Ainu Mosir in the Modern State
Updated: Sep 9
C.P
September 8, 2026
Can a nation state simply 'forget' its indigenous inhabitants for over a century, only to officially recognize them in the 21st-century ? Japan’s House of Representatives and House of Councilors adopted the ‘Resolution to Recognize the Ainu as an Indigenous People’ in June 2008, which led to the Ainu being officially recognized by the government as an indigenous people within the state. But how did a community that inhabited the northern archipelagos for centuries become so thoroughly marginalized in the first place ?
Many today first discover the Ainu through pop culture like the manga Golden Kamuy, which sets its story in early 20th century Hokkaidō or the character design of Ashitaka in Princess Mononoke (1997). While these pop-culture representations may have raised awareness, this article aims to delve into the historical realities of Ainu dispossession. We will first examine the geographical roots and cultural identity of the Ainu people, which is essential to trace back the historical trajectory of their systematic erasure through the colonization of Hokkaidō and thus the building of the modern Japanese nation state. Finally, we will look at the ongoing revival of Ainu culture today ; by examining both key political breakthroughs and cultural heritage manifestations in music, cinema, and language.
Who are the Ainu ?
To first understand who the Ainu are as a people we must go back to the 13th century. The Ainu are an indigenous ethnic group who historically inhabited a vast territory covering northern Honshū, Hokkaidō, the Kuril Islands (Chishima Rettō 千島列島), southern Sakhalin (Karafuto 樺太), and regions surrounding the Sea of Okhotsk, including the Kamchatka Peninsula. Therefore this ancestral domain is known as Ainu Mosir, translating to the « peaceful land of human beings ». We can also point out that in early Japanese records, these northern expanses were designated as Ezochi (蝦夷地, land of Ezo) and their indigenous populations were broadly referred to as Emishi (蝦夷) : a term recorded « during eighth-century Yamato state expansion beyond the Kantō plain to designate northeastern communities resisting imperial control ».
To understand the living conditions of the Ainu people of Japan especially before and after the Kamakura Period, we must consider that they were never really isolated from the rest of continental East Asia. Indeed, they traded animal furs, salmon, and eagle feathers in exchange for iron tools, rice, or textiles from Japanese merchants. But as we will examine later in this article ; trade eventually became a primary vector of economic dependency.
And what about the Ainu population today ?
A 2013 Hokkaidō Government survey pegged the Ainu population in Hokkaidō at about 17,000, while other estimates of the total population are around 100,000 or higher. However, no exact census has been conducted because many Ainu conceal their origins or in many cases ; are not even aware of them, as their parents hid their heritage to protect them from discrimination and racism. Therefore, even if some Ainu are in the process of rediscovering their heritage, others choose to remain silent out of fear (and / or related challenges).
Another characteristic of this ethnic group remains its language. The Ainu language (Ainu-itak) is recognized by linguists as a language isolate, which means with no proven link to Japanese or any other known language family. For example the word Aynu means « human being » or « person », particularly as opposed to kamuy, « divine beings ». Besides, the language mostly relied (historically) on oral transmission through poetic epics known as yukar. Because it lacked a native writing system, the sharp decline in native speakers during the Meiji period’s assimilation campaigns brought the language near extinction. But we will see that nowadays Ainu language tends to find more and more outlets.
But how can we characterize the erasure of the Ainu people and their cultural background from Kamakura period to Meiji Restoration (1868) ? And how did this dispossession serve Imperial Japan's state-building project and its colonial discourse of nationhood?
In order to understand the historical marginalization of the Ainu we will adopt a chronological examination of expanding Japanese authority over Ainu Mosir.
First and foremost, we will analyze systematic Japanese influence in Ezo during the Kamakura and Muromachi periods as Wajin (和人, ethnic Japanese) merchants established trading posts on the southern tip of Hokkaidō (the Oshima Peninsula). As mentioned earlier, increasing unfair trade practices / growing dependency sparked a series of armed indigenous rebellions. Among them the Koshamain’s War (1457-1458) : an Ainu armed uprising led by chieftain Koshamain against expanding Japanese merchant strongholds, which temporarily united Ainu clans before being overcome by superior forces under Takeda Nobuhiro (ancestor of the Matsumae clan). To clarify : the Matsumae clan (松前氏) must be understand as samurai clan granted exclusive trading and administrative rights over northern Japan (Ezochi) by the Tokugawa shogunate during the Edo period (1603 - 1867).
