HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGY IN THE FAR EAST 587

YANGJIN P AI< and HYUNG IL PAl both explore in the British Museum last year on the Painted the tensions within the practice and politics Tombs of Koguryo, which highlighted the de­ of Korean archaeology. South Korea is, of course, plorable conservation of these treasures. accessible and very conscious of its past, even FUMIKO IKAWA-SMITH's concluding paper though much of this is physically beyond the draws out some of the common themes which modern territorial boundaries. PAl discusses how highlight the links between the national the creation of modem Korean identity is bound heritages in this disparate region. In compar­ up with archaeological activities, and PAK ex­ ing the five papers, she identifies four useful plores two early states on the Korean Penin­ common points of reference: the nature of ar­ sula. Intriguingly, the shared heritage and history chaeology in east Asia; the role of national iden­ of the two Koreas forms an unbreakable link, tity and origins; the management of cultural in spite of the modern political divide. The west heritage and tourism; and the development of is becoming increasingly aware of the richness concepts of national identity, the 'other' and of Korean cultures, as shown by the exhibition cultural origins. R.eferences BARNES. G. 1999. The rise of civilisation in East Asia: The ar~ Journal of East Asian Archaeology. Forthcoming. chaeology of China, Korea and Japan. London: Thames & Hudson.

Opposite. Location map o/the Far East, showing 1 Vietnam: 2 The Korean peninsula in the lst-3rd centuries AD; 3 Japan; 4 central China.

Jomon archaeology and the representation of Japanese origins

JUNKO HABU & CLARE F AWCETI*

Key words: Jomon period; Sannai Maruyama site, Japanese archaeology, nationalism, mass media, cultural tourism

Since 1992, on-going excavations of the Early to 5 links drawn by Japanese intellectuals be­ Middle Jomon period Sannai Maruyama site tween modem Japanese and their supposed (3500-2000 DC) have uncovered the large size and Jomon ancestors. complexity of this prehistoric hunter-gatherer settlement. Sannai Maruyama, furthermore, has The Sannai Maruyama site become the first Jomon site in Japan to attract The Sannai Maruyama site is a large Joman the attention of not only archaeologists, but also period settlement located in Aomori Prefecture, the media and the public. This paper argues that Japan. The site dates primarily from the mid­ Sannai Maruyama's popularity is due to dle of the Early Jomon period to the end of the 1 the recent increased visibility of Jomon ar­ Middle Jomon period (c. 3500-2000 BC). Ar­ chaeology, chaeological excavation at Sannai Maruyama 2 the dissemination of excavation results by has revealed an enormous site containing over site archaeologists, 700 pit-dwellings, approximately 20 long 3 the pride of local people in the site, houses, about 100 remains of raised-floor build­ 4 the use of archaeology by the local govern­ ings, approximately 250 adult grave pits and ment to promote tourism, and 800 burial jars for infants or children, several

.,. Habu. Department of Anthropology, 232 Kroeber Hall. University of California, Berkeley CA 94720~3710. USA. [email protected] Fawcett, Department of Sociology & Anthropology, 5t Francis Xavier University, P.O. Box 5000, Antigonish NS, Canada B2G 2W5. [email protected] ANTIQUITY 73 (1999): 587-93 588 SPECIAL SECTION large middens and mounds containing garbage Pearson 1992). Developing from the lithic-based such as potsherds, stone tools, food remains Palaeolithic, the pottery-producing Jomon is and backdirt from houses (Okada 1998). In characterized by the presence of large settle­ addition, over 40,000 boxes of artefacts including ments and shell-middens, dependence on a stone tools, potsherds, clay figurines, bone tools, hunting, gathering and fishing economy, sophis­ clay, stone and bone ornaments, wood artefacts, ticated technologies and complex ritual. In rush and bark baskets and lacquered plates, contrast, the Yayoi period is characterized by bowls and combs have been uncovered, cata­ reliance on rice agriculture, the use of metal logued and stored for analysis (Okada 1994; tools and ritual objects and clear evidence of Okada & Habu 1995; Okamura 1995). social stratification. The following Kofun pe­ When, in 1994, excavations by the Board of riod represented ancient state fonnation, and Education of Aomori Prefecture revealed the vast saw the construction of large burial mounds, size, complexity and richness of the site, Sannai many of which were built in a characteristic Maruyama became a focus of public attention. 