Jōmon period explained

In Japanese history, the is the time between,[1] [2] during which Japan was inhabited by a diverse hunter-gatherer and early agriculturalist population united through a common Jōmon culture, which reached a considerable degree of sedentism and cultural complexity. The name "cord-marked" was first applied by the American zoologist and orientalist Edward S. Morse, who discovered sherds of pottery in 1877 and subsequently translated "straw-rope pattern" into Japanese as Jōmon.[3] The pottery style characteristic of the first phases of Jōmon culture was decorated by impressing cords into the surface of wet clay and is generally accepted to be among the oldest in the world.[4]

The Jōmon period was rich in tools and jewelry made from bone, stone, shell and antler; pottery figurines and vessels; and lacquerware.[5] [6] [7] [8] It is often compared to pre-Columbian cultures of the North American Pacific Northwest and especially to the Valdivia culture in Ecuador because in these settings cultural complexity developed within a primarily hunting-gathering context with limited use of horticulture.[9] [10] [11] [12]

Chronology

The approximately 14,000-year Jōmon period is conventionally divided into several phases, progressively shorter: Incipient (13,750–8,500 BC), Initial (8,500–5,000), Early (5,000–3,520), Middle (3,520–2,470), Late (2,470–1,250), and Final (1,250–500).[13] The fact that this entire period is given the same name by archaeologists should not be taken to mean that there was not considerable regional and temporal diversity; the time between the earliest Jōmon pottery and that of the more well-known Middle Jōmon period is about twice as long as the span separating the building of the Great Pyramid of Giza from the 21st century.

Dating of the Jōmon sub-phases is based primarily upon ceramic typology, and to a lesser extent radiocarbon dating.

Recent findings have refined the final phase of the Jōmon period to 300 BC.[1] [2] The Yayoi period started between 500 and 300 BC according to radio-carbon evidence, while Yayoi styled pottery was found in a Jōmon site of northern Kyushu already in 800 BC.[14] [15] [16]

Pottery

See main article: Jōmon pottery. The earliest pottery in Japan was made at or before the start of the Incipient Jōmon period. Small fragments, dated to were found at the Odai Yamamoto I site in 1998. Pottery of roughly the same age was subsequently found at other sites such as in Kamikuroiwa and the Fukui cave.[17] [18] [19]

The first Jōmon pottery is characterized by the cord-marking that gives the period its name and has now been found in large numbers of sites. The pottery of the period has been classified by archaeologists into some 70 styles, with many more local varieties of the styles.[20] The antiquity of Jōmon pottery was first identified after World War II, through radiocarbon dating methods.[6] The earliest vessels were mostly smallish round-bottomed bowls 10–50 cm high that are assumed to have been used for boiling food and, perhaps, storing it beforehand. They belonged to hunter-gatherers and the size of the vessels may have been limited by a need for portability. As later bowls increase in size, this is taken to be a sign of an increasingly settled pattern of living. These types continued to develop, with increasingly elaborate patterns of decoration, undulating rims, and flat bottoms so that they could stand on a surface.[21] The manufacture of pottery typically implies some form of sedentary life because pottery is heavy, bulky, and fragile and thus generally unsuitable for hunter-gatherers. However, this does not seem to have been the case with the first Jōmon people, who perhaps numbered over the whole archipelago.[17] It seems that food sources were so abundant in the natural environment of the Japanese islands that they could support fairly large, semi-sedentary populations. The Jōmon people used chipped stone tools, ground stone tools, traps, and bows, and were evidently skillful coastal and deep-water fishers.

Chronological ceramic typology

Incipient Jōmon [22]

Initial Jōmon (7500–4000 BC)[23] [24]

Early Jōmon (5000–3520 BC)[25]

Middle Jōmon (3520–2470 BC)[26]

Late Jōmon (2470–1250 BC)

Final Jōmon (1250–500 BC)[29]

Incipient and Initial Jōmon

Traces of Paleolithic culture, mainly stone tools, occur in Japan from around onwards. The earliest "Incipient Jōmon" phase began while Japan was still linked to continental Asia as a narrow peninsula.[31] As the glaciers melted following the end of the last glacial period (approximately), sea levels rose, separating the Japanese archipelago from the Asian mainland; the closest point (in Kyushu) about from the Korean Peninsula is near enough to be intermittently influenced by continental developments, but far enough removed for the peoples of the Japanese islands to develop independently. The main connection between the Japanese archipelago and Mainland Asia was through the Korean Peninsula to Kyushu and Honshu. In addition, Luzon, Taiwan, Ryukyu, and Kyushu constitute a continuous chain of islands, connecting the Jōmon with Southeast Asia, while Honshu, Hokkaido and Sakhalin connected the Jōmon with Siberia.

Within the archipelago, the vegetation was transformed by the end of the Ice Age. In southwestern Honshu, Shikoku, and Kyushu, broadleaf evergreen trees dominated the forests, whereas broadleaf deciduous trees and conifers were common in northeastern Honshu and southern Hokkaido. Many native tree species, such as beeches, buckeyes, chestnuts, and oaks produced edible nuts and acorns. These provided substantial sources of food for both humans and animals.

In the northeast, the plentiful marine life carried south by the Oyashio Current, especially salmon, was another major food source. Settlements along both the Sea of Japan and the Pacific Ocean subsisted on immense amounts of shellfish, leaving distinctive middens (mounds of discarded shells and other refuse) that are now prized sources of information for archaeologists. Other food sources meriting special mention include Sika deer, wild boar (with possible wild-pig management),[32] wild plants such as yam-like tubers, and freshwater fish. Supported by the highly productive deciduous forests and an abundance of seafood, the population was concentrated in Honshu and Kyushu, but Jōmon sites range from Hokkaido to the Ryukyu Islands. Tigers once existed in the Japanese archipelago, but they became extinct in prehistoric times.[33]

Early Jōmon (5000–3520 BC)

The Early Jōmon period saw an explosion in population, as indicated by the number of larger aggregated villages from this period.[13] This period occurred during the Holocene climatic optimum, when the local climate became warmer and more humid.[34]

Early agriculture

The degree to which horticulture or small-scale agriculture was practiced by Jōmon people is debated. Currently, there is no scientific consensus to support a conceptualization of Jōmon period culture as only hunter-gatherer.[32] There is evidence to suggest that arboriculture was practiced in the form of tending groves of lacquer (Toxicodendron verniciflua) and nut (Castanea crenata and Aesculus turbinata) producing trees,[35] [36] as well as soybean, bottle gourd, hemp, Perilla, adzuki, among others. These characteristics place them somewhere in between hunting-gathering and agriculture.

An apparently domesticated variety of peach appeared very early at Jōmon sites in 6700–6400 BP (4700–4400 BC).[37] This was already similar to modern cultivated forms. This domesticated type of peach was apparently brought into Japan from China. Nevertheless, in China, itself, this variety is currently attested only at a later date of 5300–4300 BP.

Middle Jōmon (3520–2470 BC)

Highly ornate pottery dogū figurines and vessels, such as the so-called "flame style" vessels, and lacquered wood objects remain from that time. Although the ornamentation of pottery increased over time, the ceramic fabric always remained quite coarse. During this time Magatama stone beads make a transition from being a common jewelry item found in homes into serving as a grave good.[38] This is a period where there are large burial mounds and monuments.[13] This period saw a rise in complexity in the design of pit-houses, the most commonly used method of housing at the time,[39] with some even having paved stone floors.[40] A study in 2015 found that this form of dwelling continued up until the Satsumon culture. Using archaeological data on pollen count, this phase is the warmest of all the phases.[41] By the end of this phase the warm climate starts to enter a cooling trend.[13]

Late and Final Jōmon (2470–500 BC)

After 1500 BC, the climate cooled entering a stage of neoglaciation, and populations seem to have contracted dramatically.[13] Comparatively few archaeological sites can be found after 1500 BC.