We could also referred to the Shakushain’s Revolt (1669 - 1672) : a major war sparked by trade disputes over fishing / hunting rights, led by the Ainu chieftain Shakushain against the Matsumae domain (during de Edo Period). Its defeat is notably analyzed by the writer, historian, and researcher Mike Dash in his article The Octogenarian Who Took on the Shoguns. But why can it be considered a turning point ? Because following their defeat, the Ainu were forced to swear allegiance to Matsumae, which consolidated Japanese control over Hokkaidō. The clan established 60 trading posts and imposed aggressive price monopolies that drove settlements to the brink of famine, forcing destitute Ainu into underpaid labor in Honshū fish factories.
Moreover, another contextual precision must be given : prior to formal annexation, Japanese understanding of Ezo relied heavily on early geographical surveys. Indeed, as scholar Ayelet Zohar notes : « Ezo was already known to such leaders in the Edo period, thanks to Matsuura Takeshirō (松浦武四郎1818–1888), who had traversed Ezo and Sakhalin on foot between 1846 and 1858, reaching as far as Etorofu (択捉島, Ru: Iturup) in the Kuril Islands. Matsuura recorded the names of places and Ainu sites on Ezo, publishing them in a series called, “Survey Map of the Mountains, Rivers and Geography of East and West Ezo” (1859). » (Ayelet Zohar - Introduction: Race and Empire in Meiji Japan).
In 1604, only one year after Japan’s unification : Tokugawa shogunate granted the Matsumae clan exclusive trading rights over Ezochi. As historian of early modern Japan Pia M. Jolliffe highlights in the article Forced Labour in Imperial Japan’s First Colony: Hokkaidō (The Asia-Pacific Journal - Issue 20 - oct. 2020), Japanese state-building depended heavily on subaltern exploitation, where "from its onset in the 18th century, the management of 'Imperial Japan’s first colony' relied on exploiting the labour of politically marginalized, subaltern groups, such as the indigenous Ainu."
Furthermore racial hierarchies took firm root during this era (Edo Period). For instance : following the Laxman expedition (1793) and the Treaty of Shimoda (1855) in the context of tension between the Russian Empire and Ezo : the shogunate mandated cultural assimilation programs forcing the Ainu to adopt Japanese hairstyles, names, and pieces of clothing. Mostly aiming to ensure territorial sovereignty over the northern perimeter.
« The history of Ezo’s management is the history of state formation »
(Ezo keiei-shi wa kokka seiritsu-shi dearu) (Takahashi Tomio)
Still, it is during the Meiji Restoration (1868) that active state-led colonization began. The new imperial government viewed Hokkaidō as a "blank slate" awaiting modern development. In 1869, Ezochi was unilaterally renamed Hokkaidō (can be translated to « northern sea route ») and placed under the authority of the Development Commission (Kaitakushi 開拓使). Therefore the colonization of Hokkaidō must be understood in a very particular context. First the racial argument : « […] although Japan had been grouped with other Asian nations in the prevailing discourses of race, it nevertheless strove to associate itself with the white, European/Western race. Leaders and ideologists, for example, assigned inferior racial attributes to the different groups and ethnicities on or around the Japanese islands, gradually pulling Japan away from Asia, and closer to Europe. » (Ayelet Zohar).
Moreover, in the article Forced Labour in Imperial Japan’s First Colony : Hokkaidō, written by Pia M. Jolliffe ; the use of the term of colonization is far more complex in the context of 1868 : « these activities are typically described as kaitaku (colonization or land development) instead of shokuminchika (colonization). However, several authors have argued that the term kaitaku is a euphemism that covers the colonization of Ainu land : (def.) Prevailing national narratives weave Hokkaido’s complex and fraught history into a seamless tale of Japan’s modernization and favours a lexicon of development (kaitaku) and progress (shinpō) over colonization and conquest (Philip Seaton) » (Pia M. Jolliffe).
