JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society of Cultural Anthropology

Japanese Review of Cultural AnthropologM vol.4, 2003

lt

Anthropological Studies of the Ainu in :

Past and Present

YAMADA Takako

Graduate School of Human and Environmental Studies

Kyoto University

Abstract

This article reviews the main trends in anthropological studies of the Ainu in Japan, from the past to the present. During the Edo period, detailed doeuments on the life and culture of the Ainu were already being published, along with official accounts of explorations produced for specific purposes. Ainu studies in the Melji era developed further, ranging from travel

literature to studies of Ainu ethnic origin, language and mythology Following the work of

CHAMBERLAIN, BNI)CHELOR, PILSuDSKI, and MuNRO, YosHIDA and KINDAIcHI began to study the

language and fblklore ef the Ainu in the 1910s. After that, even though folklore studies

flourished, ethnological studies of the Ainu only started in Japan with a joint survey by

anthropologists and ethnologists in 1951. While few studies have been carried out on the social

aspects of Ainu culture, so that various aspects ef traditienal Ainu social organization remain

in dispute, recent ethnological studies do shed light on the contemporary issues confronting the

Ainu, such as tourism, cultural revitalization, ethnicity anrf identity Accounts of the Ainu in

Japan have thus focused successively on their ethnic origins, their folklore and religion, and

finally their ethnicity and identity

Key words: Ainu studies, ethnic origin of the Ainu, fblkloristic studies, language, mythologyl

religion, ethnological studies ofthe Nnu, discourses on the Ainu, ethnicity and identity

Introduction

Ifwe define Japanese Ainu studies as consisting of all the studies conducted in Japan on

the Ainu and their culture, the field now includes more than 3,500 volumes according to the

NII-Electronic Library Service JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society ofCulturalof Cultural Anthropology

fo YArvIAI)A Takako

Ainu Bibliqgraph{y (IRIMoTo 1992). Studies have been carried out in a variety of disciplines, including ethnologM anthropologM folklore, archaeology) linguistics, geography and history It might be thought that the academic study of the Ainu in Japan started in the Melji "Ezo" period. However, a number of reports based on expeditions to (renamed in the Melji period) were published in the Edo period, especially in its later years when the defense of the national boundary against invasion from the north became a serious political concern of the

[[bkugawa Shogunate. Those documents written before the Melji period are generally "kyu-ki" categorized as (archives), but they are valuable even today for an understanding of

the life and cukure of the Ainu. Most were reprinted during the 1970s and 1980s. Hokkaido

and the Ainu were thoroughly explored during the Edo period, marking the real beginning of

Ainu studies in Japan, In the early days of the Melji period, many European scholars also published works on the Ainu, and these eventually encouraged further studies of Ainu

anthropology and folklore by the Japanese.

In this review article, I will explore the history ofAinu studies, concentrating especially on

ethnological werks and those closely related to ethnological themes. I explore the distinctive

characteristics of Ainu studies in Japan, as well as the problems involved in this field, [[b

accomplish this, I look first at the documents published during the Edo period, befbre describing the different trends in Ainu studies after the Meiji period.

Explorations of Hokkaido and the Ainu dui'ing the Latter Part of the Edo Period

Pioneering reports on the Ainu by foreign observers include documents such as the

Relatione deZ Ragno di fe2o [An Account of the Land of Ezo] sent to the Society of Jesus

(Jesuits) in Rome by the Italian missionarM Father de Ange!is, who visited Hokkaido in 1618

and 1621 (KoDAMA 1941). In contrast, no accounts based on first-hand investigations by Japanese were published until the eighteenth century One example is that of SAKAKuRA Gebjiro, a clerk ofthe Tbkugawa Shogunate Mint, who made a study of gold and silver mines in

Holrlsaido and referred to the Ainu in his essaM Hbhhai Zuihitsu [An Essay on the Northern

Sea] (SAKAKuRA 1739/1972). Others include Matsumae-shi [A History of Matsumae] by

MATsuMAE Hironaga (17811 1972), 7b-yu-lei [A Narrative of My [[lravels to the East] by HEzuTsu

[[bsaku (178411972), and deo Shui [Gleanings of Ezo] by SA]ro GenrokuTo (178611972),