'keyhole-shape' . Finds and interpretations of the site were pub­ The number of archaeological sites excavated lished in Japanese newspapers and magazines annually in Japan has risen rapidly since the and reported on television news programmes. early 1960s, as Japan developed into a major More than a million tourists have visited the site world economic power. In 1996 alone, approxi­ to see excavated artefacts and features. Sannai mately 11,000 site excavations were carried out Maruyama, furthermore, has been the topic of throughout the Japanese archipelago (Okamura many academic and semi-academic conferences. 1997). The vast majority of these excavations This paper asks how and why archaeologi­ were rescue projects conducted by administra­ cal, popular and mass media representations tive archaeologists prior to the construction of of Sannai Maruyama have presented this Jomon public or private development projects. Japa­ period site as a key to understanding Japanese nese archaeology enjoys wide publicity through cultural identity. Such an understanding is sig­ the mass media and considerable public en­ nificant because, until the 1990s, the Japanese couragement and support. public and mass media did not focus on sites from the Jomon period (c. 10,000-300 Be) as The construction of Japanese ethnic and sources of knowledge about the origins of the national identity in the historic and Japanese people and culture. Rather, in the prehistoric past popular imagination, the roots of the Japanese Although we will never know with certainty if people, culture and nation were linked to the people living in the Japanese archipelago dur­ process of state formation associated with the ing the Kofun period shared an ethnic iden­ Yayoi (c. 3rd century Be-AD 3rd century) and tity, present-day Japan is one of the only modern Kofun (c. 4th-7th century) periods. The past industrial states that has not consciously dis­ two decades have seen tanceditselffrom its ethnicity (Porter 1997: 107). 1 new expressions of Japanese nationalism, In Japan, as in some other Asian nations, na­ including a search for Japanese identity tionalism and ethnicity go hand-in-hand. As in the prehistoric past, several authors have painted out, for most Japa­ 2 the discovery of rich Jomon sites and nese, to be a national implies that one speaks 3 increased acknowledgement of the possibil- the Japanese language, shares physical char­ ity of cultural diversity in Japan. acteristics with other Japanese nationals and In the 1990s, these factors have resulted in the has a Japanese cultural background (Befu 1993b; possibili ty of an intense and sustained focus Mouer & Sugimoto 1986; Oblas 1995; Sugimoto on Tomon archaeology as a source of knowl­ & Mouer 1989). edge about Japanese cultural origins. The process of nation-building and the con­ struction of the modem Japanese ethnic and Archaeology in contemporary Japan national identity can be traced to the decades Japanese prehistory and proto-history have tra­ spanning from Meiji restoration of 1868 until ditionally been divided into four periods: the the Japanese defeat in 1945. This process was Palaeolithic, Jomon, Yayoi and Kofun (Aikens the result of conscious cultural policies cre­ & Higuchi 1982; Barnes 1993; Imamura 1996; ated and implemented by political elites HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGY IN THE FAR EAST 589

(Fujitani 1993: 84; Gluck 1985). The focus of be both naIve and impossible (1996: 47). He Japanese nationalism in the years leading up to concludes that there needs to be a change of and during World War II was the ideology of focus from Japanese origins and the definition tennosej, or emperor worship. The politics of pre­ of contemporary Japanese ethnic or national war emperor worship, furthennore, made the identity towards an .archaeology examining interpretation of archaeological artefacts in terms diversity in the archaeological record of Japan. of peoples , including the ancestral Japanese peo­ Ikawa-Smith (1995) argues that this sense of plet difficult This was because archaeologists had homogeneity has profoundly influenced the to