Pic: a room full of swords!

[John Lindsey]

I bet this soldier didn't know how lucky he was...

[Paul Kerr]

That's an "interesting" saya placement :)




Paul

[Ralutin]

That soldier's lucky in a couple of ways...check out where the saya of the sword he's holding is positioned. :D

Too bad most of those swords ended up being burned.

[Ralutin]

"It's not the length of your sword that matters, but it's how you swing your saya." :D

[Dave Violago]

I've got a book on Japanese military swords that shows a similar pile of swords after WWII, along with two fellows with pitchforks levering them into a blast furnace.

Did these surrendered/confiscated blades suffer the same fate?


Dave Violago

[ulvulv]

very sad picture. The smile on his face just makes it sadder. Priceless cultural heritage down the drain.

:cry:

[Maro]

That is quite a large blade he is Holding - I thought most WW2 era blades were shorter.

[Steve Delaney]

Either that serviceman was small framed, or that blade has got to be about sanjaku or more. And look at the haba on that monster!

[Brian Owens]

Originally posted by Maro
That is quite a large blade he is Holding - I thought most WW2 era blades were shorter.
In addition to the military issue gunto, the occupation forces ordered all swords, even family heirlooms, to be surrendered.

Some families hid their swords, but many complied. Many priceless treasures were forever lost during that phase of the occupation.

[Kevin Geaslin]

Is that a yari blade on the bottom left?

[Brian Owens]

Originally posted by Kevin Geaslin
Is that a yari blade on the bottom left?
Yari tended to have smaller, symmetrical blades. It's hard for me to tell on my low res. monitor, but that looks to be some kind of naginata or nagamaki. (Maybe even a scimitar someone had collected?)

[Jin]

god... that picture makes me almost cry every time I see it... :(

Best,
Brian James

[glad2bhere]

Dear Brian:

"......Some families hid their swords, but many complied. Many priceless treasures were forever lost during that phase of the occupation......."

I am still disturbed by occasional comments I hear about Japanese nationals auctioning or selling swords on the Internet. I don't advocate a return to a sword culture over there, but it stings whenever I hear of any culture becoming cavalier about its heritage.
To my way of thinking we are who we were, you know what I mean?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Excel Glenn]

Although I believe that it is correct that this man is of slightly smaller frame, judging by his proportions, that blade appears to be O-dachi. A poor example of O-dachi, but a demonstrative one, can be seen in the Seven Samurai, carried by Toshiro Mifune's character.

My understanding of O-dachi is that it was used by foot soldiers to knockdown other foot soldiers who were then lanced by spear men. Also, it could be used against a horse to bring down the rider.

Some, maybe most of you, probably already know this, but I thought I would share it anyway.

[Brian Owens]

Originally posted by Excel Glenn
Although I believe that it is correct that this man is of slightly smaller frame, judging by his proportions, that blade appears to be O-dachi...AKA Nodachi (Field Sword).

[Excel Glenn]

AKA Nodachi (Field Sword).

Well, I will be writing that down in a notebook somplace. As I said, I am sure many here know what it is, but I thought I would mention it for those who may not have ever seen one.

Learn something new everyday.

Maybe someone could answer this question. On all the nodachi I have seen, maybe two or three though, the tsuka is absolutely huge. I mean even a large person would be pressed to take the haft of it in their hands. Why is this. Great swords from Europe don't seem to suffer from this, and it seems to me that it would just make it incredibly difficult to use. Does anyone know why this is the case?

Thanks in advance.

[Brian Owens]

I haven't seen the word "O-dachi" written in Japanese, but I suspect it means "Great sword." I've seen it applied to larger than average katana, as well as these really big guys. I've only heard "Nodachi" applied to the big guys.

As far as the huge tsuka, other than balance (visual as well as physical) I can't think of a reason. Although they were used in a different manner than the big European swords, AFAIK.

[KendoKingKlan]

Isn't a great katana composed of millions of layers of steel? If that's the case, so much priceless effort into waste.

