Japanese Paleolithic Hoax
Encyclopedia
The consisted of a number of lower and middle paleolithic
finds in Japan discovered by amateur
archaeologist Fujimura Shinichi, which were later all discovered to have been faked. The incident became one of the biggest scandals in archaeological circles in Japan after the story was published by the Mainichi Shinbun in a morning edition article on November 5, 2000.
For finds from the Jōmon period
or later, structure
s were originally made by digging below the then-current surface, causing changes in soil composition
that make it much easier to discern fakes from real finds. The Paleolithic Hoax highlighted some of the shortcomings of Japanese archaeological research into paleolithic sites, such as an over-reliance on the dating of volcanic ash
layers while ignoring other soil layers.
. Fujimura found numerous artifact
s and relic
s in quick succession, of the type and age (Roman strata
) that researchers in the area were hoping to find, which earned him a reputation as an indispensable member of any archaeological team, with some going so far as say he was "God's hand" when it came to finds. In fact, as much as 90% of Fujimura's "discoveries" were found by the man himself, while the finds of those accompanying Fujimura are thought to have been planted by him beforehand. Fujimura's finds were mostly paleolithic items collected from other archaeological surveys of Jōmon-era sites. It has still not been completely ascertained where these artifacts were taken from, though they were likely from elsewhere in the Tōhoku region
. The hoax "finds" were located primarily in Miyagi Prefecture, with some as far north as Hokkaidō
and others as far south as the southern Kantō region
.
The Mainichi Shinbun exposé concerned just the Kamitakamori site near Tsukidate, Miyagi Prefecture
, and the Sōshin Fudōzaka site in Hokkaidō, but news of the hoax sparked reappraisals at all sites Fujimura had been involved in, which found evidence of scrapes and damage from prior unearthing on many of the paleolithic articles Fujimura had been connected with. Investigations showed that the hoax went so far as the same items being "discovered" more than once, and fake paleolithic items being buried for later "discovery".
s of such an age would be found in Japan. However, Fujimura's success in finding artifacts soon silenced his critics, and his reputation as a leading amateur archaeologist was firmly established in the early 1980s. Prior to discovery of the hoax, Japan's paleolithic period was thought to have started earlier than anywhere else in Asia at around 700,000 BCE, but the revelation of Fujimura's duplicity shook Japanese lower and middle paleolithic research to its core, as much of it had been built on the foundation Fujimura had laid.
There was sharp criticism that such a flawed theory could have been blindly accepted for so long despite strong criticism from some quarters. Immediately after the hoax discovery, the Japanese Archaeological Association formed a special committee which spent two and a half years reviewing the incident, releasing a report in May 2003 concluding that Fujimura's work was indeed the product of a hoax.
Taking a calm look at the various stone implements and excavations, it becomes clear that a number of the items and sites are rather unnatural and do not make archaeological sense, such as those exhumed from pyroclastic flow
strata, but nonetheless archaeological groups of the time ignored these inconsistencies. There were also "finds" that were quite difficult to believe, such as stone implements whose cross sections just by chance happened to match those for items found at sites several tens of kilometers away.
Moreover, there was an enormous amount of indirect involvement by supporting organizations based on Fujimura's remarkable successes, including instances such as the government naming sites as national historical sites, and the Agency for Cultural Affairs
sponsoring special exhibitions. Local governments in the Tōhoku region, where many of the sites were located, were particularly guilty of such uncritical support, as they were quick to use Fujimura's "findings" as the basis for creating specialty products and tourist attractions for building up the local economy, focusing on the idea that the history of their respective counties, towns, and villages went back several hundred thousand years. This no doubt helped feed into the perpetuation of the hoax.
Criticism was difficult while so many lower and middle paleolithic sites were being found, and aside from a critical paper published in 1986, there was no real criticism again until another paper was released in 1998, to be followed by only two more in 2000. The thrust of the argument in 2000 was that the problematic paleolithic findings were "odd" compared to other lower and middle paleolithic findings. However, the academic world showed no signs of heeding this fair criticism until the Mainichi Shinbun's scoop was published.
Fujimura's duplicity did not stop there, however. After the Japanese Archaeological Association's special committee reported the results of its survey into these problems in lower and middle paleolithic archaeology, it was revealed that Fujimura's hoax extended beyond the paleolithic era to include Jōmon sites as well.