The [[bkugawa Shogunate also dispatched several expeditions to Ezo. MoGAMI [[bkunai, who joined an expedition in 1785, wrote E2o Zoshi [An Account of Ezo] (MoGAMI 1790/1972)

and Exo Zoshi Kbhen [An Account ofEzo, Part 2] (MoGAMi 1800f1972). HATA Awakimaru, later

renamed MuRAKAMI Shimanojo, accompanied a large-scale expedition dispatched in 1798 by

the Shogunate and wrete Egov'irna Kihan [Natural Wonders of Ezo Island], which skillfu11y

pertrayed the life ofthe Ainu with fille pictures (HATA 17981 1982). Another important source is

Higashi Ezo-chi Dochu-ki [A Record of My [[ravels in Eastern Ezo] (Unknown 1791).

The nineteenth century witnessed a more active exploration of Hokkaido, INo Tadataka

NII-Electronic Library Service JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society of Cultural Anthropology

Anthropological Studies of the Nnu in Japan: Past and Present 77

surveyed Hokkaido in 1800 and drew the territory's first fine map, which was supplemented

by MAMIyA Rinzo after an additional survey in 1810. A work entitled Higashi Ezo-ehi Kizhu

Basho 7ttigaisho [A General Description of Each District in Eastern Ezo] was published in

1809, although the author is unknown. This key document systematically described not only

the topographM production, population, and settlement patterns of each district but also Ainu

subsistence activities, fbod processing, storage and consumption. TAMAMusHI Sadayu, a

from the domain of who accompanied an expedition dispatched by his feudal

lord, published a diary of his travels, IVb,u-hoku-hi [An Account of a Journey to the North,

Hoklcaido] (TAMAMusHI 1857), while SmMA Giyu, a samurai from the domain of Saga in

Kyushu, who aecompanied a tour of inspection of Hokkaido by the magistrate of Hakodate, also

reeorded the tour in his diary, Ailyu-hohu-ki [An Account of a Journey to the North, Hokkaido]

(SHIMA 1857),

Among the archives published before the Melji period, a series of works by MATsuuRA

Takeshiro are panicularly important as material for Ainu studies. MAi]suuRA made a series of

expeditions to Hokkaido in 1845, 1846, 1849, 1855, 1857 and 1859, visiting the interior more

frequently than any other Japanese explorer, and producing detailed written accounts

(MATsuuRA 185011970, 185611978, 1857/1982, 1858/1985), He made the 1857 and 1859

expeditiens as an oMcial researcher for the [lbkugawa Shogunate, studying the geegraphy of

Hokkaido, especially the rivers and mountains. As he was well acquainted with the Ainu

language, he wrote the finest accounts of the Ainu firom that period. For example, 7ttkeshiro

Klxiho Nikhi [A Diary of Takeshiro's Vbyage] (MATsuuRA 1856/1978) deseribes not only the topography with place names in the and bird's-eye pictures but also the number

ofhouses, the demographM and the names ofthe inhabitants in each settlement, comparing the

results with those of fbrmer investigations. Bo-go 7bzai Ezo Sansen Chiri 7brishirabe Nisshi [A iDiary of Geographical Explorations in Eastern and Western Ezo in the Year of Earth-Elder

Brother-Horse] (MA];suuRA 185811985), the style of description of which fbllows that of

7?iheshiro Ktziho Nikki, deseribes for each settlement the number of households, the names of

their members, ages, kin or family relationships, and notes on social roles. It also deseribes in

detail the animals and plants, products, and subsistence econom}L The works of Miy]]suuRA are

highly valued as ethnographic materials fbr exploring Ainu culture during the late Edo period, ' Ainu Studies in the Melji Period: From [[beavel Literature to the Study of Ethnic Origins, Language, and Mythology

i European scholars took the initiative in Ainu studies during the final years of the Edo

period and the early Meiji period, The Ainu attracted great interest among Europeans in terms

of their racial characteristics because they were viewed as a Caucasoid population in the Far

East. Although he himself had never visited Japan, August PFizMAiER of the University of

Vienna published a book on Ainu vocabulary (PFIzMAIER 1854). IVbert S. BIcKMoRE visited

"The YUrappu, Mori, and Ylikumo in Hokkaido and wrote several articles such as Ainos, or

NII-Electronic Library Service JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society ofCulturalof Cultural Anthropology

78 YAMADA Takako

Hairy Men ofYesso," based on his investigations of food, ornaments, marriage, household, and

beliefs (BIcKMoRE 1868a, 1868b, 1869). Ernest SATove who visited Hakodate, Yamakoshi, and

Ylikume in 1867 and 1870, Thomas BLAKisToN, who visited Hokkaido in 1869, Isabella L. BmD,

who traveled through Hokkaido in 1878, and XM DENING, who visited the Iburi and Hidaka

regions in 1876, also discuss the Ainu in scattered references in their books (SATow 1870;

BLAKIsToN 1872; BIRD 1880; DENING 1877).