[Bill Gallant]

I personally would love to have had the freedom to scoop some of those blades before they were destroyed, but at the end of WW2 I don't think many people were thinking about saving works of art. They were thinking about destroying a symbol of Japanese aggression,
The picture needs to be put into historical context.I completly understand the desire for feeling sad about the destruction of those blades,(being a MJER person), but guys come on, this was at the end of WW2 the allies were in no mood to fart around with the Japanese.
I throughly enjoy training with my sword, i've meet a great many wonderful Japanese people, I enjoy the food and music, but the Japanese committed horrendous crimes 60+ years ago. Ask the Chinese or Koreans, or any of the allies, (Americans, British, Canadian, Aussies, New Zealanders etc.), who had the treat of staying in a prison camp. My father had two cousins die in a prison camp. Trust me among the older generations, forgiveness is hard to come by.
I would not be surprised to find out if some of our older Japanese instructors participated in some of the horrors of the war.
Don't mean to rant guys, but put me back 60 years and I would probably destroy the damn things too.


Bill Gallant
(Who really does like playing with my sword)

[Sam17]

.

[glad2bhere]

I don't mean to deride anyones' interest in antique swords but has anyone actually done an educated estimate on how many of the swords could reasonably be expected to be true antiques. What I mean to say is that it would seem to be that taking a family heirloom into the war would have been (IMVHO) not unlike Gen Patton carrying his famed revolver with the ivory handle. In other words, I am sure it probably happened but I just wonder if it happened all the often. Relative to the number of swords that were made just before and during the raise of Japanese nationalism (plus WW II itself) I am thinking that most families would have told the typical guy headed for war not to take great-great-great-great grandpas' katana. Just a thought.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Brian Owens]

Yes, Bruce, that's a good point. Most of the swords worn in battle in WWII were military issue gunto -- machine made, oil quenched "junk." They were often used effectively, however poor they may have been from an art-sword perspective. There were also some better officers' and NCOs' swords that were made in a manner closer to the traditional process. There is a book on the subject of modern military swords called Military Swords of Japan: 1868 - 1945, by Richard Fuller and Ron Gregory that deals with these swords.

Some officers, and even enlisted men, did take family swords to war, either in their original furniture or with the blades mounted in modified standard-issue mounts.

The "Room full of swords" picture, however, is from occupied Japan after the surrender. Most of those swords were confiscated from homes in Japan, and most would have been old swords. Some of them were taken home by GIs as "spoils of war" and souvenirs, but most were melted down.

It's tragic to think that in that photo may be an Amakune or Masamune, forever lost to history.

[Cody]

Originally posted by glad2bhere

To my way of thinking we are who we were, you know what I mean?


Not sure, but I think we are what we are, right now. We are not ahistorical, our history affects our lifestyle now, but I think it's counter-productive to cling onto the past.

-Cody

[Brian Owens]

Originally posted by Cody
...I think it's counter-productive to cling onto the past...
Yes, let's burn all the museums and art galleries. Ban use of all languages except Esperanto. And what's with these koryu bugei people!? They should be playing video games, not wasting their time clinging to the past! :rolleyes:

Hyperbole? Of course. But I hope it makes my feelings on the subject clear.

[glad2bhere]

Dear Cody:

".....Not sure, but I think we are what we are, right now. We are not ahistorical, our history affects our lifestyle now, but I think it's counter-productive to cling onto the past......"

For moment I was going to trot out that old chestnut from Santayana ("those who ignore history are cursed to repeat it"). I changed my mind because I don't really think it speaks to my actual position. Rather I often now use a popular line ("life is too damn short to make all of your own mistakes") as being closer to the point. To my way of thinking it is the lessons of the past we need to hold dear. Things like medals, swords, old buildings, monuments are only symbols or icons that remind us of the lessons. They are not the lessons themselves. For instance, if I were to debate States Rights with someone I would take them to the Sunken Road at Antietam, Virginia, or the Bloody Angle at Gettysburg. These are not just places but icons and that is why we don't build shopping malls on their land.