avoid interpretations of archaeological evi­ interpretation of Japanese archaeology since dence that would question historical interpre­ archaeologists have focused their efforts on tations based on assumptions about the sanctity understanding the creation and development of the imperial lineage. These assumptions were of the Yamato state, and put cultural continu­ found in the Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, ancient ity at the centre of their description of Japa­ Japanese textual sources compiled during the nese prehistory and history. This has occurred 7th and 8th centuries. To avoid these ideologi­ in books aimed at the general public, even cal and political problems, archaeologists pro­ though most archaeologists are conscious of the duced detailed and apolitical typological studies cultural and physical diversity of the peoples of artefacts as the focus of their work (Bleed 1989; who inhabited the Japanese archipelago in the Edwards 1997b; Fawcett 1990; 1995; 1996; Fawcett past (Ikawa-Smith 1990: 68). & Hahu 1990; Habu 1989; Ikawa-Smith 1982). After Japan's defeat in 1945, its nationalist Nihonjinron focus shifted abruptly away from the emperor. A concept that helps us understand the rela­ This was when the discipline of archaeology tionship between Japanese archaeology, ethnic­ began to contribute to the creation of a new ity and nationalism is nihonjinron. Nihonjinron Japanese national identity for individuals and is a discourse on Japanese identity that focuses groups of very different political persuasions. on describing and understanding the unique In the late 1940s and early 1950s, the interdis­ qualities ofJapant the Japanese people and Japa­ ciplinary investigation of the Yayoi period Toro nese culture. Much of it was produced by Japa­ site and, several years later, the excavation by nese and foreign intellectual elites since the archaeologists and local villagers of the Kofun 1970s and was transfeITed into the popular realm period Tsukinowa Tomb excited public inter­ through the mass media and business leaders est (Edwards 1991; 1997a; Fawcett 1995; Kondo eager to internationalize the Japanese work-force 1985; Wajima 1973). Academic, media, politi­ (Befu 1984; 1993a; Mouer & Sugumoto 1986; cal and public interest in the Toro site drew on Yoshino 1992; 1997). populist images of Japan as a rice-farming na­ Scholars have criticized the two fundamen­ tion, creating a common sense of Japanese iden­ tal elements of nihonjinron: that Japanese peo­ tity linked to the ancient agrarian Yayoi past ple, culture and society are unique and that (Edwards 1991). Using the Tsukinowa Tomb, Japanese people are homogeneous in terms of Marxist-oriented archaeologists stressed the race, language and culture (Befu 1984; 1993a; importance of using archaeological excavation Mauer & Sugimoto 1986: 99; Sugimoto & Mouer and analysis to make a new history by and for 1989; Yoshino 1997). Befu (1984; 1993b) and the Japanese common people (Fawcett 1990: Mauer & Sugimoto (1986), furthermore, con­ 107; 1995; Kondo 1985; Wajima 1973). sider nihonjinron to be a subtle form of post­ Kaner (1996), who remains unread by most war Japanese nationalism which negates the Japanese, and to a lesser extent Ikawa-Smith true racial and cultural heterogeneity of Japa­ (1995) see archaeologists as partly responsible nese society and de-emphasizes social and class for perpetuating the idea that past and present conflict, thus maintaining the established so­ inhabitants of the Japanese archipelago were cial order. Yoshino (1992), in contrast, argues ethnically homogeneous. Japanese archaeolo­ that nihonjinron can be viewed as problematic gists, however, are largely concerned with try­ when it creates barriers of chauvinism and mis­ ing to understand the lifeways of people in the understanding, but can also be perceived as ad­ Japanese archipelago, rather than determining vantageous when it allows the Japanese people their origins. Kaner considers this latter aim to to construct a positive sense of themselves. 590 SPECIAL SECTION