The Ainu werb also of great interest to Europeans because, like prehistoric Europeans,

they practiced the bear festival (iomante), and several articles of the festival were written by

European researchers (GuNzBouRG 1894; HILGENDoRF 1876; ScHEuBE 1880, 1882, 1891).

ScHEuBE, a German anthropologist who traveled to the southern part of Hokkaido in 1880, for

example, not only stressed the racial and physical connections between the Ainu and

Europeans, but also the relationships in terms of religion and beliefs. At that time, European

scientists were partly interested in Ainu culture for the light it ceuld shed on the life of the

prehistoric Europeans. Japanese scientists, meanwhile, took note of the studies carried out by Europeans and

began to purspe anthropological studies of the Ainu more actively themselves. wnile European

anthropologists studied the Ainu mostly because of their Caucasoid origin, the Japanese

studied the origins ofthe Ainu from anthropological and archaeological viewpoints in order to

explore the origins of the Japanese. TsuBoi Shogoro developed theories originally proposed by Edward MoRsE, that the original inhabitants of Japan were a pre-. He suggested "Korobokkuru," that these people, ealled the disappeared or were driven out of Hokkaido by

the Ainu, who were themselves driven out of by later waves of invaders (TsuBol 1887;

IKEDA 1998).

In contrast, KoGANEi Ybshikiyo, who was deeply influenced by the work of Erwin BAELz

(BAELz 1901), was the first anthropologist to study the Ainu. Based on a comparative study of

the limb bones of Stone Age man, modern Japanese and the Ainu, he suggested that the Ainu

were the Stone Age peoples ofJapan (KoGANEi 1893, 1894, 1927), ToRIi Ryuzo also published a series of anthropological, archaeological, and ethnological works on the Ainu (ToRII 18991

1981a, 1899/1981b, 1903, 1919/1976) after his expeditien to the Kurile Islands. In particular, he proposed the hypothesis that the Japanese today are derived from a mixture of the

E`Japanese proper'i (the Yhyoi population), and peoples whe came from overseas in the Bronze and Iron Ages, while the Ainu today originated from the indigenous Jomon population. A number of other ethnological works by Japanese scholars date firom this period. They include Ainu iji-dan [An Account of Ainu Medicine] by SEKIBA Fdjjhiko (189611980), which deseribed illness among the Ainu; a description of the geography of Hokkaido and the usefulness ef the Ainu language fbr Japanese geographers by JINBo Kotora (1892, 1895); and a report on plant narnes by MIyABE Kingo and JINBo Kotora (MIyABE and JINBo 1892). Hewever,

the best ethnological and cultural anthropological studies on the Ainu were those of European

ethnologists, such as CHAMBERLAIN, BA[pCHELoR, PILSuDsm, and MuNRO.

Basil Hall CmmIBERLAIN, for example, considered Ainu culture not as a remnant of

NII-Electronic Library Service JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society of Cultural Anthropology

Anthropological Studies ofthe Nnu in Japan: Past and Present 79

European prehistoric culture but as the archetype ofJapanese culture. He compared in detail the Japanese and , mythologies, and geogTaphical nomenclature (CHA)vlBERLAIN 188811969, 1887), showing scientifically the similarities and differences between them.

Further, in a debate with BAIvcHELoR on the origins of the Ainu word hantui, he demonstrated that it is etymologically the same as the Japanese woTd fbr hanzi (CHAMBERLAIN 1888). His

work, together with that of BATcHELoR, whieh will be discussed below, triggered further Ainu

studies focusing on myths and folklore.

BA[rcHELoR, who settled in Hokkaido as a missionary in 1877, studied the Ainu language and began to collect a variety of material on myths, legends, customs and manners, and beliefs.