But what were the motives of the colonization ? We can pick out several reason : the Meiji government first aimed to assert its control over the region as a « buffer against potential Russian advances ». Secondly Hokkaido was considered attractive for its rich natural resources, including coal, timber, fish, plus its fertile land. Thirdly, it was seen as a solution to mass unemployment among the former samurai class. Lastly and as mentioned earlier, since Western powers viewed colonial expansion as a symbol of prestige, Japan viewed the colonisation of Hokkaido as an opportunity to present itself as a modern and respected nation to Western powers. (Katarina Sjöberg)
Besides, it is under the Kaitakushi (Development Commission) that the state enacted dispossession and assimilation policies, often referring to the concept of Japanization (皇民化 Kōminka) which was also deployed in the cases of Okinawa, Taiwan or Korea. Thus, for the land dispossession, the state declared all uncultivated Ainu ancestral hunting and fishing grounds as mushūchi (無主地, ownerless land / terra nullius) in order to seize them for government use or in some case distributing them to Wajin agricultural settlers (tondenhei 屯田兵). Relocation was also used during the Meiji period. For example 841 Sakhalin Ainu were forcibly displaced and relocated to Cape Sōya in northern Hokkaidō following the 1875 Treaty of Saint Petersburg. On a more cultural aspect : traditional livelihoods were criminalized. Deer hunting was restricted and salmon fishing was banned and core cultural practices such as traditional facial tattooing for women (amipurchi), wearing earrings (neptuki), and the sacred bear spirit-sending ritual (iomante イオマンテ) were outlawed. At the same time ; the law prohibited the Ainu from speaking their native language and practicing their animist religion. Ainu children received "a rudimentary education in the Japanese language that focused on “national” ethics » (Thisanka Siripala)
Even if the assimilation of the Ainu people was accelerating under the Emperor Meiji, a key elements shows what can be called a climax of assimilation policy. Indeed, The Hokkaidō Former Aborigines Protection Act (Hokkaidō Kyū-Genshumin Protection Act 北海道旧土人保護法) was enacted in 1899 under the guise of welfare. It forced the Ainu to transition into agriculture, allocated small parcels of land that were often infertile, forced attendance at segregated "Former Aborigine" elementary schools, and mandated the adoption of Japanese surnames and Japanese language fluency.
To protect new livestock, the Development Commission launched aggressive eradication campaigns. Among them : bounties were placed on wolves and bears, and mass poisoning overseen by American advisor Edwin Dun was deployed. These methods (also observe in other country and timeline) drove the Hokkaidō wolf to extinction and near extermination of the Ussuri brown bear.
According to the Minority Right Group : While there was some debate in Japan during the first half of the 20th century about the treatment of the Ainu, it was after the end of World War II (with Japan adopting a liberal democratic model with its Constitution of 1947) that there appeared the first steps of an Ainu renewal.
This final section addresses the long-overdue institutional recognition of the Ainu as an indigenous people living within Japan. It further examines the diverse actors who actively keep contemporary Ainu cultural heritage alive today.
The persistence of Ainu identity directly challenges the myth of post World War II Japanese ethnic homogeneity. After the collapse of the multi-ethnic Japanese Empire in 1945, we saw that successive governments forged a unified national narrative centered on monoculturalism. Which means denying the existence of distinct ethnic minorities. Even as legal frameworks evolved ; political rhetoric repeatedly reinforced this ideology. For instance, in 2020 former Deputy Prime Minister Tarō Asō (麻生太郎) notoriously asserted : « No other country but this one has lasted for as long as 2,000 years with one language, one ethnic group, and one dynasty ».
Among and against this political state narrative, Ainu activists such as Shigeru Kayano (1926 - 2006) spent decades carving out space for indigenous rights under both domestic and international legal frameworks. As a native of Nibutani (二風谷), Shigeru Kayano dedicated his life to preserving his people’s heritage, notably throughout various books and essays on Ainu language, folklore, and material culture (Our Land Was the Forest. An Ainu Memoir - Oxford: Westview Press, 1996). In 1994, Kayano made history by becoming the first and till today the only Ainu individual to sit in the Japanese Parliament (serving in the House of Councillors until 1998). During his tenure he addressed the assembly in the Ainu language (Ainu-itak) and lobbied for the repeal of the discriminatory 1899 Protection Act. His legislative efforts culminated in the passage of the Ainu Culture Promotion Act of 1997 (Ainu Bunka Shinkō Hō アイヌ文化振興法) which is considered a landmark shift that replaced forced assimilation policies with « state-funded cultural preservation ».
Although the 1997 Act established the Foundation for Research and Promotion of Ainu Culture (FRPAC), initial state measures might be considered structurally limited. For example : the foundation offered financial support for Ainu language classes (though strictly outside the standard public school curriculum) plus a 15-minutes radio learning program, and an annual speech contest launched in 2006. Critics noted that many sponsored projects were initially managed by Wajin scholars rather than Ainu community members.