Japanese Paleolithic
The began around 50,000 to 30,000 BC, when the earliest stone tool implements have been found, and continued to around 14,000 BC, at the end of the last ice age, which corresponds to the beginning of the Mesolithic Jōmon period...
finds in Japan discovered by amateur
Amateur
An amateur is generally considered a person attached to a particular pursuit, study, or science, without pay and often without formal training....
archaeologist Fujimura Shinichi, which were later all discovered to have been faked. The incident became one of the biggest scandals in archaeological circles in Japan after the story was published by the Mainichi Shinbun in a morning edition article on November 5, 2000.
For finds from the Jōmon period
Jomon period
The is the time in Japanese prehistory from about 14,000 BC to 300 BC.The term jōmon means "cord-patterned" in Japanese. This refers to the pottery style characteristic of the Jōmon culture, and which has markings made using sticks with cords wrapped around them...
or later, structure
Building
In architecture, construction, engineering, real estate development and technology the word building may refer to one of the following:...
s were originally made by digging below the then-current surface, causing changes in soil composition
Soil
Soil is a natural body consisting of layers of mineral constituents of variable thicknesses, which differ from the parent materials in their morphological, physical, chemical, and mineralogical characteristics...
that make it much easier to discern fakes from real finds. The Paleolithic Hoax highlighted some of the shortcomings of Japanese archaeological research into paleolithic sites, such as an over-reliance on the dating of volcanic ash
Volcanic ash
Volcanic ash consists of small tephra, which are bits of pulverized rock and glass created by volcanic eruptions, less than in diameter. There are three mechanisms of volcanic ash formation: gas release under decompression causing magmatic eruptions; thermal contraction from chilling on contact...
layers while ignoring other soil layers.
Discovery of the hoax
At the time of the discovery in November 2000, hoax perpetrator Fujimura Shinichi was working as deputy director of the Tōhoku Paleolithic Institute, a private research center. He had begun faking discoveries when he was working as an amateur archaeologist in the 1970s when he became close to various paleolithic research groups in Miyagi PrefectureMiyagi Prefecture
is a prefecture of Japan in the Tōhoku Region on Honshu island. The capital is Sendai.- History :Miyagi Prefecture was formerly part of the province of Mutsu. Mutsu Province, on northern Honshu, was one of the last provinces to be formed as land was taken from the indigenous Emishi, and became the...
. Fujimura found numerous artifact
Artifact (archaeology)
An artifact or artefact is "something made or given shape by man, such as a tool or a work of art, esp an object of archaeological interest"...
s and relic
Relic
In religion, a relic is a part of the body of a saint or a venerated person, or else another type of ancient religious object, carefully preserved for purposes of veneration or as a tangible memorial...
s in quick succession, of the type and age (Roman strata
Stratum
In geology and related fields, a stratum is a layer of sedimentary rock or soil with internally consistent characteristics that distinguish it from other layers...
) that researchers in the area were hoping to find, which earned him a reputation as an indispensable member of any archaeological team, with some going so far as say he was "God's hand" when it came to finds. In fact, as much as 90% of Fujimura's "discoveries" were found by the man himself, while the finds of those accompanying Fujimura are thought to have been planted by him beforehand. Fujimura's finds were mostly paleolithic items collected from other archaeological surveys of Jōmon-era sites. It has still not been completely ascertained where these artifacts were taken from, though they were likely from elsewhere in the Tōhoku region
Tohoku region
The is a geographical area of Japan. The region occupies the northeastern portion of Honshu, the largest island of Japan. The region consists of six prefectures : Akita, Aomori, Fukushima, Iwate, Miyagi and Yamagata....
. The hoax "finds" were located primarily in Miyagi Prefecture, with some as far north as Hokkaidō
Hokkaido
, formerly known as Ezo, Yezo, Yeso, or Yesso, is Japan's second largest island; it is also the largest and northernmost of Japan's 47 prefectural-level subdivisions. The Tsugaru Strait separates Hokkaido from Honshu, although the two islands are connected by the underwater railway Seikan Tunnel...
and others as far south as the southern Kantō region
Kanto region
The is a geographical area of Honshu, the largest island of Japan. The region includes the Greater Tokyo Area and encompasses seven prefectures: Gunma, Tochigi, Ibaraki, Saitama, Tokyo, Chiba, and Kanagawa. Within its boundaries, slightly more than 40 percent of the land area is the Kantō Plain....
.
The Mainichi Shinbun exposé concerned just the Kamitakamori site near Tsukidate, Miyagi Prefecture
Kurihara, Miyagi
is a city located in Miyagi Prefecture, Japan. As of 2008, the city has an estimated population of 77,012 and a population density of 95.7 persons per km². The total area is 804.93 km². Previously a district consisting of nine towns and one village, on April 1, 2005, the towns and village...