"Notes His first work on the Ainu"(BA[vcHELoR 1882a) was fbllowed by many bthers

(BATcHELoR 1882b, 1887, 1888a, 1888b, 188911981, 1891/1972, 1901, 1935; BrvrcHELoR and

MIyABE 1893). His book, An Ainu-English-eJttpanese Dictionar:y (BATcHELoR 188911981) was

the first fu11-scale dictionary of Ainu, and until very recently it was regarded as the authoritative work on the Ainu language. The Ainu and 77Leir Pbllelore (BATcHELoR 1901) was

the,first fu11-scale ethnography of Ainu Iife. A later work, A Study ofAncient Jcrpanese Local Naihes Viewed from Ainu Language (BATcHELoR 1935), was also a pioneering work on geogiraphical nomenclature in Japan.

John BATcHELoR was the first scholar to collect a large amount of folklore, and he

described the life of the Ainu, including customs, manners and religion, based on these

materials, However, he did not try to explain Ainu folklore using parallel texts, but only in the

form of an English translation that revealed, unfortunatelM the limitations of his work,

Moreover, his interpretations of Ainu religion and worldview, such as his description of the

Creator playing the rele ofjudge at the Last Judgment and the Ainu as dividing the other

world into Heaven and Hell, were later criticized as being influenced by his own Christianity.

(CHAMBERLAIN, fbr instance, had argued that the 1linu had never seen the other world as

divided into Heaven and Hell [CHAMBERLAIN 1887].) But even taking these comments into

consideration, BATcHELoR's 71he Ainu and Their liblklore is still one of the most important

souirces for exploring the past culture of the Nnu, Bronislaw PILsuDs-, who was sent into exile te the Far East for eighteen years during the Czarist period in Russia, conducted ethnographic research among the Ainu in 1902- 1905 and wrote many documents concerning the language, folklore, customs, bear festival and

shamanism of the Sakhalin Ainu (PILsuDsKI 1909a, 1909b, 1912, 1935; WADA and PiLsuDsKI

1961). His work drew attention to the richness of the fblklore of the Sakhalin Ainu and he

recorded 350 examples of oral tradition using wax cylinders. Among them, twenty-seven exarnples of upaskuma (myths of origin) were published as Materials for the Stucly of the Ainu Lauguage and Folklore (PILsuDsKI 1912). This provided the original Sakhalin Ainu text in the

fbrm of an alphabetic transcription together with a literal English translation, a literary

English translation, and a rich eommentary on the Ainu language. Moreover, the wax cylinders

left by PILsuDsKi were eventually copied (AsAKuRA and IFuKuBE 1986) and became valuable

phopetic materials fbr the study of the . The works of PILsu]sKI are

NII-Electronic Library Service JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society ofCulturalof Cultural Anthropology

80 YA}{ADA Takake'

regarded as vaiuable even today for exploring the language and traditional culture of the

Sakhalin Nnu.

Neil Gordon MuNRo arrived in Ybkohama in 1891 and worked as a doctor. He also started

archaeological research through his interest in the Paleolithic culture in Japan, on which he

published two books: Primitive Culture in eldpan (MuNRo 1906) and Prehistoric eJdpan (MuNRo 1911). Assuming that the original population in the Japan Archipelago had been the Ainu, he was also interested in Ainu culture, and conducted field research in Hekkaido, at Biratori and

Shiraoi. He later changed his field ofinterest, and began to publish articles on Ainu ethnology

in 1918, He settled in Nibutani in the Hidaka district in 1930, after which he was fu11y

occupied with the ethnological study of the Ainu, producing an enormeus manuscript. Part of this was published after his death in the book Ainu: Creed and Cult (MuNRo 1963), which serves even today as a highly valuable ethnography ofthe beliefs and rituals of the Nnu.

The Start of the Study of Ainu Culture by YosHIDA and KINDAIcHI: A Study of Language and Folklore

The works of CHAMBERLAIN, BATcHELoR, PILsuDsKI, and MuNRo show that ethnological or

ethnographical studies of the Ainu at first explored their fo]klore and religion. Following this

academic tradition, Japanese scholars began to study Ainu culture in the 1910s by collecting

and recording Ainu stories, legends, and epics. Tkvo outstanding schelars should be mentiened:

YosHIDA Iwao, who began work in 1906, and KINDAIcHI Kyosuke, who began work in 1918.

