Jomon: Paleolithic Contingent in Modern Japanese

The Jōmon culture of Japan (c. 12 500–2350 BP; Table 1) is considered one of the best contexts for analysing complex prehistoric hunter-gatherer groups (Rowley-Conwy 2001). Although often discussed as a single culture that dominated the archipelago for over 10 000 years, the Jōmon actually comprised various subgroups with differing traits across regions (Bleed & Matsui 2010). These traits were specifically defined by the geography and climate of the various latitudinal zones from subarctic to subtropical, a result of the extreme north–south orientation of the islands. This variation in climatic conditions meant that subsistence systems practised by Jōmon hunter-gatherers in each area were highly varied, with different prey species, tool technology, hunting methods and environmental adaptations (Underhill & Habu 2006). Even within a small area in Japan, a mosaic of different environments is possible. Due to these variables, different degrees of complexity can be expected among the various Jōmon subcultures.

This paper focuses on the Jōmon subculture that inhabited the eastern side of the main island, Honshu, hereafter referred to as the Pacific Honshu Jōmon (Figure 1). At the beginning of the Holocene, this region of Japan experienced a distinctive transition to environmental conditions that allowed Jōmon foragers to flourish in a forest-estuary ecotone consisting of abundant, nut-bearing deciduous trees, shellfish, coastal fish and forest ungulates such as sika deer (Cervus nippon) and wild boar (Sus scrofa leucomystax), which made up the majority of their diet. Also unique to this part of Jōmon Japan is the occurrence of the individual burials of domesticated dogs (Canis familiaris), only a few of which have previously been discussed outside of the Japanese literature. Researchers have long presumed that hunting dogs were kept by Jōmon foragers (e.g. Kraus 1953; Nishinakagawa et al. 1994), and in Japan “boar-hunting with dogs is seen as a quintessential Jōmon activity” (Knight 2003: 153). Yet this idea has not moved beyond the theoretical, even though archaeological dog remains have been systematically surveyed across Japan (see Kaneko 1978; Shigehara 1985; Niwa 1987; Kojima & Kikuchi 1999). Here, I discuss a possible relationship between the isolated clustering of Jōmon dog burials in just one region and the specialised adaptations to changing environments and prey in this locality. I document a strong association between the first appearance of Jōmon dog burials in eastern Honshu and a shift to primarily hunting terrestrial ungulates in the new Holocene deciduous forests of the region, signifying the probable use of dogs as a dense-forest hunting adaptation after the Pleistocene–Holocene transition.



Post-glacial shifts of flora and fauna in north-central Honshu prompted a reorganisation of subsistence strategies, requiring adaptations away from hunting the large terrestrial megafauna of the Pleistocene—e.g. Naumann's elephant (Palaeoloxodon naumanni) and Yabe's giant deer (Sinomegaceros yabei)—and towards a strategy of taking smaller, quicker ungulates in a densely forested environment (Inada 1986; Tsuji 1997). Changes in prey are reflected in the technological advances seen from the region, including a shift to smaller, triangular points used for the bow and arrow (Aikens & Higuchi 1982; Inada 1986), which were designed to induce heavy bleeding in ungulates (Friis-Hansen 1990; Churchill 1993). This change in blade technology began in the southern islands, moving north with the changing biota, suggesting strong connections between Jōmon environmental and cultural changes (Aikens & Akazawa 1996).

In the temperate deciduous forests of north-central Honshu, there may have been variation between Jōmon on the Japan Sea and Pacific coasts, with an increased reliance on plant resources along the Japan Sea, although more dietary isotopic work is needed for this region. The Japan Sea coast, west of the central mountain range, is well known for its heavy, long-lasting snowfall, which sika deer and boar migrate to avoid (Tsujino et al. 2010). Minaki (1988) suggests that extensive chestnut cultivation occurred along this coast, with raised-floor longhouses—associated with the winter storage of nuts in high snowfall areas—found predominantly in this region (Kitagawa & Yasuda 2008). In contrast, a substantial primary dependence on sika deer and wild boar by Jōmon on the Pacific Honshu coast has long been established by researchers (Koike 1986; Hongo et al. 2007). In these two productive temperate forest environments, however, the importance of ungulate hunting on the Pacific coast, as compared to the Japan Sea coast, is probably closely related to the availability of prey during the key autumn and winter months.