The Japanese chestnut, Castanea crenata, becomes essential, not only as a nut bearing tree, but also because it was extremely durable in wet conditions and became the most used timber for building houses during the Late Jōmon phase.[42]

During the Final Jōmon period, a slow shift was taking place in western Japan: steadily increasing contact with the Korean Peninsula eventually led to the establishment of Korean-type settlements in western Kyushu, beginning around 900 BC. The settlers brought with them new technologies such as wet rice farming and bronze and iron metallurgy, as well as new pottery styles similar to those of the Mumun pottery period. The settlements of these new arrivals seem to have coexisted with those of the Jōmon and Yayoi for around a thousand years.Outside Hokkaido, the Final Jōmon is succeeded by a new farming culture, the Yayoi (c. 300 BC – AD 300), named after an archaeological site near Tokyo.[6]

Within Hokkaido, the Jōmon is succeeded by the Okhotsk culture and Zoku-Jōmon (post-Jōmon) or Epi-Jōmon culture, which later replaced or merged with the Satsumon culture around the 7th century.

Population decline

At the end of the Jōmon period the local population declined sharply. Scientists suggest that this was possibly caused by food shortages and other environmental problems. They concluded that not all Jōmon groups suffered under these circumstances but the overall population declined.[43] Examining the remains of the people who lived throughout the Jōmon period, there is evidence that these deaths were not inflicted by warfare or violence on a large enough scale to cause these deaths.[44]

Foundation myths

The origin myths of Japanese civilization extend back to periods now regarded as part of the Jōmon period, but they show little or no relation to the current archaeological understanding of Jōmon culture. The traditional founding date of the Japanese nation by Emperor Jimmu is February 11, 660 BC. That version of Japanese history, however, comes from the country's first written records, the Kojiki and the Nihon Shoki, dating from the 6th to the 8th centuries, after Japan had adopted Chinese characters (Go-on/Kan-on).[45]

Some elements of modern Japanese culture may date from the period and reflect the influences of a mingled migration from the northern Asian continent and the southern Pacific areas and the local Jōmon peoples. Among those elements are the precursors to Shinto, marriage customs, architectural styles, and technological developments such as lacquerware, laminated bows called "yumi", and metalworking.

Origin and ethnogenesis

See main article: Jōmon people. The relationship of Jōmon people to the modern Japanese (Yamato people), Ryukyuans, and Ainu is not clear. Morphological studies of dental variation and genetic studies suggest that the Jōmon people were rather diverse, and mitochondrial DNA studies indicate the Jōmon people were closely related to modern-day East Asians.[46] [47] The contemporary Japanese people descended from a mixture of the various ancient hunter-gatherer tribes of the Jōmon period and the Yayoi rice-agriculturalists, and these two major ancestral groups came to Japan over different routes at different times.[48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54]

The modern-day Japanese population carries approximately 30% paternal ancestry from the Jōmon. This is far higher than the maternal Jōmon contribution of around 15%, and autosomal contribution of 10% to the Japanese population. This imbalanced inheritance has been referred to as the "admixture paradox", and is thought to hold clues as to how the admixture between the Jōmon and Yayoi cultures took place.[55] According to Mitsuru Sakitani the Jōmon people are an admixture of several Paleolithic populations. He suggests that Y-chromosome haplogroups C1a1 and D-M55 are two of the Jōmon lineages.[56] The maternal haplogroups M7a, N9b, and G1b have been identified from ancient Jōmon specimens.

According to study "Jōmon culture and the peopling of the Japanese archipelago" by Schmidt and Seguchi (2014), the prehistoric Jōmon people descended from diverse paleolithic populations with multiple migrations into Jōmon-period Japan. They concluded: "In this respect, the biological identity of the Jōmon is heterogeneous, and it may be indicative of diverse peoples who possibly belonged to a common culture, known as the Jōmon".[57]

A study by Lee and Hasegawa of Waseda University concluded that the Jōmon period population of Hokkaido consisted of two distinctive populations which later merged to form the proto-Ainu in northern Hokkaido. The Ainu language can be connected to an "Okhotsk component" which spread southwards. They further concluded that the "dual structure theory" regarding the population history of Japan must be revised and that the Jōmon people had more diversity than originally suggested.[58]

A 2015 study found specific gene alleles, related to facial structure and features among some Ainu individuals, which largely descended from local Hokkaido Jōmon groups. These alleles are typically associated with Europeans but absent from other East Asians (including Japanese people), which suggests geneflow from a currently unidentified source population into the Jōmon period population of Hokkaido. Although these specific alleles can explain the unusual physical appearance of certain Ainu individuals, compared to other Northeast Asians, the exact origin of these alleles remains unknown.[59] [60]

Full genome analyses in 2020 and 2021 revealed further information regarding the origin of the Jōmon peoples. The genetic results suggest early admixture between different groups in Japan already during the Paleolithic, followed by constant geneflow from coastal East Asian groups, resulting in a heterogeneous population which then homogenized until the arrival of the Yayoi people. Geneflow from Northeast Asia during the Jōmon period is associated with the C1a1 and C2 lineages, geneflow from the Tibetan Plateau and Southern China is associated with the D1a2a (previously D1b) and D1a1 (previously D1a) lineages. Geneflow from ancient Siberia into the northern Jōmon people of Hokkaido was also detected, with later geneflow from Hokkaido into parts of northern Honshu (Tohoku). The lineages K and F are suggested to have been presented during the early Jōmon period but got replaced by C and D. The analysis of a Jōmon sample (Ikawazu shell-mound, Tahara, Japan) and an ancient sample from the Tibetan Plateau (Chokhopani, China) found only partially shared ancestry, pointing towards a "positive genetic bottleneck" regarding the spread of haplogroup D from ancient "East Asian Highlanders" (related to modern day Tujia people, Yao people, and Tibetans, as well as Tripuri people). The genetic evidence suggests that an East Asian source population, near the Himalayan mountain range, contributed ancestry to the Jōmon period population of Japan, and less to ancient Southeast Asians. The authors concluded that this points to an inland migration through southern or central China towards Japan during the Paleolithic. Another ancestry component seem to have arrived from Siberia into Hokkaido.[61] [62] [63] Archeological and biological evidence link the southern Jōmon culture of Kyushu, Shikoku and parts of Honshu to cultures of southern China and Northeast India. A common culture, known as the "broadleafed evergreen forest culture", ranged from southwestern Japan through southern China towards Northeast India and southern Tibet, and was characterized by the cultivation of Azuki beans.[64]

Some linguists suggest that the Japonic languages were already present within the Japanese archipelago and coastal Korea, before the Yayoi period, and can be linked to one of the Jōmon populations of southwestern Japan, rather than the later Yayoi or Kofun period rice-agriculturalists. Japonic-speakers then expanded during the Yayoi period, assimilating the newcomers, adopting rice-agriculture, and fusing mainland Asian technologies with local traditions.[65]

Vovin (2021) presented arguments for the presence of Austronesian peoples within the Japanese archipelago during the Jōmon period, based on previous linguistic research and specific Austronesian vocabulary loaned into the core vocabulary of (Insular) Japanese. He suggests that Austronesian-speakers arrived in Japan during the Jōmon period and prior to the arrival of Yayoi period migrants, associated with the spread of Japonic languages. These Austronesian-speakers were subsequently assimilated into the Japanese ethnicity. Evidence for non-Ainuic, non-Austronesian, and non-Korean loanwords are found among Insular Japonic languages, and probably derived from unknown and extinct Jōmon languages.[66]

Cultural revival

Modern public perception of Jōmon has gradually changed from primitive and obsolete to captivating:[67]