YosHIDA, who lived in in the [[bkachi district, devoted his entire life to the education of

Ainu children and tried to collect and preserve folklore materials of the [[bkachi Ainu. He published a variety of papers, not only on language, legends, stories, manners and customs, but also on clothing, foed, and housing, in journals such as The clburnal of the AnthropolQgical

Society of Nippon, Ilyodo Klenkyu [Felk Studies], and The cJdpanese eJburnal of Ethnolqgrv (YosmDA 1912, 191611983, 1984a [reprint], 1984b [reprint], 1984c [reprint], 1984d [reprint]).

In 1989, after his death, a vocabulary of the [[bkachi Ainu was published (YosHIDA 1989). In contrast, KINDAIcm, who had graduated from Tbkyo Imperial University in 1907, pursued his studies as a linguist. He began to study Ainu language and culture after coming

back from a trip to Hokkaido and Sakhalin at the end of the 19th century He established a

system of transcribing the Ainu language in both kana and alphabet forms, and began to

transcribe Ainu oral epics, visiting Ainu villages in Holtkaido or inviting Ainu elders to his

house in [[bkyo. KiN]AicHI not only transcribed and translated epics and myths into Japanese

and clarified the phonemic and grammatical structure of the Ainu language, but he also tried

to demonstrate the ethnic origins of the Ainu and their religion and worldview.

KINDAIcHI made three key academic contributions to Ainu studies. The first consisted of his studies of Ainu literature, including epics fyukar). The studies ofyuhar, which started with

"Ainu the paper no Shikyeku nitsuite, Sono 1" [On the Ainu YUkar, no. 1] (KINDAIcHI 1918), were compiled in two volumes, Ainu no Seiten [Ainu Oinas and YUkars] (KINDAIcm 1923) and

NII-Electronic Library Service JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society of Cultural Anthropology

Anthropological Studies of the Ainu in Japan: Past and Present 81

Ainu tJbjishi: Yitkara no Klendyu [Ainu Epics: A Study of Yinkars] (KINDAIcHI 1931). He also compiled a collection of yukars that were transmitted orally by KAN'NARI Matsu in nine volumes in collaboration with KAN'NARI (KAN'NARI and KINDAIcHI 1959-1975). He established a system for publishing oral epics, with a text transcribed in kana and alphabet forms together

with a Iiteral translation into Japanese, which became the model for later folklore studies.

KINDAIcHI's second contribution was the study of the Ainu language. He clarified not only the phonemic system of the Sakhalin Ainu language (KINDAicHi 1911a, 1911b, 1911c) but also published Ainu-goho Gaisetsu [An Introduction to Ainu Grammar] in collaboration with CHIRI

Mashiho (KINDAIcm and CHIRI, 1936) and Ainugo Klendyu [A Study oC the Ainu Language]

(KINDAIcHI 1960). He demonstrated that since the Ainu language was an incorporating

language, it did not belong to the Ural-Altaic and belonged to a diflerent

lariguage family from Japanese, Although some linguists claimed that the Ainu language had

the same roets as Japanese, KINDAIcHI's theory became standard in later studies of the Ainu lariguage,

KiNDAIcHi's third centribution was the study of culture and fblklore. In his book Ainu no :Kbndyu [A Study of the Ainu] (KINDAIcHI 1925), he proposed the establishment of the field of

"Ainuology}" te deal with Ainu Iife, the relationship between the Ainu and the Enzishi (the

indigenous inhabitants of the north-eastern part of Honshu in the eighth eenturM who are generally considered to be akin to the present-day Ainu), poems and oral tradition, mytholog:y;

religion and legends. Here, as a methodology for the study of the Ainu, he showed how to

explore the spiritual and inner aspects of their culture by analyzing their language and

fblklore, The important point is that KINDAIcHI's ultimate aim in his Ainu studies was to reveal

the ethnic origins of the Ainu. He explored this through their language and concluded that the

Ainu did not belong linguistically to the Ural-Altaic language familM and therefore that they

were not an Asian race. He Positioned the Ainu as an ethnic greup clearly difTerent from the Japanese.

