Kansai - Kofun Period

  General Description   The Kofun period is commonly defined by the emergence and spread of mounded tombs, from which derive the word Kofun meaning "old tumulus"(Ko (=ancient) + fun(=tumulus)). ^{[1] [2]} The most visually prominent type of these mounds is the monumental keyhole shaped tomb that spread from northern Kyushu to Kanto from the middle of the third century onwards. ^{[3] [4]} The large-sized keyhole shaped tombs have been interpreted as the burials of regional leaders. ^[2] Most of the largest keyhole shaped tumuli are distributed in the present-day Nara basin and Osaka plain of the Kansai region, which could have played a prominent political role in Japan during the Kofun period. ^[1] The Kofun period is sub-divided into three sub-periods: Early (250-400 CE), Middle (400-475 CE), and Late (475-710 CE). ^[5] This sub-division is based on changes in tomb structures and their assemblages, in settlement patterns and in ruling dynasties. In fact, the seat of the political centre shifted from Miwa, during the Early Kofun, to Kawachi, in the Middle Kofun, and finally to Asuka in the Late Kofun period. ^[6]
Population and political organization
The Early Kofun period is characterized by the spatial distribution of many contemporaneous large keyhole shaped tumuli, which represent the presence of several different polities and regional leaders. ^{[1] [7]} In this period, bronze mirrors, beads of jasper and green tuff, haniwa vessels, iron weapons and tools were deposited in the large mounded tombs, which likely hosted the burial of a regional chief. ^[8] The burial chambers were either cists made of slate stone in oblong plan or vertical pitsdug on the top of the mound. ^[9] The political centre was Miwa, in the south-eastern Nara basin. Thi centres incorporated the Makimuku district, which housed the large Hashikaka keyhole-shaped tomb (280 m long), considered to be the burial place of the queen Himiko. ^[5] The power was held at Miwa by the Sujin dynasty. ^{[10] [11]}
The Middle Kofun period is characterized by the spread of large keyhole-shaped mounds in the Osaka Plains.The grave assemblage met substantial change: bronze mirrors and fine beadstone objects were no longer deposited. ^{[6] [12]} Instead, the amount of iron deposited in the tombs in form of weapons and/or tools increased. ^[6] Beads, armlets and talismans begant to be made of talc, and they were not only deposited in burials but also used in landscape rituals. ^{[13] [14] [15]} Horse trappings, gilt-bronze ornaments and gold jewellery began being deposited in the grave assemblage of large burial mounds. ^[6] In this period, the power was exerted by the Ojin dynasty in the centre of Kawachi, in the east central Osaka prefecture. ^[6]
In the Late Kofun Period the size of the burial mounds decreased significantly and the construction of large keyhole-shaped tumuli ceased, except for the Kanto region. Thereafter, the tumuli of the regional leaders were downsized and built in a rectangular and square shape. ^{[16] [17] [18]} This decline was followed by the proliferation of clusters of small round tumuli called "packed tumuli clusters". ^[19] They have been interpreted as the result of the emulation of the chiefly habits by powerful extended family-scale groupings. ^[20] In this period were also introduced the corridor-chamber tombs and the cliff-cut cave tombs. ^[21] The power was held by the Keitai dinasty in the centre of Asuka, in southern Nara prefecture. ^[22] The introduction of Buddhism in 552 CE, determined a new Buddhism-based culture in the area. ^[21]
We have estimated the population of Kansai to be between 150,000 and 200,000 people in 300 CE, and between 1.5 million and 2 million by 500 CE. An estimated 16.8% of the Japanese population lived in Kansai from 250-599 CE. ^{[23] [24]}

[1]: Mizoguchi, K., 2009.Nodes and edges: A network approach to hierarchisation and state formation in Japan. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28, 15.

[2]: G. Barnes, 2007. State formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-century ruling elite. Routledge, 7.

[3]: Hirose, K. 1992. ‘Zenphkhenfun no Kinai hennen [Chronology of keyhole tombs in the Kinai]’. In Y. Kondh (ed.). Kinki-hen, pp. 24-6.

[4]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 221-226.

[5]: G. Barnes, 2007. State formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-century ruling elite. Routledge, 9.

[6]: G. Barnes, 2007. State formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-century ruling elite. Routledge, 10.

[7]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 243.

[8]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 259-264.

[9]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 249-250.

[10]: Kawamura, Y. 2004. ‘Shoki Wa seiken to tamazukuri shidan [Early Wa authority and bead production]’. Khkogaku Kenkyi 50 (4): 55-75.

[11]: G. Barnes, 2007. State formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-century ruling elite. Routledge, 9-10.

[12]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 260-263.

[13]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 262.

[14]: Barnes, G., 2006. ‘Ritualized beadstone in Kofun-period society’. East Asia Journal: studies in material culture 2(1).

[15]: Kaner, Simon. "The Archaeology of Religion and Ritual in the Prehistoric Japanese Archipelago." The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Ritual and Religion (2011): 457-469.

[16]: Shiraishi, T., 1999. ‘Kofun kara mita yamato Hken to Azuma [Viewing Yamato kingly authority and the eastern provinces from mounded tombs]’. Khkai khkogaku khza, pp. 15-17 (conference pamphlet). Maebashi: Gunma-ken Maizhbunkazai Chhsajigyhdan.

[17]: G. Barnes, 2007. State formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-century ruling elite. Routledge, 10-11.

[18]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 297-298.

[19]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 298.

[20]: K. Mizoguchi, 2013. The Archaeology of Japan. From the Earliest Rice Farming Villages to the Rise of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 298-299.

[21]: G. Barnes, 2007. State formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-century ruling elite. Routledge, 14.

[22]: G. Barnes, 2007. State formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-century ruling elite. Routledge, 10, 14.

[23]: Kidder, J. E., 2007. Himiko and Japan’s elusive chiefdom of Yamatai: archaeology, history, and mythology. University of Hawaii Press, 60.

[24]: Koyama, S., 1978. Jomon Subsistence and Population. Senri Ethnological Studies 2. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology