportunity to analyze plantremains recovered from flotation at the Akakina Gusuku site. Based on artifacts recoveredfrom the site, the site was dated to the 12th to 13th centuries AD. The result of flotation wasastonishing. While only six l of soil samples were processed by flotation, more than 200
plant remains were recovered. Interestingly, approximately 180 were rice. Other plantremains were barley and millet. The analysis demonstrated for the first time that during the
Gusuku period, the subsistence economy in this region was agriculture.
Between 2006 and 2016, several late Shellmidden and initial Gusuku period sites
were excavated, and soil samples for flotation were collected. These sites are the Gusuku
site group on Kikaijima Island (Takamiya and Chida 2014) and the Kawaminetsuji site
(Takamiya 2010) and the Nakagumi site (Takamiya and Chida 2013) on TokunoshimaIsland. the latter two sites yielded small amount of cultigens such as barley. the Gusuku
site group consisted of eight sites, and soil samples were collected from four of these sites.
(Size: Length x Width x Thickness)

Oryza sativa L.
(Rice)

Triticum aestivum L.
(Wheat)(Barley)

4.6x2.9x1.7mm(Rice)

3.4x2.4x2.2mm(Wheat)5.6x2.5x1.9mm(Barley)

4.6x2.9x1.7mm

3.4x2.4x2.2mm

Setalia italica (L.) Beauv.
(Foxtail millet)
1.2x1.2x1mm

Hordeum vulgare L.

5.6x2.5x1.9mm

Panicum miliaceum L.
(Broomcorn millet)(Broomcorn millet)
1.7x1.8x1.4mm

Fig. 11: Major plant remains identified from the
Gusuku sites.
1.7x1.8x1.4mm
1.2x1.2x1mm

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago25

All these sites yielded cultigens, such as barley, wheat, rice, foxtail millet, and broomcorn
millet. The result suggests that by this time period food production was the major
subsistence economy in the Amami archipelago.
three rice grains from the Akakina Gusuku site were 14C dated. the dates were
between the 11th and 12th centuries AD. In addition, nine cultigen samples (rice, barley,
wheat, and foxtail millet) from the Gusuku site group were also 14C dated. they belonged
to between the 8th and 12th centuries AD. thus, in the Amami archipelago, food production
began sometime between the 8th and 12th centuries AD. the Maeatari site, on tokunoshimaIsland, also belongs to the initial Gusuku period. the site also unearthed cultigens, including
foxtail millet, wheat, barley, and rice (Takamiya 2018c). The 14C dates of cultigens, such as
those on rice and barley grains, were from the 10th to 11th centuries AD.
The Okinawa Archipelago(See Fig. 9 for site locations)Thanks to the introduction of flotation in the early the 1990s, the timing of the Okinawa
archipelago’s transition from hunting, gathering, and fishing to agriculture has been clearly
understood. In the Okinawa archipelago and the Amami archipelago, the initial stage of the
Gusuku period is characterized by the presence of Chinese white wares, steatite cauldrons,
and kamuiyaki (gray stone ware). These dates range from the late 11th to the 12th centuries
AD. the sites discussed below have yielded these three types of artifacts. they are all
located on Okinawajima Island. The Yabumedabaru shellmidden is thought to belong to thelate Shellmidden period to the initial Gusuku period (Takamiya and Chida 2014). The siteyielded foxtail millet, barley, wheat, and rice. the respective 14C dates of rice, wheat, andbarley were 1018-1155 cal. AD (2σ), 969-1045 cal. AD (2σ), and 1024-1115 cal. AD (2σ).
the dates of cultigens were from the 10th to the 12th centuries AD. The Kumuibaru site isinterpreted as the initial Gusuku period. At the site, a large number of soil samples werecollected and processed by flotation (Takamiya and Chida 2014). The site yielded rice,
foxtail millet, wheat, barley, and broomcorn millet. In addition, foxtail millets, barley, andrice were 14C dated. They dated respectively 1031-1170 cal. AD (2σ), 967-1040 cal. AD (2σ),
and 1062-1155 cal. AD (2σ). These dates indicate that the cultigens can be dated to between
the 10th and 12th centuries AD. Finally, the Uganhira-hoppo site, which is also thought tobe the initial Gusuku period site, yielded cultigens (Takamiya and Chida 2014). The siteyielded rice, foxtail millet, wheat, and barley. Among them, rice, wheat, and barley were14
C dated. The dates obtained are respectively 1022-1155 cal. AD (2σ), 990-1057 cal. AD(2σ), 1022-1155 cal. AD (2σ). Thus, they indicated that agriculture began in the Okinawa
archipelago between the 10th and 12th centuries AD.
Short Summary
A series of archaeobotanical research conducted in the Central Ryukyu has
demonstrated that agriculture centered around foxtail millet, wheat, barley, and rice began
in this region between the 8th and 12th centuries AD. As presented in the previous section,no cultigens were found from the Shellmidden period (more precisely, before the 7th century

26South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

AD), except for bottle gourd. The analysis showed that food production was rather abruptly
introduced into the Central Ryukyu region. the fact that the dates of cultigens in the Amami
archipelago were the 8th to 12th centuries AD, and those in the Okinawa archipelago were
between the 10th and 12th centuries AD strongly suggests that food production began in the
Amami archipelago and then spread to the Okinawa archipelago 100 to 200 years later.
While recovered grains were not directly 14C dated, the Nazakibaru site (estimated datesof the 9th to 10th centuries AD), in Okinawajima Island, also yielded foxtail millet, rice,barley, and wheat (Takamiya 1996). This suggests that food production spread almost
spontaneously in the Amami and Okinawa archipelagos.
The Beginning of Agriculture in the Southern Ryukyu Cultural Region(See Table 1 for Chronology, Fig. 9 for site locations)Archaeobotanical research has not been conducted as intensively as in the Central
Ryukyu cultural region. Flotation has been conducted at only two prehistoric sites. theArafu site on Miyakojima Island is dated to the non-pottery period (Takamiya 2003). The
flotation yielded no cultigens—only small amount of grass seeds. The Nagabaka site is also
located on Miyakojima Island. According to Hudson (2014), who excavated the site, thesite dates ca. 4,000 years ago to the non-pottery period. The analysis of plant remains has
not been completed yet. However, prehistoric samples examined so far do not contain any
plant remains. According to Shimabukuro (2011), no cultigens have been unearthed fromthe Shimotabaru and non-pottery periods in Yaeyama arcguoelago.
The non-pottery period ends with the introduction of Chinese white wares, steatitecauldrons, and kamuiyaki (gray stone ware) (which date ca. late 11th to the early 12th
centuries in Central Ryukyus). The end of the non-pottery period simultaneously signifies
that the Central and Southern Ryukyu cultures united for the first time at the beginning of
the new era, the Gusuku period. It should be remembered that, as we have seen, these threesets of artifacts are associated with cultigens in the Central Ryukyus. the initial Gusuku
period in the Yaeyama archipelago is called the Shinzato mura period (12th-13th centuries
AD). While no flotation has been carried out, some Shinzato mura period sites, such as the
Shinzato mura higashi and Birosuku, have yielded rice and mugi (i.e., barley or wheat inJapanese). Rice phytoliths have been reported from the Birokuku site (Ishigaki shi Somubu
Shishi Henshushitsu 2009). These pieces of information suggest that agriculture spread to
the South Ryukyu cultural region at the beginning of the Shinzato mura period (Pearson2013).
Recently, both flotation and impression replica analyses were conducted at the
Mizunuma site on Miyakojima Island. The soil samples for flotation were collected froma hearth, and dates were estimated to be between the 11/12th and 15th centuries AD. theflotation process successfully recovered more than 300 carbonized seeds. They are foxtail
millet (109), barley (90), wheat (31), mugi (barely or wheat (53)), and Fabaceae (16).
Fabaceae possibly belonged to the adzuki group. In addition, a small amount of rice (6) was
identified (Chida 2015, Manabe et al. 2019). According to Manabe et al. (2019), the 14C
dates are as follows: barley 1272-1309 cal. AD, 1338-1397 cal. AD, wheat 1297-1373 cal.

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

27

AD, 1279-1318 cal. AD. The cultigens date between the 13th and 14th centuries AD.
Manabe et al. (2019) conducted the impression replica method on 1537 potsherds,
dating to the 12th to 14th centuries AD. Among these potsherds, 83 had an impression. The
impressions totaled 151. the identification of these impressions revealed that they were
mostly foxtail millet (almost 80%), followed by barley, wheat, and mugi. In addition,
broomcorn millet, adzuki group, and rice were identified. As implied by the flotation
analysis, all five important crops (rice, wheat, barley, foxtail millet, and broomcorn millet)
were also identified by impression replica analysis. Thus, the people of the Minuzuma site
grew these crops at least by the 12th to 14th centuries AD. While paleoethnobotanical studies
have just begun in the South Ryukyu cultural region, the above analysis indicates that
agriculture was practiced in this region from the 12th to 14th centuries AD. Since the threesets of artifacts (Chinese white wares, steatite cauldrons, and kamuiyaki) have been reported
at several sites in this region, it strongly suggests that food production was the major
subsistence economy in the South Ryukyu cultural region at this time.

Discussion and Conclusions
the origin of agriculture in the Ryukyu archipelago has been vigorously discussed
among researchers for more than fifty years. While it can be understood that agricultural
origins have been vigorously discussed in this region, it can also be interpreted that this“vigorousness” had emerged as a result of an inadequate amount of archaeobotanical data.
Indeed, most hypotheses presented in this paper are based on secondary data. Secondary
data in this paper means data, which might imply the presence of agriculture, such as thepresence of Yayoi pottery and site locations that might be suitable for agriculture. These
pieces of data are not decisive in stating the presence of agriculture, although they might
hint at the presence of agriculture. to understand agricultural origins, we need direct data,such as cultigens with precise dating, impression of cultigens in/on potsherds, and/or ancient
paddy fields. For the last three decades, direct data have accumulated in this region, mainly
owing to the introduction of flotation and impression replica analyses.
the results of the impression replica analysis conducted at three sites dating to theMiddle Yayoi and Kofun periods in the Northern Ryukyu cultural region have elucidated
that rice and foxtail millets were cultivated by the Middle Yayoi and continuously to the
Kofun periods. This analysis revealed that agriculture was practiced in the Northern Ryukyu
cultural region prior to the 7th century AD, revealing that agriculture was practiced earlier
than historically acknowledged. Because more archaeological excavations were conductedin the Central Ryukyu cultural region compared to the Northern and Southern Ryukyu
cultural regions, at least six Shellmidden agriculture hypotheses have been proposed. theapplication of flotation in this region has shed light on the timing of the transition fromhunting, gathering, and fishing to agriculture. Agriculture was practiced in the Amami
archipelago between the 8th and 12th centuries AD and in the Okinawa Archipelago between
the 10th and 12th centuries AD. In the South Ryukyu cultural region, paleoethnobotanicalresearch has just been launched. While traditional archaeological approaches in this region

28South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021(based on artifacts, i.e., secondary data) have suggested the possible presence of agriculture
during the Shimotabaru and/or the non-pottery period, recent applications of flotation andimpression replica analyses strongly suggest that agriculture was introduced into this region
for the first time around the 12th and 14th centuries AD. While Ishido’s (2014) hypothesis
has been confirmed, other prehistoric agriculture hypotheses proposed based on secondary
data from the Central and Southern Ryukyus have been rejected, including the famous
Ocean Road and New Ocean Road hypotheses.
Applications of flotation (and the 14C dating of cultigens) and impression replica
analyses shed light on several important aspects of agricultural origin in the archipelago inaddition to the timing of the origin. Firstly, while the hypotheses mentioned in this paperargued for the presence of agriculture, four of them speculate from where agriculture
was introduced: the Ocean Road and New Ocean Road hypotheses from the south; the“Early 4” and Late 1 from the north. In contrast to the two “southern” route hypotheses,
which predicted that agriculture (wet and dry field rice agriculture) was introduced tomainland Japan from southern China/Taiwan or Southeast Asia via the Ryukyu archipelago,
agriculture in the Ryukyu archipelago was diffused from north to south. In that, the “northern”
route was correct. However, the timing of the introduction from the north was wrong. Yayoi
agriculture began ca. 9th BC in northern Kyushu, and then it spread into southern Kyushu
by the 7th BC. By the Middle Yayoi, it reached the Northern Ryukyu cultural region, andthis Middle Yayoi agriculture continued to be practiced there in the succeeding Kofun
and historical periods. It then advanced into the Amami archipelago by ca. the 8th to 12th
centuries AD. Immediately after it reached the Amami archipelago, it expanded into the
Okinawa archipelago (the 10th to 12th centuries AD) probably within 100-200 years (or if the
Nazakibaru data is acceptable, it spread within 100 years). Finally, within the next 100-200
years, agriculture was established in the Southern Ryukyu cultural region (the 12th to 14th
centuries AD). Thus, recent studies have clearly demonstrated that agriculture spread from
north to south in the Ryukyu archipelago.
Applications of flotation and impression replica analyses have revealed that hunters,
gatherers, and fishers lived in the Central Ryukyu cultural region at least from ca. 7,000
years ago (or 11,000 years ago, if we include the Hango site) to 1,000 years ago. This is anextremely important finding from this region. Many islands in the world were colonizedby agriculturalists, including all the Mediterranean and most Caribbean and Oceanianislands. Only a handful of islands were colonized by hunter-gatherers. These islands arecharacterized by 1) large islands, 2) being located close to a continent or another large
island, 3) availability of sea mammals, 4) translocation of edible plants and animals from themotherland to the island, or 5) a combination of 1)-4) (Takamiya et al. 2016). None of theseapplies to Central Ryukyu. Furthermore, recent findings of Paleolithic sites in this region
suggest the possibility of hunter-gatherer habitation on the islands since ca. 30,000 years
ago. this would contribute brand new information to human history and world history.
In the future, at least two issues must be examined. First, the Northern Ryukyu cultural
region accepted agriculture almost immediately after the Yayoi culture spread into southern
Kyushu. Why did they accept agriculture so fast? It took several centuries until it reachedTakamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago29