Since 1945, archaeological research has be­ of the site. Soon individuals living in Aomori come an important way of constructing Japanese Prefecture wrote letters to newspapers and lob­ national identity (Fawcett 1996: 74). Popular pres­ bied the prefectural government to fund the site entations of archaeological work by specialists preservation. Part of the impetus for this span-. and non-specialists inform nihonjinron when they taneous and unplanned movement was the stress what excavated materials tell research­ public's knowledge about the importance of ers about the origins of the Japanese people and archaeological remains, a knowledge cultivated the development of the Japanese state. This post­ by the mass media. Their efforts bore fruit when, war archaeology has been invaluable in creat­ two weeks after media reports appeared of the ing a renewed understanding of, and pride in, discovery of a six-post feature, the governor of the accomplishments of the people who lived Aomori Prefecture announced that Sannai in the ancient Japanese archipelago. It has en­ Maruyama would be preserved. Archaeologists couraged the Japanese public to consider the responded by organizing a two-day public in­ important influences of mainland Asian peo­ terpretation program at the site attended by 8000 ples and culture on Japan's development. Con­ people (To'o Nippo Sha 1997). Throughout the versely, archaeological results have been used summer and the autumn 'Sannai Maruyama to bolster a sense of Japanese ethnic homoge­ fever' swept the nation. Archaeologists, the neity and uniqueness. For example, in the 1970s excavators and various media groups (Okada and 1980s, Asuka Village, an area in Nara Pre­ et a1. 1996) organized academic symposia and fecture with large numbers of archaeological public lectures about Sannai Maruyama involv­ sites dating from the mid 6th to early 8th cen­ ing Jomon sprcialists. Articles appeared in tury, was preserved through special legislation newspapers and on television specials. In March and developed as an archaeological tourist cen­ 1997, Sannai Maruyama was designated a Na­ tre. Billed as the 'hometown of the Japanese tional Historical Site (KunishisekO. By July 1997, heart' by the government and corporate spon­ more than 1 million people had visited the site sors, Asuka Village has been used by business (To'o Nippo Sha 1997). and government elites to link the modern Japa­ nese to their nation's ancient past (Fawcett 1990: The media, tourism and the public: the 170; 1996: 62). cultural context of the Sannai Maruyama 'boom' The Sannai Maruyama preservation The popularity of the Sannai Maruyama site movement can be explained in terms of a combination of Before the excavations of the Jomon Sannai factors. First, the large number of sites exca­ Maruyama site in 1992, the main media and vated over the past several decades (Habu 1989: public focus was on Yayoi period and later sites 40; Tanaka 1984; Tsude 1995) and extensive as keys for understanding the origins of Tapa­ coverage of these excavations by the mass me­ nese people and culture (Edwards 1991: 3; dia (Fawcett 1990: 260-63; Oblas 1995) have 1997b). In july 1994, the discovery ofafeature engendered public interest in archaeological dis­ associated with six large pits containing wooden coveries. The first Japanese archaeological site posts at Sannai Maruyama was widely reported to receive extensive media coverage was the on television and in newspapers. Thereafter Takamatsuzuka Tomb (7th-8th century) in Nara thousands of people visited the site. The ar­ Prefecture, which became famous when archae­ chaeologists encouraged public visits to Sannai ologists announced that it contained wall-paint­ Maruyama and voluntarily explained various ings showing clear resemblance to those site features to visitors (Okada & Habu 1995J. discovered in continental Koguryo tombs (see Al though these archaeologists did not believe Yangjin Pak, this volume). This discovery sug­ they had enough political influence to save gested that the Japanese imperial court might Sannai Maruyama on their own, and they have had close ties with state-level societies wanted the Japanese public to appreciate the on the continent. In 1972, front-page newspa­ importance of the site and provided organized per coverage of the site throughout Japan re­ tours. In short, while archaeologists did not sulted in large nwnbers of non-specialist visitors organize a preservation movement themselves, (Sako 1996). Pundits and archaeologists alike they educated the public about the significance dubbed Takamatsuzuka an 'archaeological HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGY IN THE FAR EAST 591 boom'. From then until the early 1990s, sev­ Finally, Sannai