In like manner, the gunto I have in my office is no doubt a cheap sword but was probably carried with pride by a Japanese soldier who believed something about how his worldcame together. On the otherside of the office is a flag and medals from my father, who, as a sailor survived December 7th. only to spend days pulling burned bodies out of the harbor. In one single item I have an intersection of these two experiences and it hanges on my wall to tickle my memory when I start feeling particulalrly arrogant in my understanding of human nature. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[John Linker]

I think that saying that the Japanese deserved to have their rich cultural heritage destroyed because of the way they treated prisoners of war is ridiculous. In the second world war, no one was innocent, everyone did things that are unspeakably horrible when we look back at them. Need i mention the women and children who slowly burned to death at Nagasaki and Hiroshima? And i'm sure that all the captured Japanese prisoners of war were given cups of tea, a slap on the wrists and were then sent home.Perhaps we might look at the people from all over the world languishing at camp x-ray without POW status....meaning that they have absolutely no rights whatsoever? But no country is innocent...we have all committed our crimes, but i do not think that one can ever vindicate the destroying of a country's heritage, it is mindless and the idiotic grin on that GI's face only goes to prove my point.

[Mekugi]

You can't care where you're going, if you don't care where you've been.


Originally posted by Cody
Not sure, but I think we are what we are, right now. We are not ahistorical, our history affects our lifestyle now, but I think it's counter-productive to cling onto the past.

-Cody

[Cody]

Whoa, I guess this is a budo board, but I still didn't expect such strong responses!

I never said I support destruction of cultural heritage, nor did I said I don't care where we were, I just disagree with the statement that we are what we were, a concept so popular now that sometimes people use the word "culture" synonomously with "traditions", as if those who listen to classical music has "more culture" than those who play international music through her ipod.

Surely you noticed I said we are not ahistorical, we don't live in a temporal vacuum. And surely it is important to understand where we came from, but that still doesn't equate past to now, it is different, and for better or worse, we have to move forward.

For example, in budo, in the past, loyalty is reflected by your actions, nowadays, loyalty is reflected by the $$ you pay. The same can be said about church (tithing), "indigenous rituals" (tribal people hide their stereo and TV etc when tourists arrive, and charge an arm and a leg to permit tourists to watch "rituals" that would not be kept if not for the tourist money). Even if we look like we are preserving tradition, the fact remains that we are not the past, things has changed, and will change, no matter what you do.

-C

[Jock Armstrong]

Mr Linker, you sound like an ivory tower type. People's attitudes are formed by their experience. I may not share a WWII vets feelings towards Japanese but I can understand them enough to not be judgemental. You it would seem are applying 21st century moral mores on a past event. Ask a marine who fought on Tarawa or Iwo Jima, an Aussie digger who fought in Papua or Malaya. Most of them had no sympathy for the Japanese after experiencing their fanaticism and cruelty.They did howevr treat the few POWs they took humanely. A famous man once said thet the past is a different country, the have different ideas and speak a different language.

BTW Nobody was slowly burned alive in those atomic blasts. The nature of the explosion is inmstantaneous. That people died later from burns is a fact. Also, the Allies didn't wake up one morning and decide to screw the japanese because they felt like it. It was a decision that was hotly debated at the time. The looming possibility of huge casualties in the invasion of japan to finally win the war decided it.
Please don't pull the "no-one is innocent" blurb because that is the resort of the fool. It's all right for the enemy to do bad stuff because we're all bad at heart. What kind of life view do you have??????????

[John Linker]

Ah, so sorry for my immature and "foolish" comments. I was under the misapprehension that we are all human but i forgot that that particular "we" only includes the west. The Japanese are, of course, cruel fanatics, and any prisoners of war taken by our side were, of course, treated humanely...do you not think that you are being slightly naieve? War is a terrible thing and great cruelty was inflicted by all parties involved, no one can be absolved from blame simply because they are "us" and not "them". In future i shall not pull the "no one is innocent" blurb and remember to use the modifier "except us westerners".
so sorry to have inflicted my extremist views upon you
John Linker

[glad2bhere]

Dear John and Jock:

I think I have a pretty good idea of where you both are coming from. For me I think its a matter of degree. For instance, I would be appalled to learn that the Chinese had razed the tomb of the Yellow Emperor because it was a symbol of past imperialism and oppression. I can just bearly tolerate that the building of the Three Gorges dam system will cause the innundation of thosands of historic sites in China. But consider the loss for a moment in this perspective.

If destroying the symbols does any good wouldn't we want to tear down the Tower of London for its symbolism of past English monarchies? What about melting down all the armour and weaponry that remains in Europe for how it represents the martial attiudes of past generations? In fact, why stop there? How about if we get rid of Picasso's work because he had Leftist leanings, or burn Poes' books because he was a drug addict. Why not detroy the Vatican for the centuries of oppression, violence, anti-semitism and anti-science it symbolizes. Its not the symbols that need destroying but the values and thought-processes that need reconstruction. It is slow, painful and frustrating work but destroying symbols is only a poor substitute.