On the legal framework we can quote many breakthrough (results of the pressure and activism of the Ainu community and cultural/states collaborators). First in September 2007, Japan supported the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). One year later, following diplomatic pressure ahead of the G8 Summit in Hokkaidō, Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda’s cabinet acknowledged the historical precedent of the Ainu. On June 6, 2008, the National Diet unanimously passed a landmark resolution urging full government recognition (as evoked in the introduction). Eleven years after the parliamentary resolution, the Diet officially enacted legislation explicitly recognizing the Ainu as an indigenous people (senjūminzoku 先住民族) of Japan. (Minority Right Group)
The 2019 policy prioritizing cultural promotion notably led to the opening of the Upopoy National Ainu Museum and Park (民族共生象徴空間) in Shiraoi (白老) in July 2020. Upopoy, meaning « singing in a large group » in Ainu serves as a state-funded hub designed to promote Ainu history, crafts, performing arts and even culinary traditions featuring UNESCO-recognized intangible cultural assets like traditional songs and dance (rimse). In sites like Akanko Ainu Kotan ; a living Ainu settlement near Lake Akan community members mostly rely on tourism. This phenomenon actually raised questions regarding tourism and authentic heritage preservation. Indeed the line between commercial performance for visitors and the genuine transmission of ancestral practices is thin and can be analyzed as a disneylandisation process (Sylvie Brunel).
However, beyond cultural institutions many other actors are promoting various aspects of contemporary Ainu culture. Artisans like Yukiko Kaizawa (貝澤雪子) maintain traditional craft in her Nibutani workshop, utilizing Attush (アットゥシ) which is a traditional weaving technique using bark fibers harvested directly from local elm forests. Sustaining cultural traditions also depends on oral transmission, as discussed earlier in the first part. In this perspective : Musician OKI (Oki Kano) has spearheaded the revitalization of Ainu soundscapes. By electrifying the tonkori (トンコリ) : an iconic traditional five-stringed plucked zither, he blends ancestral rhythms with dub, reggae, and even blues. With his label Chikar Studio, OKI has produced performers like the late Umeko Ando (安東ウメ子) and the vocal group Marewrew, with the goal of bringing Ainu music to international stages. Ainu people are finding more ways to celebrate their identity.
« Yukiko Kaizawa in her Attush workshop. Attush is a traditional Ainu weaving technique that employs fibres derived from tree bark. Kaizawa, with the help of her family, still sources the tree bark from the forests that surround Nibutani » (The Guardian). Credit (left): Ogawa Masaki
Credit (right) : Laura Liverani
Representations of the Ainu have seen an increase in Japanese popular culture and media from the late 20th to 21st centuries. Director Takeshi Fukunaga examines these dynamics in his feature film Ainu Mosir (2020) and most recently in the documentary Ainu Puri (アイヌプリ). In Ainu Mosir for instance : Kanto, a sensitive 14-year-old Ainu boy who struggles to come to terms with his father's death and his identity will be confronted to dilemma of the controversial bear sacrifice ritual under the shadow of modern Japanese society and the Ainu's heavy reliance on tourists for their livelihood. Once again this example shows that besides institutional breakthrough, current issues such as economic and social marginalization including prejudice and discrimination are still alive nowadays.
Sources :
Jolliffe, Pia M. (2020). « Forced Labour in Imperial Japan’s First Colony: Hokkaidō », The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, vol. 18, issue 20, no. 6.
Zohar, Ayelet. (2020). « Introduction: Race and Empire in Meiji Japan », The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, vol. 18, issue 20, no. 2, article ID 5496.
Dash, Mike. (2013). « The Octogenarian Who Took on the Shoguns », Smithsonian Magazine, 20 juin 2013.
Sjöberg, Katarina. (1993). The Return of the Ainu: Cultural Mobilization and the Practice of Ethnicity in Japan. Studies in Anthropology and History, vol. 9. Switzerland: Harwood Academic Publishers.
Siripala, Thisanka. (2020). « Far-Right Politics and Indigenous Ainu Activism in Japan », Georgetown Journal of Asian Affairs, vol. 6, no. 2.
Kayano, Shigeru. (1994). Our Land Was a Forest: An Ainu Memoir. Translated by Kyoko Selden and Lili Selden. Foreword by Mikiso Hane. Boulder / Oxford: Westview Press (extract).
United Nations General Assembly. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Resolution A/RES/61/295, adopted September 13, 2007. United Nations Publication. URL : https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf
Minority Rights Group International. (2021). « Ainu », Directory of Minorities and Indigenous Peoples. London: Minority Rights Group. URL : https://minorityrights.org/communities/ainu/
International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA). (2019). « Indigenous World 2019: Japan », The Indigenous World 2019. Copenhagen: IWGIA. URL : https://www.iwgia.org/en/articles/iw2019-japan?lang=en
Nibutani Ainu Craft Project. (2021). « Kaizawa Yukiko (貝澤雪子): Attus Weaver Profile », Nibutani Ainu Craft / Biratori Town Committee for the Promotion of Traditional Crafts. Biratori: Hokkaido. URL : https://www.nibutani-ainucraft.com/en/craftspeople_profile/kaizawa_yukiko/
Comments