Maruyama demonstrates a eral other sites, including the intact 6th-cen­ new tendency among some intellectuals and tury Fujinoki Tomb in Nara Prefecture and members of the Japanese public to think of the Yoshinogari, a Yayoi period moated settlement Jomon period as a time when core and funda­ and burial site in Saga Prefecture, made front­ mental aspects ofJapanese culture first appeared. page headlines in Japan (Edwards 1996). Me­ For example, Takeshi Umehara, an influential dia and public interest in these sites provided Japanese intellectual, suggests that the roots of insights into Japanese ancient history at the time the Japanese culture and Japanese character can of state formation. Unlike its predecessors, be found in the Jomon and Ainu cultures (Umehara however, Sannai Maruyama, the latest Japanese 1995; cf. Ikawa-Smith 1990: 60-61; 1995: 53). 'archaeological boom', extends public interest He-also argues that the 'spirit of the Jomon cul­ back to the pre-state Jomon period. ture' Varnon no seishin) can still be found in Secondly, archaeologists felt a profeSSional modern Japanese culture, particularly in the responsibility to infonn the public about the size, Tohoku region (Umehara 1995). Tadao Umesao, quality and importance of Sannai Maruyama. another well-known Japanese intellectual, also Before the site was saved they did this largely sees a distinct link between the Jomon culture through on-site presentations. After site pres­ of Sannai Maruyama and contemporary Japa­ ervation was assured, they worked with the nese culture (Umesao et a1. 1995). The articu­ media to publicize excavation results at a se­ lation of these ideas by respected thinkers has ries of symposia and lectures as well as through encouraged the public to consider the Jomon articles in newspapers and magazines. While period as part of their ancestral heritage. the presentation of some of this information was academic in tone, archaeologists also wrote Discussion and conclusion non-specialist articles and even created comic­ In the previous section, we argued that the strip explanations of the site for children. Sannai Maruyama 'boom' resulted from sev­ Third, the people of Aomori Prefecture took eral interrelated factors. These include: the regional pride in the site, their most important increased prominence of lomon archaeology historical symbol. They visited Sannai Maruyama over the past two decades; the desire of archae­ themselves, advertised the site as a reason why ologists working at Sannai Maruyama to dis­ tourists from other parts of Japan should visit seminate widely the results of their work; pride Aomori, and some of them acted as volunteer felt by the Aomori people in the historical im­ tour guides at the site (Okada et a1. 1996: 201). portance of their area; the Aomori Prefectural Sannai Maruyama put Aomori on the Japanese government's decision to use Sannai Maruyama map. to promote Aomori as a tourist destination and Fourth, the prefectural government was anx­ the tendency of influential Japanese thinkers ious to promote Sannai Maruyama as a tourist to see in Sannai Maruyama evidence of the site that would attract visitors to the undevel­ importance of the Jomon period in the devel­ oped rural area, located at the tip of the main opment of modem Japanese culture. island of Honshu, 600 km north of Tokyo. At We suggest that the Sannai Maruyama phe­ the site on 19 July 1998, the governor of Aomori nomenon described in the previous section is Prefecture declared cultural tourism to be a new significant for several reasons. First, although focus for prefectural development. In his dec­ Japanese scholars have since the 1950s discussed laration, the governor pointed out that Sannai the possibility of the Jomon being the founda­ Maruyama added temporal depth to Aomori's tion of Japanese culture, prior to the Sannai natural beauty and traditional cultural assets. Maruyama 'boom' popular understanding had Furthermore, he stated that Aomori Prefecture, traced Japanese cultural origins to the rice-pro­ which he called 'the hometown of the Japanese ducing and socially stratified Yayoi and Kofun nation', was one wing of international society. periods. Rice cultivation and social stratification He also declared Aomori Prefecture to be a were seen as so central to Japanese culture and cultural and tourist centre (Kimura 1998). identity (Edwards 1991: 15; Ohnuki-TIemey 1993) Kimura's statement symbolically links Aomori that the possible location of Japanese origins Prefecture to the Japanese nation and the in­ in the 'primitive' society of Jomon hunter-gath­ ternational sphere beyond Japan's borders. erers was not actively discussed. The Sannai 592 SPECIAL SECfION