See also

Sources

External links

Notes and References

  1. Perri . Angela R. . 2016 . Hunting dogs as environmental adaptations in Jōmon Japan . Antiquity . 90 . 353 . 1166–1180 . 10.15184/aqy.2016.115 . 163956846.
  2. Timothy Jinam . Hideaki Kanzawa-Kiriyama . Naruya Saitou . 2015 . Human genetic diversity in the Japanese Archipelago: dual structure and beyond . Genes & Genetic Systems . 90 . 3 . 147–152 . 10.1266/ggs.90.147 . 26510569 . free.
  3. Mason, 14
  4. Kuzmin . Y.V. . 2006 . Chronology of the Earliest Pottery in East Asia: Progress and Pitfalls . Antiquity . 80 . 308 . 362–371 . 10.1017/s0003598x00093686 . 17316841.
  5. Book: Birmingham Museum of Art . Birmingham Museum of Art . Birmingham Museum of Art : Guide to the Collection . Birmingham Museum of Art . 2010 . 978-1-904832-77-5 . Birmingham, AL . 40.
  6. Imamura, K. (1996) Prehistoric Japan: New Perspectives on Insular East Asia. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press
  7. Book: Mizoguchi, Koji . An Archaeological History of Japan, 30,000 B.C. to A.D. 700 . University of Pennsylvania Press, Incorporated . 2002 . 978-0-8122-3651-4.
  8. Web site: 長野県立歴史館 . 1996-07-01 . 縄文人の一生 . 2016-09-02 . Comprehensive Database of Archaeological Site Reports in Japan.
  9. Koyama, Shuzo, and David Hurst Thomas (eds.). (1979). Affluent Foragers: Pacific Coasts East and West. Senri Ethnological Studies No. 9. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology.
  10. Book: Aikens, C. Melvin . Pacific northeast Asia in prehistory: hunter-fisher-gatherers, farmers, and sociopolitical elites . WSU Press . 1992 . 978-0-87422-092-6.
  11. Book: Fiedel, Stuart J. . Prehistory of the Americas . 1992 . Cambridge University Press . 9780521425445 . en.
  12. News: Archaeology Studies examine clues of transoceanic contact . en . The Columbus Dispatch . 2017-10-04.
  13. Sakaguchi. Takashi. 2009. Storage adaptations among hunter–gatherers: A quantitative approach to the Jomon period. Journal of anthropological archaeology. 28. 3. 290–303. San Diego. Elsevier Inc..
  14. Silberman et al., 154–155.
  15. Schirokauer et al., 133–143.
  16. 2007. A comment on the Yayoi Period dating controversy. Bulletin of the Society for East Asian Archaeology. 1. Shōda. Shinya.
  17. Mason, 13
  18. Book: Hudson, Mark J. . Mark J. Hudson . Ruins of Identity: Ethnogenesis in the Japanese islands . 1999 . University of Hawaii Press . 978-0-8248-2156-2.
  19. Book: Habu, Junko <!-- . Junko Habu --> . Ancient Jomōn of Japan . 2004 . Cambridge University Press . 978-0-521-77670-7.
  20. Mason, 14
  21. Mason, 15, 17
  22. Dresner, Melvyn. 2016. Jomon pottery as hunter-gatherer technology. UCL Institute of Archaeology. Pristupljeno 18. studenoga 2023.
  23. Kudo. Yuichiro. June 2007. The Temporal Correspondences between the Archaeological: Chronology and Environmental Changes from to 11,500 to 2,800 cal BP on the Kanto Plain, Eastern Japan. The Quaternary Research. 46. 3. 187–194. 10.4116/jaqua.46.187 . J-Stage.
  24. Motohashi. Emiko. 25 January 1996 . Jomon Lithic Raw Material Exploitation in the Izu Islands, Tokyo, Japan. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association. 2. 15. 131–137. 18 November 2023. Open Journal Systems.
  25. Habu. Junko. Hall. Mark E.. 1999. Jomon Pottery Production in Central Japan. Asian Perspectives. 38. 1. 90–110. 42928448 . 0066-8435.
  26. Web site: Japanese art – Jomon, Pottery, Sculpture Britannica. 2023-11-17. www.britannica.com. en.
  27. Web site: Jōmon Pottery at the World's Columbian Exposition. 2023-11-17. web.sas.upenn.edu.
  28. Hall. Mark E. 2004-10-01. Pottery production during the Late Jomon period: insights from the chemical analyses of Kasori B pottery. Journal of Archaeological Science. 31. 10. 1439–1450. 10.1016/j.jas.2004.03.004. 0305-4403.