the Amami and Okinawa archipelagos. While the Amami and Okinawa people knew of thepresence of rice agriculture by the Middle Yayoi period, why did they not accept it until ca.
the 8th to 12th centuries AD? Furthermore, agriculture diffused to the Amami and Okinawa
archipelago almost simultaneously, and it spread within 100 to 200 later to reach theSouthern Ryukyu cultural region. Why did it spread almost concurrently in the Central andSouthern Ryukyu cultural regions?
the second issue is the subsistence economy of the Southern Ryukyu cultural region.
Based on flotation and impression replica analyses, it is certain that agriculture wasintroduced into this region by the 12th to 14th centuries AD. How about the subsistence
economy during the prehistoric times (the Shimotabaru and non-pottery periods)? The
results of flotation at the two sites (Arafu and Nagabaka sites) imply no evidence ofcultigens. Is this true or just a result of insufficient research there? If people consume
cultigens, applications of flotation will reveal this economy. Or, have root crops played asignificant role there? If so, the starch analysis could indicate the presence or absence of root
crop consumption. Similar to the Central Ryukyu cultural region, did hunters, gatherers, andfishers sustain themselves in the small islands? If this is the case, it will shed very importantlight on the life of Homo sapiens on small islands. In any case, the studies on the subsistence
economy in the Ryukyu archipelago will greatly contribute to the nature of our species,
Homo sapiens, in addition to the elucidation of the cultural history of the archipelago.

Acknowledgement
Obata Hiroki (Kumamoto University) kindly provided Figs. 5-8. Many scholars
from Kyushu and Ryukyu archipelagos contributed to this research. We thank them
wholeheartedly. This research was partially funded by Kakenhi No. 18K01068. Twoanonymous reviewers and Sakamaki Yoshitaka (editor in chief for South Pacific Studies)
have sharpened the contents of this paper. We would also like to thank them.

References
Bar-Yosef, O. 2011. Climatic Fluctuation and Early Farming in West and East Asia. Current
Anthropology, 52 Supplement 4: S175-S193.
Chida, H. 2015. Miyakojima no Gusuku Jidai Noko Shiron (A Hypothesis on the
Miyakojima Island Gusuku Period Agriculture). In: Ima Miyako no Kokogaku gaomoshroi! Mudoki-ki kara Gusukujidai eno Utsuri Kawari Okinawa Koko Gakkai 2015
Nendo Kenkyu Happyou Shiryo (Ed. Okinawa Koko Gakkai), 52-59. Okinawa Koko
Gakkai, Nishihara Cho, Okinawa, Japan (in Japanese).
Crawford, G. W. 1983. Paleoethonbotany of the Kameda Penninsula, Jomon. 200 pp.,
University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, USA.
Crawford, G. W. and Yoshizaki M. 1987. Ainu Ancestors and Prehistoric Asian
Agriculture. Journal of Archaeological Science, 14: 201-213.
Grayson, K. D. 1984. Quantitative Zooarchaeology: topics in the analysis of archaeological30South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

faunas. 202 pp., Academic Press, London, UK.
Hashimoto, t. 2012. Kofun Chikuzo Shuen Chiiki ni okeru Kyokaikeisei-Nangen Shakai
to Kokka Keisei (the Formation of the Boundary in the Peripheral Regions during
the Kofun Building Times-the Southern Boundary Society and the State Formation).
Kokogaku Kenkyu, 58(4)：17-31 (in Japanese).
Hisa, Y., and Katata, M. 2005. Doki Akkon Repurika-ho ni yoru Tensha Sagyo no Tebiki (AGuide Book for Transcriptions of Pottery Impression Replicas). Fukuoka Shi Maizo
Bunkazai Senta, Fukuoka Shi, Japan (in Japanese).
Hudson, M. 2014. Sakishimani okeru Senshijidai no Hito to Seitaishi-Miyakojima
Nagabakai Iseki wo Chushin ni (Prehistoric Human and Ecological History in the
Sakishima Archipelago: focusing on the Nagabaka site, Miyakojima Island). In:
Ryukyu Retto Senshi/Genshi Jidai no Kankyo to Bunka no Hensen (Eds. Takamiya, H.
and Shinzato, T.), 181-194, Rokuichi Shobo, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
Ishido, K. 2014. Osumishoto no Senshi Bunka ni mirareru Seigyo no Tokucho to Hensen(Subsistence Economy and its Change in the Prehistoric Cultures in the Osumi
Archipelago). In: Ryukyu Retto Senshi/Genshi Jidai no Kankyo to Bunka no Hensen(Eds. Takamiya, H. and Shinzato,T.), 159-170, Rokuichi Shobo, Tokyo, Japan (inJapanese).
Ishigaki shi Somubu Shishi Henshushitsu 2009. Mudoki kara Yudoki e (From Non-Pottery
to Pottery). Ishigaki Shi Kokogaku Bijuaru Ban 4. 70 pp., Ishigaki Board of Education,
Ishigaki Shi, Japan (in Japanese).
Itoh, K. 2007. Kaizuka Jidai ni okeru Nokomondai Kenkyu shi (History of the Origins
of Agricultural Issues during the Shellmidden Period). Nanto Koko, 26: 97-120 (inJapanese).
Itoh, S. 1993. Ryukyu Jomon Bunka no Wakugumi (A Framework of the Ryukyu Jomon
Culture). Nanto Koko, 13: 19-34 (in Japanese).
Kamimura, T. 1984. Nanseishoto Senshi-jidai ni okeru Kokogaku teki Kiso Kenkyu (theFundamental Archaeological Research on Prehistoric Southwest Islands). 132 pp.,
Kagoshima University, Kagoshima Shi, Japan (in Japanese).
Kanaseki, T. 1955. Yaeyama-gunto no Kodai Bunka (The Ancient Culture of the Yaeyama
Archipelago). Minzokugaku Kenkyu, 19(2): 107-141 (in Japanese).
Kawaguchi, M. 2002. Minami Kyushu ni okeru Inasaku bunka to Mokuseihin-saishin nochosa seika kara” (Rice Agriculture and Wooden Tools in the Southern Kyushu-Latest
Excavation Results). Gekkan Bunkazai, 11: 38-43 (in Japanese).
Kuwahata, M. and Yokoyama, A. 2000. Inasaku bunka wa Minami Kyushu ni Dou
Hiromattaka- Miyazaki Ken Nairikubu no Isekikara (How Rice Agriculture Spread into
the Southern Kyushu-From Inland Sites in Miyazaki Prefecture), Rekishi Kyushu, 11:
2-10 (in Japanese).
Manabe, A., and Obata, H. 2011. X sen CT ni yoru Senzai Akkon no Kenshutsu (Detectionof Unexposed Impressions by X Ray CT). Nihon Shokuseishi Gakkai Dai 26 Kai
Taikai Koen Yoshi-shu, 82-82 (in Japanese).
Manabe, A., Chida, H., Kugai, M., and Obata, H. 2019. Miyako shi Minuzuma Iseki

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

31

Shutsudo Gusuku Doki no Akkon Seika (Results of the Survey of the Impressions on
the Gusuku Pottery Found in Minuzuma Site in Miyako City). Nanto Koko, 38: 51-66(in Japanese).
Miyamoto, K. 2018. Yayoijidai Kaishiki no Jisunendai Sairon (Reconsideration of theActual Dates of the Beginning of the Yayoi Period). Kokogaku Zasshi, 100(2): 1-27 (inJapanese).
Miyamoto, K. 2019. Soron Yayoi Jidai no Hajimari (General Remarks on Several Issues
about the Beginning of the Yayoi Period). Kokogaku Janaru 729: 3-4 (in Japanese).
Nakamura, N. 2015. Tanegashima Doki Akkon Chosa kara mita Yayoi/Kofun Jidai
Heikouki no Shokuyo Shokubutsu (The Food Plants during the Yayoi and the Kofun
Parallel Periods as Seen from Tanegashima Island Potsherds Impression Analysis). In:
Archaeology from the South 3 Honda Michiteru Sensei Taishoku Kinen Ronbunshu(Ed. by Honda Michiteru Sensei Taishoku Kinen Jigyokai), 161-168, Honda
Michiteru Sensei Taishoku Kinen Jigyokai, Kagoshima, Japan (in Japanese).
Nakamura, N., Manabe, A., Ohnishi, t., Sangawa,t., Fukui, t., and Kuwahata, M.
2013. Miyakonojo shi ni okeru Doki Akkon no Chosa-Saibai Shokubutsu no Donyu ni
kanrenshite- (Potsherds Impression Analysis in Miyakonojo City-The Introduction ofCultivated Plants). Miyazaki Koko, 24 (bottom):15-29 (in Japanese).
Nakayama, S. 2010. Shokubutsu Koko Gaku to Nihon no Noko no Kigen (Archaeobotany
and the Origins of Agriculture in Japan). Doseisha, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
Nakayama, S. and Kaimon, T. 2009. Yamanashiken Meotoishi Iseki no Jomon Jidai Chuki
no Mame Akkon (Bean Impressions Observed in the Middle Jomon Meotoishi Site,
Yamanashi Prefecture). Yamanashi Koko Gaku Ronnshu, 4: 43-61 (in Japanese).
Nakazawa, M. 2005. Sanin Chiho ni okeru Jomon Jidai no Shokubutsushitsu Shokuryo ni
tsuite: Saibai Shokubutu no Mondai wo Chushin ni (On Plant Food Consumed during
the Jomon Period in the Sanin Region, Mainly Focusing on Cultigens). In: Dai 16 Kai
Chugoku/Shikoku Jomon Kenkyukai Happyo Shiryoushu Jomon Banki no Sanin Chiho(Ed. Chu/Shi Jomon Kenkyukai), pp. 119-130. Chu/Shi Jomon Kenkyukai, Yonego,
Japan (in Japanese).
Nitta, J. 1969. Saikin no Okinawa ni okeru Koko Gakkai no Doko (Recent trends in the
Archaeology of Okinawa). Ryukyu Shigaku, 1: 61-70 (in Japanese).
Obata, H. 2016. Tane wo Maku Jomon-jin (The Jomon People who Sowed Seeds). 217 pp.,
Yoshikawa kobunkan, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
Obata, H., Manabe, A., Nakamura, N., Onishi, t., and Senba, Y. 2011a. A New Light on
the Evolution and Propagation of Prehistoric Grain Pests: the world's oldest maize
weevils found in Jomon potteries, Japan. PLos ONE (http://www.plosone.org).
Obata, H., Ha, I-S., and Manabe, A., 2011b. Tosando Kaizuka Hakken no Kankoku Saikono Kibi Akkon (The Oldest Millet Impressions Found from the Dongsam-dong ShellMidden). Nihon Shokuseishi Gakkai Dai 26 Kai Taikai Koen Yoshi Shu, 39-40 (inJapanese).
Obata, H., Sasaki, Y., and Senba, Y. 2007. Doki Akkon karamita Jomonjidai Ko/Bankiniokeru Kyushu no Daizu Saibai (Cultivation of Soya Bean as Seen from the Late and32South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