Maruyama 'boom' brought to the public's at­ nese culture. This is significant because, al­ tention the complexity of the Jomon culture. though physical anthropologists (e.g. Hanihara This new understanding of the Jomon allowed 1991) have discussed the genetic relationship a paradigm shift toward public acceptance of between the Jomon people and modern popu­ it as key to understanding the development of lations of the Japanese archipelago (including Japanese culture. The idea that the Sannai both the Ainu and the ethnic Japanese), until Maruyama excavation demonstrated the com­ the discovery of Sannai Maruyama links be­ plexity of the Jomon culture for the first time tween the Jomon and modern Japan were not has been largely created by the mass media. emphasized by the mass media. Recent popu­ Since the 1960s, archaeologists have argued that lar fascination with Jomon period archaeology Jomon hunter-gatherers often lived in large results from the realization that Jomon culture, settlements, possessed a sophisticated material as seen at Sannai Maruyama, is highly sophis­ culture and had a high population density and ticated; not only is the site large, but it con­ complex social organization. In other words, tains the remains of complex living and ritual archaeologists have long recognized that the structures and artefacts. Because of Sannai Jomon people were far from being 'barbarous Maruyama, the Japanese public and the media wanderers'. The image of the Jomon people as have begun to contemplate a relationship be­ impoverished and primitive nomads has been tween themselves and the Jomon people. perpetuated largely by the media. In conclusion. we suggest that the recent use Secondly. the Sannai Maruyama 'boom' is of Jomon sites such as Sannai Maruyama as significant because it had regional support. models of Japanese ethnicity can be explained Although one of the themes used to promote in two ways. First, the appeal of these sites may Sannai Maruyama was the site's importance in have to do with their role in the reification of understanding the life of the Japanese people's the traditional ideology of Japanese linguistic, ancestors, much of the impetus for site preser­ cultural and biological homogeneity by push­ vation and development has come from the ing the origins of Japanese seishin (spirit or Aomori people and prefectural government. By essence) further into the prehistoric past. This making Sannai Maruyama a symbol of their is a conservative and reactionary position that region, the people and leaders of Aomori con­ upholds the political and social status quo of structed a regional identity based on their links modern Japan. In contrast to this view, one could to nature through their Jomon past. Aomori argue that current interest in Jomon sites might Prefecture is not the only region of Japan to provide a broader framework for a re-exami­ develop local identity using a Jomon site. In nation of Japanese ethnicity. Recently, the the southern Japanese prefecture of Kagoshima, marginalized Ainu and Ryukyuan people, who the prefectural government has used newspa­ live primarily in the regions of Hokkaido and per advertisements featuring artefacts excavated Okinawa respectively, have been vocal in their from the Initial Jomon Uenohara site to present demands for political, legal and social recog­ an image of their region as an innovative and nition (Hanazaki 1996). Broad public accept­ progressive place worth visiting. ance of a prehistoric cultural and biological link Finally, Sannai Maruyama is important be­ between the modern ethnic Japanese and the cause non-academic, public discussions of the Ainu and Ryukyuans could result in a new site are not so much part of the discourse of paradigm of the archaeological past which nihonjinron, which emphasizes the uniqueness would focus on prehistoric diversity rather than of the Japanese people and culture, as part of homogeneity and would provide space for a nihonbunkaron, a related discourse that stresses modern-day acceptance of ethnic diversity the development and characteristics of Japa- within Japan.