Dogs as hunting technology

A hunting partnership between dogs and humans has long been postulated in the archaeological literature, with some researchers suggesting that such a collaborative alliance was the basis for the initial domestication of dogs (e.g. Davis 1982; Clutton-Brock 1995). A partnership of this nature has often been proposed between Jōmon hunters and their dogs, given that terrestrial game hunting was an important part of the subsistence economy of some regional subgroups (Nishinakagawa et al. 1994; Kobayashi 2004). The shift in hunting strategies following the Pleistocene–Holocene transition probably included hunting dogs as a combined, dense-forest technological innovation along with the bow and arrow. The innate ability of a dog to sniff out, track, chase and hold prey can significantly enhance the success of human hunters in forested environments (e.g. Dwyer 1983; Ngima Mawoung 2006). Dogs are an important, and in some cases indispensable, hunting aid for many modern forager groups, as they probably were for foragers in prehistory. Their use is often a critical factor in the minimisation of subsistence risk and the maximising of hunting returns; they can prove an invaluable extension of the hunter and their toolkit (Mitchell 2008).

The rapid spread of post-glacial temperate forests in north-central Japan increased the total ungulate biomass, which may have been a crucial variable in human behaviour, organisation and populations in the early Holocene (Mellars 1975; Rowley-Conwy 1986). These areas of high-value prey species were ideal hunting grounds for the Jōmon, yet the density of the temperate forests and swiftness of medium-sized ungulates would have required adapted hunting methods compared to the more open habitats and large herd animals of the previous glacial period. Clutton-Brock (1984) suggests that hunting dogs were heavily used in the early Holocene—in conjunction with microlith technology—to track and retrieve wounded game in difficult, forested environments. Wild boar are particularly sensitive to vegetation type, preferentially inhabiting areas with the densest cover (Melis et al. 2009; Saïd et al. 2012), making dogs particularly useful for boar hunting.

The use of dogs as hunting tools is widespread in the ethnographic literature, especially in the hunting of deer and wild boar in forested environments (e.g. Ngima Mawoung 2006; Pannell & O'Connor 2010). Modern hunters emphasise the importance of hunting dogs in dense woodland, where human sensory and locomotor skills are diminished (e.g. Ellen 1999; Chitwood et al. 2011). Injured deer often run, leading hunters on long chases, and wild boar can be aggressive and quickly learn to evade capture. Hunting dogs mitigate these factors by tracking blood trails, forcing game into vulnerable positions (e.g. in water) and holding prey until the hunter can make the final kill (Rühe et al. 2006; Saïd et al. 2012). Specifically, the successful hunting of wild boar often requires highly skilled dogs, which are prized above all others, and without which many hunters attest boar hunting would be virtually impossible (Bulmer 1968; Dwyer 1983). The effectiveness of hunting dogs in the Pacific Coast Jōmon environment, along with the presence of many dog burials in this region, indicates that Jōmon hunters were probably using dogs as tools for the hunting of sika deer and wild boar, as hunters in Japan still do today.



A comprehensive survey was undertaken of Jōmon dog burials in the archaeological literature (Japanese and Western language; details are available in the online supplementary material). Over 110 burials are identified from 39 archaeological sites (Figure 3). The dog burials discussed are all isolated burials: intentional, buried alone and with no obvious signs of butchery or human-induced death noted (cf. Perri in press). While 110 burials have been individually documented, some reports were ambiguous, noting only that dog burials were encountered. This implies the actual number of isolated burials is greater than 110. Importantly, isolated dog burials from Jōmon Japan are found almost exclusively in the eastern half of north-central Honshu, correlating with the deciduous forest-terrestrial ungulate economy of the Pacific Coast Jōmon. Burials begin in the Initial phase, with single burials at two sites, including the only example not located in north-central Honshu (Figure 4; Table 2). By the Early phase, burials occur farther north and in greater numbers. In the Middle phase, burials become more widespread across the Pacific coast of north-central Honshu, with more sites and more burials. The Middle phase also has the only reported inland dog burial(s), although the number of animals and details are not given. Large numbers of sites and burials continue during the Late and Final phases, with burials widespread across the entire Pacific coast of north-central Honshu. After the Final phase the practice of dog burials seems to terminate, as dog burials are unknown in the ensuing agricultural Yayoi period (beginning c. 2350 BP), further suggesting that dog burials are closely related to hunting activities during the Jōmon period.

The association between Jōmon dog burials and the deciduous forest-estuary ecotone is strongly supported by the fact that 37 of the 39 dog burial sites are shell middens. Injuries, mostly healed broken bones, were evident on dog remains from seven sites. It is possible these are related to the hunting of ungulates, as has been suggested for other prehistoric dogs (Warren 2004) and modern wolves (Mech & Nelson 1990). The ages of the dogs range from newborn to over 12 years old. The burial of immature dogs may not normally be associated with those distinguished as capable hunters, yet the ethnographic record shows that puppies in hunter-gatherer groups are often valued for their potential as future hunting partners (e.g. Terashima 1983; Koster 2008), as Clutton-Brock (1995) has previously suggested for prehistoric puppies. Grave goods (an oyster shell bracelet; Horikoshi 1977) were noted from only one burial, although another dog burial was covered with stones (Otake 1983).

Antiquity Volume 90 Issue 353