  29. Kobayashi. Seiji. 24 January 2008 . Eastern Japanese pottery during the Jomon-Yayoi transition: a study in forager-farmer interaction. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association. 5. 21. 37–42. 17 November 2023. Open Journal Systems.
  30. Kushihara. Koichi. Jomon Period. Archaeologia Japonica. 2014. 2. 74–77. 17 November 2023.
  31. Mason, 13
  32. Crawford. Gary W.. 2011. Advances in understanding early agriculture in Japan . Current Anthropology . 52. S4. S331–S345. 10.1086/658369. 10.1086/658369. 143756517.
  33. Hasegawa, Y. . Tomida, Y. . Kohno, N. . Ono, K. . Nokariya, H. . Uyeno, T. . 3. 1988 . Quaternary vertebrates from Shiriya area, Shimokita Pininsula, northeastern Japan . Memoirs of the National Science Museum . 21 . 17–36.
  34. Francis E. Mayle . . William D. Gosling . Mark B. Bush . 2004. Responses of Amazonian ecosystems to climatic and atmospheric carbon dioxide changes since the Last Glacial Maximum. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences. 359. 1443. 499–514. 10.1098/rstb.2003.1434. 1693334. 15212099.
  35. Matsui. A.. Kanehara. M.. 2006. The question of prehistoric plant husbandry during the Jomōn Period in Japan. World Archaeology. 38. 2. 259–273. 10.1080/00438240600708295. 162258797.
  36. Book: Crawford, G.W.. Transitions to Agriculture in Prehistory. University of Wisconsin Press. 1992. Gebauer. A.B.. Madison, WI. 117–132. The transitions to agriculture in Japan. Price. T.D..
  37. Yang. Xiaoyan. Zheng. Yunfei. Crawford. Gary W.. Chen. Xugao. 2014. Archaeological evidence for peach (Prunus persica) cultivation and domestication in China. PLOS ONE. 9. 9. e106595. 2014PLoSO...9j6595Z. 10.1371/journal.pone.0106595. 1932-6203. 4156326. 25192436. free.
  38. Nishimura, Y. (2018). The Evolution of Curved Beads (Magatama 勾玉/曲玉) in Jōmon Period Japan and the Development of Individual Ownership. Asian Perspectives 57(1), 105–158. doi:10.1353/asi.2018.0004.
  39. News: May 27, 1997. Early Jomon hamlet found. The Japan Times.
  40. Moriya. Toyohito. 2015. A Study of the Utilization of Wood to Build Pit Dwellings from the Epi-Jomon Culture. Journal of the Graduate School of Letters. 10. 71–85. 10.14943/jgsl.10.71.
  41. Kusaka, Soichiro, Hyodo, Fujio, Yumoto, Takakazu, & Nakatsukasa, Masato. (2010). Carbon and nitrogen stable isotope analysis on the diet of Jomon populations from two coastal regions of Japan. Journal of archaeological science, 37(8), 1968–1977. LONDON: Elsevier BV.
  42. Noshiro, Shuichi, & Sasaki, Yuka. (2014). Pre-agricultural management of plant resources during the Jomon period in Japan—a sophisticated subsistence system on plant resources. Journal of archaeological science, 42(1), 93–106. LONDON: Elsevier BV.
  43. Ohashi. Jun. Tokunaga. Katsushi. Hitomi. Yuki. Sawai. Hiromi. Khor. Seik-Soon. Naka. Izumi. Watanabe. Yusuke. 2019-06-17. Analysis of whole Y-chromosome sequences reveals the Japanese population history in the Jomon period. Scientific Reports. en. 9. 1. 8556. 2019NatSR...9.8556W. 10.1038/s41598-019-44473-z. 2045-2322. 6572846. 31209235.
  44. Nakao, Hisashi, Tamura, Kohei, Arimatsu, Yui, Nakagawa, Tomomi, Matsumoto, Naoko, & Matsugi, Takehiko. (2016). Violence in the prehistoric period of Japan: the spatio-temporal pattern of skeletal evidence for violence in the Jomon period. Biology letters (2005), 12(3), 20160028. Historical Article, LONDON: The Royal Society.
  45. [:ja:沖森 卓也|OKimori Takuya]
  46. Web site: Out of Sunda by Jōmon Japanese . Southeast Asia . Earth & Life Sciences . Scribd . en . 2017-07-05.
  47. Hideaki . Kanzawa-Kiriyama . Aiko . Saso . Gen . Suwa . Naruya . Saitou . 2013 . Ancient mitochondrial DNA sequences of Jōmon teeth samples from Sanganji, Tohoku district, Japan . Anthropological Science . 121 . 2 . 89–103 . 10.1537/ase.121113 . 18 April 2017. free .
  48. Hanihara . K. . 1984 . Origins and affinities of Japanese viewed from cranial measurements . Acta Anthropogenetica . 8 . 1–2 . 149–158 . 6537211 .