Final Jomon Potsherd Impressions). Shokuseishi Kenkyu, 15(2): 97-114 (in Japanese).
O’Connor, T. 2008. The Archaeology of Animal Bones. 206 pp., Texas A&M Press Sutton
Publishing, College Station, USA.
Okinawa Koko Gakkai (ed.) 2018. Nanto Koko Nyumon (An Introduction to theArchaeology of the Southern Islands). Bodainku, Naha, Japan.
Ohnishi, t., Manabe, A., Sangawa, t., Kanegae, K. and Nakamura, N. 2012. Bishoshoibutsu/bisho-kon-ato no Bunsekini motozuku Shokuyo Shokubutu no Chosa-tokuni
SLW deno torikumi wo chushin ni (A Study on Edible Plants Based on the Analyses ofMicro-Artifacts and Micro-Impressions). Kagoshima Koko, 42: 99-108 (in Japanese).
Pearson, R. 2013. Ancient Ryukyu. 396 pp., University of Hawaii Press, Manoa, USA.
Sasaki, K. 2003. Minami karano Nihon Bunka (Japanese Cultural Elements That were
Introduced from the South). 296 pp., NHK books, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
Sato, Y. 1992. Ine no Kita Michi (Tracing the Route of Rice). 166 pp., Shokabo, Tokyo,
Japan (in Japanese).
Shimabukuro, A. 2011. Sakishima Shoto no Senshijidai-Yaeyama Shoto wo Chushin
ni (Prehistory of the Sakishima Archipelago, Mainly Focusing on the Yaeyama
Archipelago) In: Senshi/Genshi Jidai no Ryukyu Retto-hito to keikan (Eds. Takamiya H.
and Itoh, S.), 267-289. Rokuichi Shobo, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
Shimoyama, S. 1995. Kokogaku kara mita Hayato no Seikatsu-‘Hayato’ Mondai to Tembo(The Life Ways of the Hayato as seen from Archaeology-Questions and Prospects
on the Hayato). In: Saikai to Nanto no Seikatsu/Bunka (Ed. Shinkawa, T.), 169-199,
Meicho Shuppan, Osaka, Japan (in Japanese).
Shinzato, T. 2014. Ryukyu Retto no Senshijidai Meisho to Jidai kubun (Period Names andPeriod Divisions in the Prehistoric Ryukyu Archipelago). In: Ryukyu Retto Senshi/
Genshi Jidai no Kankyo to Bunka no Hensen (Eds. Shinzato, t. and Takamiya, H.),viii-xii, Rokuichi Shobo, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
Struever, S. 1968. Flotation Techniques for the Recovery of Small-Scale ArchaeobotanicalRemains. American Antiquity, 33(3): 353-362.
Takamiya, Hiroe 1985. Okinawa no Iwayuru Koki Iseki ni tsuite-Yayoi Bunka tono Kanren
ni oite (So called the Late Period Sites in Okinawa-Relation with Yayoi Culture). In:
Nihonshi no Reimei (Ed. Yawata, I.), 311-333, Rokko Shuppan, Tokyo, Japan (inJapanese).
Takamiya, Hiroto 1993. Senshi Jidai no Okinawa honto ni okeru Hito no Tekio Katei(Adaptation Processes of Homo sapiens to Prehistoric Okinawajima Isand). Kobunka
Danso, 30: 1089-1107 (in Japanese).
Takamiya, Hiroto 1996. Kodai-minzokushokubutsu gaku teki apurochi ni yoru Nazakibaru
Iseki no Seigyo (the Subsistence Economy of the Nazakibaru Site, based on
Paleoethnobotanical Approach). In: Nazakibaru Iseki (Ed. The Naha City Board of
Education), 83-100, The Naha City Board of Education, Naha Shi, Japan (in Japanese).
Takamiya, Hiroto 2003. Arafu Iseki Shutsudo no Shokubutu Itai (Plant Remains Recoveredfrom the Arafu Site). In: Arafu Iseki Chosa Kenkyu I (Ed. Arafu Iseki Hakkutsu
Chosadan), 105-106, Arafu Iseki Chosadan, Ginowan shi, Japan (in Japanese).

Takamiya and Nakamura: The Beginning of Agriculture in the Ryukyu Archipelago

33

Takamiya, Hiroto 2010. Kawaminetsuji Iseki Shutsudo no Shokubutu Itai (Plant Remains
Recovered from the Kawaminetsuji Site). In: Kawaminetsuji Hakkutsu Chosa
Hokokusho (Ed. The Isen Town Board of Education), 77-79, The Isen Town Board of
Education, Isen Cho, Japan (in Japanese).
Takamiya, Hiroto 2016. Omonawa Dai 1 Kaizuka, Omonawa Dai 4 Kaizuka Shutsudo no
Shokubutu Itai (Plant Remains Recovered from the Omonawa No.1 Shellmidden andthe Omonawa No. 4 Shellmidden). In: Omonawa Kaizuka Sokatsu Hokokusho (Ed.
The Isen Town Board of Education), 140-141, The Isen Town Board of Education, Isen
Cho, Japan (in Japanese).
Takamiya, Hiroto 2017. Tobaru Iseki Shutsudo no Shokubutu Itai (Plant Remains
Recovered from the Tobaru Site). In: Tobaru Iseki (4) (Ed. The Amagi Town Boardof Education), 77-86, The Amagi Town Board of Education, Amagi Cho, Japan (inJapanese).
Takamiya, Hiroto 2018a. Kannate Iseki Shutsudo no Shokubutu Itai (Plant Remains
Recovered from the Kantena Site). In: Maeatari Iseki/Kannate Iseki (Ed. The Isen
Town Board of Education), 117-119, The Isen Town Board of Education, Isen Cho,
Japan (in Japanese).
Takamiya, Hiroto 2018b. Kuzuri Iseki Shutsudo no Shokubutu Itai (Plant Remains
Recovered from the Kuzuri Site). In: Kuzuri Iseki (Ed. The Kikai Town Board of
Education), 122-132, The Kikai Town Board of Education, Kikai Cho, Japan (inJapanese).
Takamiya, Hiroto 2018c. Maeatari Iseki Shutsudo no Shokubutu Itai (Plant Remains
Recovered from the Maeatari Site). In: Maeatari Iseki/Kannate Iseki (Ed. The Isen
Town Board of Education), 61-70, The Isen Town Board of Education, Isen Cho, Japan(in Japanese).
Takamiya, Hiroto 2019. Hango Iseki (dai 2 ji chosa) Shutsudo no Shokubutu Itai (Plant
Remains Recovered from the Hango <the second investigation> Site). In: Nakayama
Kiyomi to Amami-gaku Nakayama Kiyomi-shi Tsuito Ronbun shu (Ed. Amami Koko
Gakkai), 485-492, Amami Koko Gakkai, Kagoshima Shi, Japan (in Japanese).
Takamiya, Hiroto In Press. Ukikunden Iseki Shutsudo no Shokubutu Itai (Plant Remains
Recovered from the Ukikunden Site). In: Ukikunden Iseki (Ed. Miyamoto, K.),
Kyushu University, Fukuoka Shi, Japan (in Japanese).
Takamiya, H. and Chida, H. 2013. Nakagumi Iseki kara Kenshutsu sareta Shokubutsu
Itai (Plant Remains Recovered from the Nakagumi Site). In Nakagumi Iseki: (Ed.
The Amagi Town Board of Education), 46-50, The Amagi Town Board of Education,
Amagi Cho, Japan (in Japanese).
Takamiya, H. and Chida, H. 2014. Ryukyu Retto Senshi/Genshi Jidai ni okeru Shokubutsu
Shoku Riyou-Amami Okinawa Shoto wo Chushin ni (Plant Foods during the Prehistoricand Protohistoric periods in the Ryukyu Archipelago, Focusing on the Amami andOkinawa Archipelagos). In: Ryukyu Retto Senshi/Genshi Jidai no Kankyo to Bunka no
Hensen (Eds. Takamiya, H. and Shinzato, T.), 127-142, Rokuichi Shobo, Tokyo, Japan(in Japanese).