References AIKENS, C. &: T. HIGUCHI. 1982. Prehistory of Japan. San Diego civilization and the modern world: Life and society: 59- (CA): Academic Press. 75. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnography. Senri Eth­ BARNBS, G. 1993. China, Korea and Japan: The rise of civiliza­ nological series 16. tion in East Asia. London: Thames &: Hudson. 1993a. Cultural nationalism in East Asia. Berkeley {CAl: BEFU, H. 1984. Civilization and culture: Japan in search ofiden­ Institute of East Asian Studies, University of Califor­ tity, in T. Umesao, H. Befu &: J. Kreiner (ed.), Japanese nia. HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGY IN THE FAR EAST 593

1993b. Nationalism and nihonjinron: representation and OKADA, Y. 1994. Discovery of a large settlement (Sugata 0 identity, in Befu (ed.): 105-35. arawashita kyodai shuraku), Weekly Asahigraph (25 Oc­ BLEED, P. 1989. Foreign archaeologists in Japan, Archaeologi­ tober 1994): 56-63. (In Japanese.) cal Review from Cambridge 8(1): 19-26. 1998. Changes in intrasite settlement patterns at the Sannai DENOON, D., M. HUDSON, G. MCCORMACK 8: T. MORRIS-SUZUKI. Maruyama site (Sannai Maruyama iseki no shuraku 1996. Multicultural Japan: Paleolithic to Postmodern. hensen). Paper presented at the 8th International Con­ Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ference on Hunting and Gathering Societies. 25 October EDWARDS, W. 1991. Buried discourse: the Toro archaeological 1998, Aomori, Japan. (In Japanese.) site and Japanese national identity in the early postwar OKADA, Y. & J. HABU. 1995. Public presentation and archaeo­ period, Journal of Japanese Studies 17(1): 1-23. logical research: A case study from the Jomon Period Sannai 1996. In pursuit ofHimiko: Postwar archaeology and the loca­ Maruyama site. Paper presented at the 1995 Chacmool tion ofYamatai, Monumenta Nipponica 51(1): 53-79. Conference, Calgary. 1997a. Review of ObI as' Perspectives on race and culture in OKADA, Y., S. KOYAMA 8: K. ICHIKAWA. 1996. Local people's Japanese society: The mass media and ethnicity, Journal support of Jomon cultural studies (Shimin ga sasaeru Jomon of Japanese Studies 23(1): 234-7. bunka), in Y. Okada 8: S. Koyama (ed.), Discussion about 1997b. Japan's new past: how a century of archaeology helped the Jomon period: The world ofSannai Maruyama (Jomon dispel a nation's mythic origins, Archaeology 50(2): 32-42. Teidan: Sannai Maruyama no Sekal1: 199-216. Tokyo: FAWCETI, C. 1990. A study of the socio-political context of Japa­ Yamakawa Shuppan Sha. (In Japanese.) nese archaeology. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Depart­ OKAMURA, M. 1995. The Sannai Maruyama site (Sannai ment of Anthropology, McGill University. Maruyama iseki), in Agency for Cultural Affairs (ed.), 1995. Nationalism and postwar Japanese archeology, in P. Excavation of the Japanese archipelago: New archaeo­ Kohl 8: C. Fawcett (ed.), Nationalism, politics, and the logical discoveries in 1995 [Hakkutsu Sareta Nihon Retto: practice of archaeology: 232-48. Cambridge: Cambridge '95 Shin-hakken Koko Sokuho): 20-25. Tokyo: Asahi University Press. Shinbun-sha. (In Japanese.) 1996. Archaeology and Japanese identity, in Denoon et a1. 1997. Buried cultural properties administration: my 15 years (ed.): 60-80. in archaeology (Maibun gyosei: kokogaku to watashi no FAWCETT, C. & J. HAou. 1990. Education and archaeology in 15 nen), Cekkan Bunkazai Hakkutsu Shutsudo Joho De­ Japan, in P. Stone & R. MacKenzie (ed.), The excluded cember 1997. (In Japanese.) past: Archaeology in education: 217-32. London: Unwin OHNUKl-TlERNEY, E. 1993. Rice as self: Japanese identities through Hyman. time. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University: Press. FUJITANI, T. 1993. Inventing, forgetting, remembering: toward PEARSON, R.J. 1992. Ancient Japan. Washington (DC): a historical ethnography of the nation-state, in Befu (ed.): Smithsonian Institution. Arthur M. Sackler Gallery. 