  49. Michael F. . Hammer . Tatiana M. . Karafet . Hwayong . Park . Keiichi . Omoto . Shinji . Harihara . Mark . Stoneking . Satoshi . Horai . 2006 . Dual origins of the Japanese: Common ground for hunter-gatherer and farmer Y chromosomes . . 51 . 1 . 47–58 . 10.1007/s10038-005-0322-0 . 16328082 . free.
  50. Rita Rasteiro . Lounès Chikhi . 2009 . Revisiting the peopling of Japan: An admixture perspective . . 54 . 6 . 349–354 . 10.1038/jhg.2009.39 . 19424284 . free .
  51. Yungang . He . Wei R. . Wang . Shuhua . Xu . Li . Jin . 2012 . Paleolithic contingent in modern Japanese: Estimation and inference using genome-wide data . . 2 . 355 . 47–58 . 10.1038/srep00355 . 22482036 . 3320058 . 2012NatSR...2E.355H .
  52. Youichi . Sato . etal . 2014 . Overview of genetic variation in the Y chromosome of modern Japanese males . Anthropological Science . 122 . 3 . 131–136 . 10.1537/ase.140709 . free.
  53. Hideaki . Kanzawa-Kiriyama . Kirill . Kryukov . Timothy A. . Jinam . Kazuyoshi . Hosomichi . Aiko . Saso . Gen . Suwa . Shintaroh . Ueda . Minoru . Yoneda . Atsushi . Tajima . Ken-ichi . Shinoda . Ituro . Inoue . Naruya . Saitou . 6 . February 2017 . A partial nuclear genome of the Jōmons who lived ago in Fukushima, Japan . . 62 . 2 . 213–221 . 10.1038/jhg.2016.110 . 27581845 . 5285490 .
  54. Nara . Takashi . Adachi . Noboru . Yoneda . Minoru . Hagihara . Yasuo . Saeki . Fumiko . Koibuchi . Ryoko . Takahashi . Ryohei . 2019 . Mitochondrial DNA analysis of the human skeletons excavated from the Shomyoji shell midden site, Kanagawa, Japan . Anthropological Science . en . 127 . 1 . 65–72 . 10.1537/ase.190307 . 0918-7960 . free.
  55. Osada . Naoki . Kawai . Yosuke . 2021 . Exploring models of human migration to the Japanese archipelago using genome-wide genetic data . Anthropological Science . Anthropological Society of Nippon . 129 . 1 . 45–58 . 10.1537/ase.201215 . 0918-7960. free . "The high frequency of the Y-chromosomal Jomon haplotype (~30%) clearly shows that Jomon ancestry in the present-day Japanese population is much stronger on the Y chromosomes than on autosomes (Sato et al., 2014b). In contrast, the Jomon ancestry proportion of mitochondrial genomes is less certain because the frequency of M7a and N9b haplogroups in Jomon people are somewhat variable across the Japanese archipelago (Adachi et al., 2009). If we assumed that the proportion of M7a and N9b haplogroups in Jomon was around 70%, the mitochondrial Jomon ancestry would be around 15% in present-day Japanese individuals. The observed imbalance of Jomon ancestry among autosomal, Y-chromosomal, and mitochondrial genomes, which we refer to as the ‘admixture paradox’, seems confusing but worthwhile to study further to elucidate the process of admixture of Jomon and Yayoi genetic components."
  56. 崎谷満『DNA・考古・言語の学際研究が示す新・日本列島史』（勉誠出版　2009年）(in Japanese)
  57. Web site: Schmidt; Seguchi . 2014 . Jōmon culture and the peopling of the Japanese archipelago . These results suggest a level of inter-regional heterogeneity not expected among Jomon groups. This observation is further substantiated by the studies of Kanzawa-Kiriyama et al. (2013) and Adachi et al. (2013). Kanzawa-Kiriyama et al. (2013) analysed craniometrics and extracted aDNA from museum samples that came from the Sanganji shell mound site in Fukushima Prefecture dated to the Final Jomon Period. They tested for regional differences and found the Tokoku Jomon (northern Honshu) were more similar to Hokkaido Jomon than to geographically adjacent Kanto Jomon (central Honshu).
    Adachi et al. (2013) described the craniometrics and aDNA sequence from a Jomon individual from Nagano (Yugora cave site) dated to the middle of the initial Jomon Period (7920–7795 cal BP). This individual carried ancestry, which is widely distributed among modern East Asians (Nohira et al. 2010; Umetsu et al. 2005) and resembled modern Northeast Asian comparison samples rather than geographical close Urawa Jomon sample..
