The Battle for the Survival of the Japanese Sword 1945-48

[Nick Komiya]

The Battle for the Survival of the Japanese Sword 1945-48

As soon as it was decided that Japan had no choice, but to surrender, how to prevent the occupying Americans from prohibiting all possession of swords became a contentious issue to the government of Japan.

That was because prohibiting swords in Japan would have been akin to prohibiting the use of the crucifix symbol in a western nation. That is to say swords had become an intrinsic component of the beliefs Japan was based upon.

An example that illustrates this is the sword of Kusanagi, one of the three imperial treasures, the possession of which decided who became the Emperor of Japan, beside his bloodline. It’s exactly like Excalibur selecting King Arthur, although you needed a mirror and an ancient jade necklace bead in addition to the sword to gain full accreditation as Emperor. Anyway that was one reason at the core of Japanese identity that could not accept a blanket prohibition of swords.

Another example is the rebuilding of the Ise Shrine every 20 years at which time, 60 new swords are dedicated to the Shinto deities. These swords used to be buried after serving the Kami for 20 years to be replaced by new ones. So swords were embedded deeply within the Shinto religion as well.

In addition to the two types of swords above, names of master sword smiths are associated with famous Samurai warlords through the swords they used. Much in the same way as Colts and Tommy Guns are inseparably tied to certain American historical figures, Japan had swords that had marked its national identity, swords that could not be given up just because a war was lost.

[Nick Komiya]

Developments up to 10th October 1945

The basic defense perimeter they drew up within 1945, with the Sword of Kusanagi at the center, was to draw a line at pre-Meiji era swords, and to selectively allow some Meiji and Showa blades, they added a fuzzy buffer zone around that perimeter for “artistic merit”.

The following announcements in English made in the immediate postwar years tell, in broad strokes, the story of how this negotiation evolved between the government of Japan and MacArthur’s GHQ.

The concept of preserving national treasures and cultural assets as proposed by the Japanese government in August seemed generally acceptable to MacArthur and they confirmed that on 7th September. But public reaction to that news somehow seemed to give the GHQ cold feet when, on 11th September, they suddenly threatened to turn around and have all swords destroyed. However, the Japanese seemed able to cool them down, and this was soon followed by a memo issued by the Japanese Police authorities to all governors of prefectures on 16th September that collection and registration of privately held weapons were to be completed by 10th October, as an initial deadline.

This was followed by another memo on the 27th of September that instructed large collection owners of antique swords just to report their collection inventory to their local police rather than dump their whole collection on the police, due to the routine care that such antiques needed, which the police was in no position to take over.

[Nick Komiya]

1945 Developments after 10th October

After the deadline of 10th October 1945, another follow-up memo was issued on 13th October, asking local police to continue with the call to citizens to surrender any weapons still remaining in their possessions. It was this memo that tried for the first time to define what artistic merit of a sword was supposed to mean.

At the end of this first stage of “Disarming the Public Campaign”, the score sheet on swords stood as follows

1. Nihonto 627,000 pcs
2. Gunto 50,500 pcs
3. Shikito (ceremonial sword) 128,800 pcs
4. Bayonets 477,300 pcs
5. Others (Naginata, Spears, etc) 279,300 pcs

The local police kept issuing permits to owners for swords that could be regarded as works of art, but in early December, locally stationed US occupation HQs started to issue orders rescinding those actions, directing police to confiscate even swords thought to be art objects and deliver them to the US troops stationed in the area. This caused huge confusion and mistrust, so that the GHQ had to follow up on the 13th of December by countermanding these orders issued by local US troops.

Please note that some of the following pages were uploaded in incorrect order by the forum's system, so I added page numbers in color in the upper right corner to allow you to read them in the right sequence.

[Nick Komiya]

1946 to ’48 Developments

Then it was the turn for US troops to get baffled and confused, when Japanese police authorities protested to the Americans that the local police were not invested with any right to certify objects of art and issue sword permits, so permits issued on 1st December 1945 and thereafter should be regarded as void. I suppose the Japanese had switched the jurisdiction for cultural property and the police was reacting to this change in legal status.

This objection by the police seems to have been accepted as legitimate, as a 19th April 1947 memo from the US forces instructs the Educational Ministry to commence in early May with a survey of swords held at the Akabane Ordinance Base Dept. in Tokyo to ensure that national treasure class swords were removed before they proceeded with disposal.

These were what would later be called Akabane swords, and a national treasure, formerly from the collection of the Tokugawa family (former Shoguns) remains missing to this day.

By October 21st 1947, the registration work seemed to be in the hands of the Education Ministry with the National Museum of Tokyo being involved in appraising national treasure class swords.

A memo dated 28th February 1948 from the 8th Army HQ of the US Army informed that those that had missed earlier registration deadlines had until 1st June 1948 to legitimize what they had earlier failed to register.

[tomp]

Very interesting, Nick, thanks for posting this.

Although beyond the scope of this excellent thread, I was wondering if there was a sustained, concerted effort by the government of Japan to repatriate swords from the U.S in the 1950's, 60's and beyond? Were govt reps sent over to evaluate and purchase swords at that time? Were ads put in newspapers, etc. to purchase swords? Very curious about this.

Tom

[Nick Komiya]

Tom, will let you know if I come across something about that.

Here's what the understanding of the US 8th Army was as of 25th August 1946.

3 of 5 deleted, due to being a duplicate of 4.

[Alan M]

Again , many thanks for posting this information Nick . The time and effort you put into your thorough research , in firstly unearthing these documents and then recording and posting your conclusions , for the benefit of all that are interested in the subject , is really appreciated by myself and all our members . This fine thread has now been included in your Master Index to be found in the "Sticky " list at the top of the forum under "Swords "

[Kiipu]

Censorship of American military mail ended with the surrender; censorship of Japanese mail and publications had to continue for some time. Censorship is usually a dull business, but now and then there was a bit of variation. One was censorship of theatrical performances. General MacArthur, who had a profound knowledge of Oriental psychology, had ordered all swords in Japan surrendered to our army. This was not a matter of the swords’ having any military value, but that the sword was a symbol in Japan not understood in the Western World. Whether in the possession of museums, private individuals, or the late Japanese armed services, all swords must be given up and no sword could be displayed in a public place. This soon brought a cry of anguish from the Japanese classical theater—the Nō drama. This ancient art could be performed without a sword just about as well as you could have a western movie without a gun. For a while we stuck to the “no swords” for the Nō drama, until we found things were going so well we could let down the barriers a bit. I finally agreed swords could return to the stage, but only when made of cardboard. In the Nō drama, the audience is called upon to imagine so many things that imagining a cardboard sword was the real thing should have added little to the mental effort.

Thorpe, Elliott R. East Wind, Rain: The Intimate Account of an Intelligence Officer in the Pacific, 1939–49. Gambit, 1969. Pages 217-218.