77-106. PORTER. B. 1997. Concepts of nationalism in history. in Van GLUCK, C. 1985. Japan's modern myths: Ideology in the Late Horne (ed.): 93-114. Meiji period. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press. SAKO, K. 1996. Takamatsuzuka Kofun, in Asahi Graph (ed.), HABU, J. 1989. Contemporary Japanese archaeology and soci­ Review of archaeological excavations over the past 50 ety, Archaeological Reviewfrom Cambridge 8(1): 36-45. years (Sengo Goju Nen: Kodaishi Hakkutsu So-makun} HANAZAKI, K. 1996. Ainu Mosher and Yaponesia: Ainu and 115-19. Tokyo: Asahi Shinbunsha. (In Japanese.) Okinawan identities in contemporary Japan, in Denoon SUGIMOTO, Y & R. MaUER. 1989. Constructs for understanding et al. (ad.): 117-34. Japan. London. Kegan Paul International. HANIHARA, K. 1991. Dual structure model for the population TANAKA, M. 1984. Japan, in H. Cleere (ed.), Approaches to the history of the Japanese, Japan Review 2: 1-33. archaeological heritage: 83-88. Cambridge: Cambridge IKAWA-SMITH, F. 1975. Japanese ancestors and paleolithic ar­ University Press. chaeology, Asian Perspectives 18(1): 15-25. To'o NIPPO SHA. 1997. The Sannai Maruyama Site, New Edi­ 1982. Co-traditions in Japanese archaeology, World Archae­ tion (Shinpan Sannai Maruyama I5e101. Aomori: To'o ology 13(3): 296-309. Nippo Sha. (In Japanese.) 1990. The ideology of cultural homogeneity in the prehis­ TSUDE, H. 1995. Archaeological theory in Japan, in P. Ucko toric Japanese archipelago (L'ideologie de l'homog~n~it~ (ed.) Theory in archaeology: A world perspective: 298- culturelle dans l'archeologie prehistorique japonaise), 311. London: Routledge. Anthropologie et Socit§te 14(3): 51-76. (In French.) UMEHARA, T. 1995. The ancestral home of the spirit of the Japa­ 1995. The Jomon, the Ainu, and the Okinawans: the changing nese people (Nihonjin no seishin no kokyo), in T. Umehara politics of ethnic identity in Japanese archeology, in D. Dicks & Y. Yasuda (ed.), Discovery of the Jomon civilization: (ed.), Communicating with Japan: Images past, present, and Amazing discoveries at the Sannai Maruyama site Vornon future: 43-56. Montreal: Concordia University. Bunmei no Hakken: Kyoi no Sannai Maruyama Isek;): IMAMURA, K. 1996. Prehistoric Japan. Honolulu (HI): Univer­ 12-30. Tokyo: PHP Kenkyujo. (In Japanese.) sity of Hawaii Press. UMESAO. T., S. KOYAMA &: Y. OKADA. 1995. Image of a city­ KANER, S. 1996. Beyond ethnicity and emergence in Japanese Sannai Maruyama (Nihon no rekishi wa Sannai Maruyama archaeology, in Denoon et al. (ed.): 46-59. kara hajimaru), Sannai Maruyama Jomon Era File 3: 3-8. KIMURA, M. 1998. Aomori Prefectural cultural tourism estab­ (In English and Japanese.) lishment declaration {Aomori Ken Bunko Kanko Riken VAN HORNE, W.A. (ed.). 1997. Global convulsions: Race, eth­ Sensen). Aomori Prefectural pamphlet. (In Japanese.) nicify. and nationalism at the end of the twentieth cen­ KONDO, Y. 1985. Reflections on future directions on postwar tury. Albany (NY): State University of New York. Japanese archaeology (Sengo nihon kokogaku no hansei WAJIMA, S. 1973. The scholarly significance of the Tsukinowa to kadai), in Y. Kondo, Introduction to Japanese archaeo­ Kofun excavation (Tsukinowa Kofun no gakumon teki logical studies (Nihon Kokogaku Kenkyu Josetsu): 444- igi 0 chusin nil, in S. Wajima, The scientific spirit and 87. Tokyo: Iwanami. (In Japanese.) development of Japanese archaeology (Nihon Kokogaku MaUER, R. 8: Y. SUGIMOTO. 1983. Images ofJapanese society: A no Hattatsu to kagakuteki seishl1: 664-80. Okayama: study in the social construction ofreality. London: Kegan Wajima Seiichi Chosaku shu kanko'okai. (In Japanese.) Paul. YOSHlNO, K. 1992. Cultural nationalism in contemporary Ja­ OOLAS, P . 1995. PerspectIves on race and culture in Japanese pan: A sociological enquiry. London: Routledge. society: The mass media and ethnicity. Lewiston (NY): 1997. Cultural nationalism and 'internationalization', in Van Edwin Mellen Press. Home (ed.): 131-46.