  58. Lee . Sean . Hasegawa . Toshikazu . April 2013 . Evolution of the Ainu Language in Space and Time . PLOS ONE . 8 . 4 . e62243 . 2013PLoSO...862243L . 10.1371/journal.pone.0062243 . 3637396 . 23638014 . In this paper, we reconstructed spatiotemporal evolution of 19 Ainu language varieties, and the results are in strong agreement with the hypothesis that a recent population expansion of the Okhotsk people played a critical role in shaping the Ainu people and their culture. Together with the recent archaeological, biological and cultural evidence, our phylogeographic reconstruction of the Ainu language strongly suggests that the conventional dual-structure model must be refined to explain these new bodies of evidence. The case of the Ainu language origin we report here also contributes additional detail to the global pattern of language evolution, and our language phylogeny might also provide a basis for making further inferences about the cultural dynamics of the Ainu speakers [44,45]. . free.
  59. Jinam. Timothy A.. Kanzawa-Kiriyama. Hideaki. Inoue. Ituro. Tokunaga. Katsushi. Omoto. Keiichi. Saitou. Naruya. October 2015. Unique characteristics of the Ainu population in Northern Japan. Journal of Human Genetics. en. 60. 10. 565–571. 10.1038/jhg.2015.79. 26178428. 205166287. 1435-232X. free.
  60. Liu, F., van der Lijn, F., Schurmann, C., Zhu, G., Chakravarty, M. M., Hysi, P. G. et al. A genome-wide association study identifies five loci influencing facial morphology in Europeans. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002932 (2012).
  61. Yang. Melinda A.. Fan. Xuechun. Sun. Bo. Chen. Chungyu. Lang. Jianfeng. Ko. Ying-Chin. Tsang. Cheng-hwa. Chiu. Hunglin. Wang. Tianyi. Bao. Qingchuan. Wu. Xiaohong. 2020-07-17. Ancient DNA indicates human population shifts and admixture in northern and southern China . Science . en. 369. 6501. 282–288. 10.1126/science.aba0909. 0036-8075. 32409524. 2020Sci...369..282Y. 218649510.
  62. Boer. Elisabeth de. Yang. Melinda A.. Kawagoe. Aileen. Barnes. Gina L.. 2020 . Japan considered from the hypothesis of farmer/language spread . Evolutionary Human Sciences. en. 2. e13 . 10.1017/ehs.2020.7. 37588377 . 10427481 . 2513-843X. free.
  63. Watanabe . Yusuke . Ohashi . Jun . 2021-03-08 . Comprehensive analysis of Japanese archipelago population history by detecting ancestry-marker polymorphisms without using ancient DNA data . 10.1101/2020.12.07.414037 . en.
  64. Web site: Isemura. Takehisa. 2011. Comparison of the Pattern of Crop Domestication between Two Asian Beans, Azuki Bean (Vigna angularis) and Rice Bean (V. umbellata).
  65. Chaubey. Gyaneshwer. Driem. George van. 2020. Munda languages are father tongues, but Japanese and Korean are not. Evolutionary Human Sciences. en. 2. e19 . 10.1017/ehs.2020.14. 37588351 . 10427457 . 2513-843X. "The Japonic-speaking Early Jōmon people must have been drawn in to avail themselves of the pickings of Yayoi agricultural yields, and the Yayoi may have prospered and succeeded in multiplying their paternal lineages precisely because they managed to accommodate the Jōmon linguistically and in material ways."
    "The dual nature of Japanese population structure was advanced by Miller, who proposed that the resident Jōmon population spoke an Altaic language ancestral to modern Japanese, and this Altaic tongue underwent Austronesian influence when the islanders absorbed the bearers of the incursive Yayoi culture.". free.
  66. Vovin. Alexander. 2021-12-21. Austronesians in the Northern Waters?. International Journal of Eurasian Linguistics. 3. 2. 272–300. 10.1163/25898833-00320006. 245508545. 2589-8833. free.
  67. Web site: December 21, 2019 . Jomon revival . https://web.archive.org/web/20220120025006/https://features.japantimes.co.jp/jomon-revival/ . January 20, 2022 . The Japan Times.

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Jōmon period".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.