Best Wishes,
Bruce

[Bill Gallant]

Okay just to clarify some of my views/points.

The destruction of any history is a criminal offence in my view. The plunder of tombs in Peru, fires that destroy art galleries or any other natural or human destruction of our past. It is a horrible thing that needs to be prevented. However after a terrible war with millions killed nation-states do things that they may regret decades later.

I think that the destuction of those swords were terrible, but as I've said before, (and some others here), I understand why they did it.

Points to clarify Japanese actions in WW2
1. Japan invaded Korea and China in 1933. Highlights The Rape of Nanking, Japanese troops murdered one million Chinese citizens.
2 One out of every three Allies prisioners taken by the Japanese died in prision camps. Plus many more who were permentetly disabled. The death rate for Japanese troops in allies camps was comparable to German /Italian prisioners in allied camps, under 2%.
3. Allied troops were charged/convicted/jailed for the mistreatment of Japanese troops. The reverse can not be said.
4. Look at prision camps in Canada/USA/UK, German and Japanese prisioners were better treated than the population as a whole in the host countries.
5. The Japanese still do not recognize the fact that they committed terrible crimes in WW2. A great many Japanese people do not know their counties own history during WW2. It is bardly mentioned in school.

Yes the allies did terrible things in WW2, but nothing even remotely on the scale of the Japanese.

That being said I will still practice Japanese Martial Arts, eat Japanese food and socilaize with Japanese people. The war is history. Recent history, but still history. I would never have said that to my grandfathers as they would probably kill me!!

We don't have to agree with history, we just have to understand it in a historical context,

Bill Gallant

[Dojorat]

Greetins,

Points of order...

Antietem Creek is just outside of Sharpsburg, Maryland not Virginia and the Japanese occupied Korea in 1910, not 1933.

Also, by way of example, the site of the U.S.'s Arlington National Cemetary was a beautiful example of Virginia's antebellum architecture and the culture of pre-Civil War south. In fact, it was the ancestral home of Robert E. Lee's wife's family, the Custis.' Occupied since very early in the war, the Union buried their war dead there so as to keep it from ever again being a symbol of the south's glory. Go there now! See the crosses and stars of David. See the Iwo Jima Memorial! the eternal flame over Kennedy's grave. Should we raise our voices in revisionist ire in order to get that hallowed ground returned to its previous status? Each one of those crosses (and each one of those swords) speaks to the horror of war and why we should avoid it whenever possible.

Cheers,

Joe Montague

Son of a WWII veteran who may very well have faced the business end of one of those blades in 1946.

[glad2bhere]

I just HATE it when I do that!!!!

Thanks, Joe.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Bill Gallant]

Thanks Joe,
Korea 1910
University was a long time ago!!!:D :D :D

[rache]

I think it should be remembered that yeah everyone is human they are prone to mistakes and can be misled for a cause. Most of the horific war events that were commited such as the crusades were not caused by the masses but by those who controled them; the powerful lords and the church who could be very manpulative. For such a people as the Japanese who are very dedicated to their ways it isn't hard to belive that the would do anything their emperor told them to. The US has also had it's share of evil in war, just look at Vietnam.

I figured I would add what I could. But most of what I say is based soley on speculation and assumption. Being as young as I am I have little actual experience with such things so I'm open to criticism.

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by rache
The US has also had it's share of evil in war, just look at Vietnam.


Yeah the Vietcong were pretty evil;)

[glad2bhere]

Dear John:

"......Most of the horific war events that were commited such as the crusades were not caused by the masses but by those who controled them; the powerful lords and the church who could be very manpulative. ....."

I think you have touched on the "trickiest" aspect of such a discussion as this.