34South Pacific Studies Vol.41, No.1, 2 2020-2021

Takamiya, H., Katagiri, C., Yamasaki, S. and Fujita M. 2019. Human Colonization of theCentral Ryukyus (Amami and Okinawa Archipelagos), Japan. The Journal of Island
and Coastal Archaeology, 14(3): 375-393.
Takamiya, H., Hudson M., Yonenobu H., Kurozumi t. and Toizumi T. 2016.
An Extraordinary Case in Human History: prehistoric hunter-gatherer adaptation to
the islands of the Central Ryukyus (Amami and Okinawa archipelagos), Japan. The
Holocene, 26(3)408-422.
Tozawa, M. 1982. Jomon Noko Ron (An Essay on Jomon Agriculture). In: Nihon no
Kokogaku wo Manabu (2) Genshi・Kodai no Seisan to Seikatsu (Eds. Ohtsuka, H.,
Tozawa, M. and Sahara, M.), 173-191. Yuhikaku Sensho, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
Ushino, t. and Tagawa H. 1991. Repurika-ho niyoru Doki Akkon no Kansatsu (AnExamination of Pottery Impression by the Replica Method). Kokogaku to Shizen
Kagaku, 24: 13-36 (in Japanese).
Watanabe, H. 1968. Subsistence and Ecology of Northern Food Gatherers with Special
Reference to the Ainu. In: the Man the Hunter (Eds. Lee R. and Devore, I.), 69-77,
Aldine publishing Co., Chicago, USA.
Watson, P. J. 1976. In Pursuit of Prehistoric Subsistence: A Comparative Account of Some
Contemporary Flotation Techniques. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, 1(1): 77100.
Yamada, G. and Tsubakisaka, Y. 2005. Kita no Noko (Agriculture in the North), In:
Yurashia no Noko-shi (Eds. Sato, Y. and Kimura, E.), 48-85, Rinsenshoten, Kyoto,
Japan (in Japanese).
Yamanouchi, S. 1967. Sekkijidai Doki Teihenmen ni okeru Inamomi no Akkon (RiceImpression Observed at the Bottom of Prehistoric Pottery). (originally 1925, but not
published until 1967), In: Yamanouchi Sugao: Senshi/Kokogaku Ronbunshu, 4: 207208, Senshi Koko Gakkai, Tokyo, Japan (in Japanese).
Yamasaki, S. 2005. Nishi Nihon Jomon Noko Ron (Jomon Agriculture Hypotheses inWestern Japan). In: Keinan Bunkazai Kenkyuin/Kan/Nichi Shin Sekki Jidai to Noko
Mondai (Eds. Kankoku Shinsekki Gakkai/Kyushu Jomon Kenkyu Kai), 38-41, Keinan
Bunkazai Kenkyuin/Kan/Nichi Shin Sekki Jidai to Noko Mondai, Hakata, Japan (inKorean and Japanese).
Yanagita, K. 1961. Kaijo no Michi (The Ocean Road). 328 pp., Iwanami Bunko, Tokyo,
Japan (in Japanese).