Folklore Studies after KINDAIcHI:

CHIRI Mashiho, KuBoDERA Itsuhiko and Others

The Ainu studies started by KINDAIcHI were continued by his students CHIRI Mashiho,

himself an Ainu, and KuBoDERA Itsuhiko. As they continued to collect and record Ainu oral

traditions and to analyze the beliefs and worldview of the Ainu, folklore became the

mainstTeam in Ainu studies. While KINDAIcHI's studies focused on heroic epics lyuhar), CHml moved on to exp16re a variety of genres of oral tradition including narratives, stories of origins (Lrpashuma), riddles, pTosaic stories (uwepeher), and epics of deities (kamui yulear). Based on these materials, he

presented a cultural and historical examination of Ainu life, and a historical account of the

establishment oftheir religion (CHIRI 1936, 1937, 193711981, 1954a, 1955a, 1955b, 1973f1953-

54, 1986). In addition, as a linguist he published a classificatory dictionary of the Ainu

NII-Electronic Library Service JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society ofCulturalof Cultural Anthropology

82 lkMAi]A Takake

language in three volumes, which are a}so outstanding ethnographies: Bunrui Ainu-go Jiten,

Dai 1-kan: Shokubutsu-hen [A CIassificatory Dictionary of the Ainu Language, vol. 1: Plants] (CHIRI 1953), Bunrui Ainugo Jiten, Dai 2-kan: Dobutsu-hen [A CIassificatory Dictionary of the

Ainu Language, vol. 2: Animals] (CHIRI 1962), Bunrui Ainu-go cJiten, Dai 3-han: Niugen-hen [A

CIassificatory Dictionary of the Ainu Language, vol, 3: Humans] (CHIRI 1954b), and Chinzei

Ainu-go Shov'iten [DictiQnary of Ainu Place-Names] (CmRI 1956/1985a). He also published

Ainu-go IYEyumon: 7bkuni Chimei Klenbyusha no tameni [An Introduction to the Ainu Language: Especially fbr the Researcher on Place-Names] (CmRI 1956f1985b). The striking quality ofhis

studies lies in the fact that he demonstrated not only the etymologies and meanings ofwords

but also the Ainu ideas hidden behind them.

Meanwhile, KuBoDERA Itsuhike, who first visited Biratori in the Hidaka district in 1923

with his professor, KiNDAIcm, was engaged in the study ofAinu oral tradition, especially that

handed down in the Saru River region (KuBoDERA 1936, 1940a, 1977). He not only studied a

variety of kainui yuhar and uwqpeker but also conducted ethnographic research on religion,

beliefs and rituals (KuBoDERA 1935, 1940b, 1940c, 1952, 1953, 1955, 1956a, 1956b, 1957, 1959,

1968). As an ethnologist, he published fine monographs on funeral rites and customs, and the

worship of the souls of the ancestors. His most important work is perhapsAinu cJOjishi: Shtn'yo

Seiden no Kendyu [The Ainu Epics: A Study ofKamui Yitkar and Oina] (KuBoDERA 1977). This

was the fruit ef years of studying epics, and it includes eighteen examples of oina and eighty- six examples of hamui yuhar with transcriptions in alphabet-form, literal translations into

Japanese, and fu11y detai]ed annotations. This is one of the most monumental ethnographical

studies of the Ainu,

In addition to the studies done by CHIRI and KuBoDERA, the works of SARASHINA Genzo

eannot be ignored. He often made trips to Ainu villages together with CHml, reeording Ainu

fblklore. SARAsHINA demonstrated for the first time Ainu folk knowledge of animals and plants by publishing Kbtan Seibutsu-ki [Natural History of Kotan] (SARAsHINA 1942; SARAsmNA and

SARAsHINA 1976-1977), a botanical and zoological ethnography of the Ainu. Moreoveg as a poet

and write4 he published many works on Ainu fblklore (SARAsmNA 1955a, 1955b, 1981-1984).

The study of Ainu oral tradition and literature from KINDAIcHI to CmRI, KuBoDERA, and SARAsmNA can be summarized as the precise recording of tradition and the examination atid

interpretation of the religion and worldview of the Ainu. They were essentially the first

generation of scholars in Ainu studies to collect first-hand inforrnation at a time when the

Ainu, especially in the Iburi and Saru River regions, maintained their own traditions in their

daily life (AINUBASE, Hokkaido University; cf IRIMoTo, 1988a). These studies are

academically valuable as descriptions of traditional Ainu culture since the areas studied were

famous at that tirne for their maintaining a rich Ainu cultural tradition.