It is one thing to give an order in the military and have soldiers carry it out. But I have always been intrigued by the dynamic wherein the energy for committing a crime comes not from military order but from some attitude such as Racism, Religion, Ethnic Cleansing, socio-economic standing. Putting to one side the Nuremburg Defense ("I was just following orders....") I wonder how many of the travesties committed occurred because military necessity crossed pathes with long-standing attitudes. For instance, need the Japanese have beheaded POW-s in the Bataan Death March or did it happen because the attitude of some Japanese soldiers found an opportunity to be expressed on hapless victims? The same thing in the Balkans. The Serbians may have wanted the Coatian and Muslim populations out, but need they have used systematic rape and murder to accomplish this? In mentioning Vietnam I can remember many people I met while overseas whose attitude towards the "gooks" and "slopes" seemed to make it easy to be particularly overbearing and affrontive when dealing with the average citizen. I wonder sometimes how much our arrogance as the single strongest nation on the planet fed some belief that we were somehow above laws and rules. This is the sort of dynamic I have been mulling over.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Cody]

Originally posted by glad2bhere
[B]
It is one thing to give an order in the military and have soldiers carry it out. But I have always been intrigued by the dynamic wherein the energy for committing a crime comes not from military order but from some attitude such as Racism, Religion, Ethnic Cleansing, socio-economic standing. Putting to one side the Nuremburg Defense ("I was just following orders....") I wonder how many of the travesties committed occurred because military necessity crossed pathes with long-standing attitudes. For instance, need the Japanese have beheaded POW-s in the Bataan Death March or did it happen because the attitude of some Japanese soldiers found an opportunity to be expressed on hapless victims?

Interesting take.

If you look at history anywhere (Japan, Europe), the most organized form of racism almost always correlate to a shift of governmentality from sovereignty to a self-governing policy.

In a sovereignty-ruled nation, the warlord/ emperor's words are the law. If the leader orders for a person to die, s/he dies.

But when governors lost sovereignty, the state no longer has the right nor power to order people to die - or to subject others to die. People in such societies are often feverent about societal reforms and revolutions.

State-sponcered racism seems to be a convenient tool for the state to regain sovereign power and counter revolution. People are directed to defend society against "biological dangers" of people of other race, instead of defending themselves against society. The state regain the power to expose members to risk of death and order death of people of other races through this "biological risk".

I might also add that I personally think all powers in society must be grounded in the body, or technologies around body. Primitive social control tools center on the physical bodies of individuals (punishment of physical bodies); modern social control tools deploy technologies around bodies (racial taxonomies, sexuality, wealth and material that modify bodies)

In the case of Japanese WWII atrocities, I think state-organized nationalism plays a huge part in it: propagandas that construct Japanese as "superior people" enable soldiers to dehuman people of other races, and make it possible to commit the things they do.

Another thought I have is nationalism as religion, and the nation itself as a form of "God". All must worship and submit to this God, those who refuse will be punished, those under its wing are also subject to sacrifice rituals such as war and blood-shedding.


I wonder sometimes how much our arrogance as the single strongest nation on the planet fed some belief that we were somehow above laws and rules. This is the sort of dynamic I have been mulling over.

I think it's not so much arrogance and ethnocentricity, but xenophobia that is at work. Its the hardwired instinct that helps tribal people to ensure their group get all the barries and rabbits within a territory.

Lastly, I think I think too much. 4:00am and I am still procrastinating to write my report... I am terminally incurable...

-C

[glad2bhere]

Dear C Chu:

".....I think it's not so much arrogance and ethnocentricity, but xenophobia that is at work. Its the hardwired instinct that helps tribal people to ensure their group get all the barries and rabbits within a territory....."

Now here is a curious thought.

For quite some time I thought along the very same lines as you. I figured such behaviors stemmed in some way from when we were hunter/gatherer societies. Like you say, it would make perfect sense to defend ones resources in the name of ones' own tribe and against the encroachments of the tribe next door. Of late I have been re-thinking this. I have begun to wonder how much of this is population driven as when experimenters compressed a rat population into increasingly smaller areas. The frequency of violence including fighting, killing young and self-abusive behavior sky-rocketed. As I write this I am thinking of Hitlers' call for "living place" ("libenstraum") and later I consider the scare tactics in the media about how there is only so much of this resouces or that (IE. water, oil, fish protein). I guess what I am wondering is if the various prejudices such as anti-semitism, racism, age-ism and so forth are too often a function of the population becoming just too large for a given area and one of these "-isms" is just a convenient excuse to get rid of the other guy and free up some breathing space. Thoughts?


Best Wishes,

Bruce