, and the Sōshin Fudōzaka site in Hokkaidō, but news of the hoax sparked reappraisals at all sites Fujimura had been involved in, which found evidence of scrapes and damage from prior unearthing on many of the paleolithic articles Fujimura had been connected with. Investigations showed that the hoax went so far as the same items being "discovered" more than once, and fake paleolithic items being buried for later "discovery".
Reaction
Researchers into the lower and middle paleolithic periods in the Japanese archipelago were initially critical of Fujimura's finds as there was little expectation that stone toolStone tool
A stone tool is, in the most general sense, any tool made either partially or entirely out of stone. Although stone tool-dependent societies and cultures still exist today, most stone tools are associated with prehistoric, particularly Stone Age cultures that have become extinct...
s of such an age would be found in Japan. However, Fujimura's success in finding artifacts soon silenced his critics, and his reputation as a leading amateur archaeologist was firmly established in the early 1980s. Prior to discovery of the hoax, Japan's paleolithic period was thought to have started earlier than anywhere else in Asia at around 700,000 BCE, but the revelation of Fujimura's duplicity shook Japanese lower and middle paleolithic research to its core, as much of it had been built on the foundation Fujimura had laid.
There was sharp criticism that such a flawed theory could have been blindly accepted for so long despite strong criticism from some quarters. Immediately after the hoax discovery, the Japanese Archaeological Association formed a special committee which spent two and a half years reviewing the incident, releasing a report in May 2003 concluding that Fujimura's work was indeed the product of a hoax.
Taking a calm look at the various stone implements and excavations, it becomes clear that a number of the items and sites are rather unnatural and do not make archaeological sense, such as those exhumed from pyroclastic flow
Pyroclastic flow
A pyroclastic flow is a fast-moving current of superheated gas and rock , which reaches speeds moving away from a volcano of up to 700 km/h . The flows normally hug the ground and travel downhill, or spread laterally under gravity...
strata, but nonetheless archaeological groups of the time ignored these inconsistencies. There were also "finds" that were quite difficult to believe, such as stone implements whose cross sections just by chance happened to match those for items found at sites several tens of kilometers away.
Moreover, there was an enormous amount of indirect involvement by supporting organizations based on Fujimura's remarkable successes, including instances such as the government naming sites as national historical sites, and the Agency for Cultural Affairs
Agency for Cultural Affairs
The is a special body of the Japanese Ministry of Education . It was set up in 1968 to promote Japanese arts and culture. As of April 2007, it is led by the Commissioner for Cultural Affairs, Tamotsu Aoki....
sponsoring special exhibitions. Local governments in the Tōhoku region, where many of the sites were located, were particularly guilty of such uncritical support, as they were quick to use Fujimura's "findings" as the basis for creating specialty products and tourist attractions for building up the local economy, focusing on the idea that the history of their respective counties, towns, and villages went back several hundred thousand years. This no doubt helped feed into the perpetuation of the hoax.
Criticism was difficult while so many lower and middle paleolithic sites were being found, and aside from a critical paper published in 1986, there was no real criticism again until another paper was released in 1998, to be followed by only two more in 2000. The thrust of the argument in 2000 was that the problematic paleolithic findings were "odd" compared to other lower and middle paleolithic findings. However, the academic world showed no signs of heeding this fair criticism until the Mainichi Shinbun's scoop was published.
Fujimura's duplicity did not stop there, however. After the Japanese Archaeological Association's special committee reported the results of its survey into these problems in lower and middle paleolithic archaeology, it was revealed that Fujimura's hoax extended beyond the paleolithic era to include Jōmon sites as well.
External links
- Information center for the "God's hand" incident - This site has continued to collect information about the hoax since the time of the discovery (links, logs from defunct bbs sites, etc.) (Japanese only)
- Collection of links about the Paleolithic Hoax - Links of detailed information up to January 2001 (Japanese only)
- Miyagi Prefecture Education Bureau, Cultural Asset Preservation Division: Information about the Paleolithic Hoax (Japanese only)
- Japanese Archaeological Association: Special Committee for Investigating Problems in Lower and Middle Paleolithic Archaeology - A page on the Japanese Archaeological Association's website about and with links to other information on the survey and findings of the special committee (Japanese only)
- Index to Materials on Japan's Early Palaeolithic Hoax - Site maintained by Charles T. Keally, retired Professor of Archaeology and Anthropology of the Department of Comparative Culture, Sophia University, Tokyo
- Yamada, Shoh (2002). "Politics and Personality - The Anatomy of Japan's Worst Archaeology Scandal". Harvard Asia Quarterly 6 (3) 48-54.