After the work of this first generation, studies of Ainu folklore have concentrated on

documenting a new generation of cultural bearers of Ainu oral tradition and recording fresh narratives and epics, especially since the 1970s. In partieular, the Aihu Mukei Bunka Densho

Hozonkai (Association for the [[leansmissien and Maintenance of Ainu Intangible Culture,

NII-Electronic Library Service JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society of Cultural Anthropology

Anthropological Studies of the Nnu in Japan: Past and Present 83

A[I)MA), which was established in 1976, and the Office of Education of the Hokkaido

Government (OEHG) have become the main organizations fbr this work. The A[I]MA

established a journal, Ainu Bunha (Ainu Culture), in September 1976, the first volume of

["YAE "Masu, whieh includes Kuro no Saleorobe" [YAE Kuro's Sakorobe] by YAE Kuro, Sake,

Akari to Hito no Ohanashi" [A Story of [[Yeut, Salmon, Light, and Ainu] by KuzuNo Tatsu]'iro,

"}?tisama" and by ARAI Sanure (ATMA 1976). Moreover, ATMA has actively promoted the publication of Ainu folklore as an intangible cultural propertM as exemplified by Stories of

Deities, Report on Ainu Intaugible Iiblk Cultural PrQperties, vol.1 (ATMA 1981). In the

meantirne, the OEHG has also published since 1976 a series of field reports on the culture and folklore of the Ainu; fbr example, Report qf U}"gent Field Research on the Ainu Iibgh Cultural

Properties, 1975: Intangible Cultural Properties, no, 1 (OEHGICul 1976), Rqport of U}'gent

Field Research on the Ainu liblfe Cultural Properties: Material Folk Cultural Properties, no, 5

(OEHGfS-E 1981), and U)'gent Field Research on Ethnqgrcrpho, of the Ainu, no, 1: Rqport on the

Ainu Culture and Fblklore, no. 1 (OEHGIS-E 1982). The fbcus ofAinu fblklore studies is now to

record these surviving traditions as a matter of urgencM The study of Ainu folklore has become

motivated not by academic interest but by the urgent necessity of preserving cultural property

In contrast to folklore studies, the study of the Ainu language has continued to the present

firorn KINDAIcHI through HATToRI Shiro and TAMuRA Suzuko to NAKAGAwA Hiroshi. HATToRI,

who studied linguistics under KINDAIcm, did field research with CHIRI in 1955 on the basic

vocabularies of the Ainu (HATToRI 1959: 101-103; HAT'roRI and CmRi 1960). He

demonstrated systematieally for the first time the regional variations in the Ainu language in

his An Ainu Dictionary with Ainza, eJlxpanese and English indexes (HAoM]oRI 1964). He

also advanced the study of the origins ofthe from a genealogical viewpoint,

suggesting the possibility that Japanese and Ainu are related, although the chronological distance between them could be between 7,OOO and 10,OOO years (HATToRi 1959: 99-100).

Although Ainu studies attracted fewer and fewer ethnologists, the study of the Ainu language

eontinued to attract linguists. RecentlM the publication of Ainu dictionaries has been popular (TAMuRA 1996; NAKAc}Awn 1995; Ktx\ANo 1996).

Interdisciplinary and Folklore Studies at the Research Institute'for Northern and Arctic Culture of Hokkaido Imperial University

In 1937, the Research Institute fbr Nerthern and Arctic Culture was established by Hokkaido Imperial UniversitMi which was restructured as the Institute for Eurasiari Cultural

Studies in 1965 and then the Institute fbr the Study of North Eurasian Cultures attached to

the Faculty of Letters of Hokkaido University in 1966. As the university president at that time stated (KoN 1939), the purpose of its establishment was to collect and arrange a variety of

materials on the one hand, and to carry out research on northern eulture from various

i Hokl[aido Imperial University was renamed Hokkaido University in 1947.

NII-Electronic Library Service JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society ofCulturalof Cultural Anthropology

84 YA"[AI)A Takako

viewpoints on the other, The academic achievements of the Institute included the publication of twenty volumes of the bulletin Studies from the Researeh lnstitute for Albrthern and Arctic Culture from 1939 tip to 1965, which was succeeded by the Bulletin of the Institute for Earasian CuZtural Studies, Hohkaido Uhiversity in 1965, then by the Bulletin of the Jnstitute for the

Stucly oflVbrth Eurasian Cultures, Hblekaido Uhiversity in 1967.

Nthough the subjects of study of the Institute include all northern cultures, the studies

carried out in its early days were mostly concerned with the Ainu. Early members included INuKAI [[btsuo, TAKABEyA Fukuhei, NAzroRI Takemitsu, and TAKAKuRA Shin'ichiro, joined later

'Ybshishige. by CHIRI Mashiho and HAyAsHI All were engaged in Ainu studies, mainly using an

interdisciplinary approach. None except for CmRI were specialists in ethnology or Ainu

studies, but each had his own specialty that contributed to their collaboration in the study of

Ainu folk!ore and history 'the For example, INuKAI, a specialist in zoologM not only revealed the background to

decrease in the deer population, which resulted in the decline of deer hunting by the Ainu

during the Meis-i period, but also described the methods, equipment and rituals ofAinu hunting

and fishing (INuKAI 1935, 1939, 1941, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1961, 1965; INuKAI and MoRI 1956).

Ni\1]oRi Takemitsu, with an archaeological and historical background, not only revealed the

cultural significances of the bear festival but also presented detailed ethnographic information

on the histories and regional variations of the deities (kamui) worshipped at the altar (nusa)

(NrtroRI and INuKAI 1939; NAopoRI 1940b, 1941; INuKAI and NAToRI 1969). Moreover, he published a valuable report not only on the genealogy of Ainu ritual arrows and winged prayer

sticks (ihtapasay), based on a thorough examination of their designs, but also on whale hunting

by the Ainu in the Funkawan (Vblcanic Bay) district and Okhotsk fishery (NA[voRI 1940a, 1943,

1945, 1948a, 1948b, 1985). TAKABEyA Fukuhei, having specialized in architecture, published

ethnegraphies on the dwellings ef the Ainu ([[AKABEyA 1939a, 1939b, 1940, 1941). TAKAKuRA Shin'ichiro, whe specialized in agro-economy and devoted his academic career

to the study of the history of pioneers in Holckaido, researched Japanese policies toward the

Ainu since the [[bkugawa Shogunate and published a rnonumental book, Ainu Seisaku-shi [A

History of Japanese Polieies teward the Ainu] (TAKAKuRA 1942). He also documented the

historical changes in Ainu villages, manners and customs as well as their hunting and fishing

'Ibkugawa rights during the Shogunate ([EAKAKuRA 1936a, 1936b, 1953, 1966, 196611940).

TAKAKuRA's studies are extremely valuable since he systematically revealed the background to

the ethnie problems of the Ainu based on a historical analysis of the relationships between Ainu and Japanese during the Ede period, HiyyAsHI Ybshishige, who specialized in agriculture, found that the Ainu had practiced cultivation in addition te gathering, hunting and fishing. In

his work he discussed the origins of this cultivation (HAyAsm 1964, 1969).

Origin and Development of Ethnological Studies of the Ainu

Although the Japanese Society of Ethnology was established in 1934, most of the Ainu

NII-Electronic Library Service JapaneseJapaneseSociety Society of Cultural Anthropology

Anthropological Studies of the Ainu in Japan: Past and Present 85

studies pursued between the 1930s and 1940s were published in The eJburnal of the Anthropolqgical Society of Nippon. Ethnological studies of the Ainu were published enly

sporadically in 7Ihe tJdpanese eJburnal ofEthnolagy in the 1930s and 1940s by KuBoDERA (1935,

1936, 1940a), TAKAIIuRA (1935), and NAToRI (1943, 1948a, 1948b). As already mentioned,

folklore was the main trend in Ainu studies at that time. However, in 1950 the Japanese

Association of Ethnology2 began planning a survey of the Ainu, and in August 1951 more than ten anthropologists and ethnologists carried out joint research on the Saru Ainu of Hidaka

"ethnological" (IsmDA 1952). This research was deseribed as the first study based on field

work. [I]he participants were not only those researchers like KuBoDERA, who had already been

engaged in Ainu studies, but also researchers who had studied other cultures such as IzuMI

Seiichi, who had studied the Orochon and the Goldi, SuGIuRA Ken'ichi, a specialist in

Micronesian cultures, and SEGA