Amateur Exploration

[Yaga the Blade Master]

Hello. As the title suggests, I'm an amateur explorer searching for the Honjo Masamune Sword. Any tips? 

[Ray Singer]

I don't know that I can help you find the Honjo Masamune (any more than I am able to help myself do so), however a couple of quick items.

• I actually just posted a video on the Honjo Masamune a few weeks back, with some informtion which may be helpful in general in learing about the sword:
• I see now that the koshirae for the Honjo Masamune appears to have remained in Japan, perhaps rediscovered but likely never left Japan, and was displayed at an exhibition: https://tsumugu.yomiuri.co.jp/feature/桃山展「本庄正宗」の刀装初公開/
   
•   

[Lewis B]

Nice video on the Honjo Masamune Ray. Begs the question why the blade was separated from its koshirae. I imagine that was quite common for swords when they were surrendered after the war, with the Japanese wanting to preserve a part of what they were losing, especially if valuable.

[robinalexander]

.

[ROKUJURO]

Yaga the blade master (there are not many of these around),

is there a reason why you posted this in the military section?

[Wah]

Yaga and friends,

I wish you the best in your search. My strongest advice is to study swords seriously and, above all, to learn how to recognize the steel of the blade you are seeking.

In the case of the Honjō, many of the characteristics people commonly expect are incorrect. The steel will be of the highest quality and will reflect the earliest working pattern of the smith. This point is critical and often misunderstood.

It is also important to understand that this is not a treasure hunt. While the sword is unquestionably a treasure, it is highly unlikely that anyone would ever be permitted a monetary reward for its return.

For many years, the sword community has unknowingly repeated an incorrect narrative. The most significant error concerns to whom the sword would be returned in Japan if it were found. There is also a reason why the authorities have never publicly sought its recovery. How can Japan formally request the return of an object when it appears that the sword was presented to GHQ from the Imperial Household itself? 

Please allow me to explain.

Many videos and published sources state that following the Meiji Restoration, the Honjō Masamune remained in the Tokugawa collection until the end of the war, and that it belonged to Tokugawa Iemasa, who ultimately surrendered it. With all due respect to the Tokugawa family, this account is not accurate.

Token to Rekishi (1968), the Biography of Emperor Meiji, and several other sources explain that the Honjō Masamune was presented by the Tokugawa family to Emperor Meiji. From that point forward, the Honjō became part of a special group of twelve or thirteen military swords (guntō) personally selected by Emperor Meiji—swords with which he symbolically ruled Japan.

Some accounts describe occasions on which Emperor Meiji wore the Honjō Masamune. One story relates that he had a chip removed from the blade and commissioned koshirae so that the sword could be worn. Another describes it as his favorite blade. Another tells how Meiji Emperor’s favorite blade was a Yukimitsu that appeared to be made later and was presented as a Masamune. 

 

At the end of the war, the Imperial Household was informed by GHQ that it was hoarding weapons and was instructed that it could retain only about fifty swords at first. As a result, the Household first separated those swords that had not been part of the Imperial collection for more than one hundred years. The military swords associated with Emperor Meiji were addressed first.

This group of Gunto were placed in a special vault within the Tokyo Imperial Household Museum to be held for a later time. The Honjō Masamune, along with two other swords, were taken to a police station to be handed over to GHQ.

Most accounts end at this point, with no further explanation of what occurred afterward. I believe that Col.D

has unfairly borne the blame for something perceived as improper, when in fact, if one considers the evidence symbolically, the events appear honorable and consistent with long-established practices of succession.

To be clear, I do not support the theft of an Imperial sword. However, in this instance, the act was a deliberate choice by the Imperial Household—an expression of surrender conducted through an established and culturally accepted practice in Japan.

This becomes evident when we consider both ownership and symbolism, particularly regarding the three specific swords surrendered at the end of the war.

The key is symbolism.

Three swords were passed in succession beginning with Tokugawa Iemitsu and then to each succeeding Tokugawa shōgun. These same three swords were transferred to Emperor Meiji during the Meiji Restoration. At the end of World War II, those swords—the Honjō Masamune, Osafune Nagamitsu, and Rai Kunimitsu—were handed by the Imperial Household to Tokugawa Iemasa, who then delivered them to the police station for transfer to GHQ.

The symbolism is clear: the three swords together represented legitimate succession by the reigning authority.

Just as swords have historically transferred honorably from one ruling power to another, this act should be understood and respected, not condemned.

It is my opinion that no active public search is being conducted to recover these three swords precisely because of their symbolic transfer at the end of the war. I believe the authorities feel unable to request their return and are instead waiting for another Compton—someone who will voluntarily return them.

 

[ROKUJURO]

2 hours ago, Wah said:

......One story relates that he had a chip removed from the blade and commissioned koshirae so that the sword could be worn......

That sounds very strange to me and like a translation mistake. 

I would imagine that making a copy or TSUNAGI was meant.