Japanese cultural property protection laws regarding "Nihonto"

[Al_KRK]

Hi Fellows,

I'm looking for specific Japanese cultural property protection laws regarding nihonto. I'm writing a postgraduate thesis at the "Academy of Heritage" and want to compare the European and Japanese systems. I specifically purchased a damaged tanto (Muromachi period), which has been cleaned and conserved according to European principles (rust and dirt removal, pitting stabilization). As a practical component, I want to create a shirasaya and koshirae for this blade.
I also have to write a theoretical part – I want to compare the approach to the protection of cultural heritage in the form of edged weapons. In the case of the European approach, I have no problem with sources and studies; during the conservation of the tanto, I received a great deal of help from the chief conservator of antique edged weapons at the National Museum in Krakow. However, I am unable to find documents regarding the principles of Japanese antique weapon conservation.
The guidelines of the Bunkazai Hogo Hō are rather enigmatic...
Can you give me a hand?

Regards

Rafal

[Mikaveli]

When I first read the title of this post, I thought you were asking about things like the export process and the laws preventing export of important cultural objects etc.

 

Instead, it seems to be alluding more to conservation and restoration practices.

 

For nihonto, having a sword polished etc. is a generally accepted practice when properly done. But in the medal or coin collecting communities, this would be sacrilegious.

 

However, I don't think it's correct to contrast this as a Japanese verses European practice - as the conservation approach varies by subject area. Look at how old buildings are treated (or classic cars or locomotives). It's very common, at least in the UK for 800+ year old buildings to be continuously modified. Lightning, signage, heating systems, replacement stonework, wooden frames etc. Only in very rare cases is a building just "stabilised" and left untouched.

 

For Japanese swords, as with buildings, their utility didn't cease in one generation - so they were maintained and used for many centuries before the Haitorei etc. pushed them more towards irrelevance as functional objects. My point being, when a maintenance cycle has already been established for several centuries, if we stop (your "European principles") are we actually preserving something, or losing even more living heritage...

 

Just as a very minor aside, when viewing objects in relic condition I think it does the original craftsmen and culture of the time a disservice. Modern eyes see junk (rusty, bent, broken etc.) rather than the technology, skill and ultimately art of the time period. 

 

[Franco]

40 minutes ago, Al_KRK said:

'm looking for specific Japanese cultural property protection laws regarding nihonto. I'm writing a postgraduate thesis at the "Academy of Heritage" and want to compare the European and Japanese systems.

 

 

https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/files/file/64-Japanese-sword-law/

 

Hope this helps.

[Al_KRK]

57 minutes ago, Mikaveli said:

When I first read the title of this post, I thought you were asking about things like the export process and the laws preventing export of important cultural objects etc.

 

Instead, it seems to be alluding more to conservation and restoration practices.

 

For nihonto, having a sword polished etc. is a generally accepted practice when properly done. But in the medal or coin collecting communities, this would be sacrilegious.

 

However, I don't think it's correct to contrast this as a Japanese verses European practice - as the conservation approach varies by subject area. Look at how old buildings are treated (or classic cars or locomotives). It's very common, at least in the UK for 800+ year old buildings to be continuously modified. Lightning, signage, heating systems, replacement stonework, wooden frames etc. Only in very rare cases is a building just "stabilised" and left untouched.

 

For Japanese swords, as with buildings, their utility didn't cease in one generation - so they were maintained and used for many centuries before the Haitorei etc. pushed them more towards irrelevance as functional objects. My point being, when a maintenance cycle has already been established for several centuries, if we stop (your "European principles") are we actually preserving something, or losing even more living heritage...

 

Just as a very minor aside, when viewing objects in relic condition I think it does the original craftsmen and culture of the time a disservice. Modern eyes see junk (rusty, bent, broken etc.) rather than the technology, skill and ultimately art of the time period. 

 

 

 

Thank you for your response.
I am very 'familiar' with the import process from Japan, I've tested it myself by importing swords I know the principles of Japanese sword conservation, but I'm looking for documents. I need to use specific entries from documents/legal acts.

 

The European-style renovation of the tanto is solely for the purpose of my postgraduate thesis. Besides, this blade is very damaged; someone even tried to grind it with an angle grinder (o tempora!) in Japan!

 

The system of protecting architectural heritage in Japan is completely different from the European one. In Japan, most structures are often replaced without regard for the so-called originality of specific elements. Different style, different rules, but fortunately, conservators understand each other and respect each other's methods.

[Al_KRK]

53 minutes ago, Franco said:

 

 

https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/files/file/64-Japanese-sword-law/

 

Hope this helps.

 

Thanks

[Mikaveli]

3 hours ago, Al_KRK said:

The system of protecting architectural heritage in Japan is completely different from the European one. In Japan, most structures are often replaced without regard for the so-called originality of specific elements. Different style, different rules, but fortunately, conservators understand each other and respect each other's methods.

 

I think that's a huge over generalisation. In many areas, Japan evidence a lot of regard for originality etc.

 

I'm also not really sure what your question is, you mentioned both laws and principles - but the distinction is important.

 

Are you asking about private property, museum conservation, or specifically government and officially recognised/protected objects (Kokuho National Treasures or Juyo Bijutsu / Important Cultural Objects)?

[ROKUJURO]

I would really like to see your TANTO.

[DKR]

No .........you don't want to see it....

[Al_KRK]

2 hours ago, DKR said:

No .........you don't want to see it....

? Are you a god, or do you have superpowers and can see through walls?

[Al_KRK]

13 hours ago, ROKUJURO said:

I would really like to see your TANTO.

Before cleaning or after cleaning? :)

[DKR]

Both , please. I need the complete package. 😁

[Al_KRK]

Just now, DKR said:

Both , please. I need the complete package. 😁

Get yourself a third leg; you could become the emblem of Sicily, for example. But seriously, I'm looking for specific documents, not weak remarks about a blade you haven't seen.

[Soshin]

1 hour ago, Al_KRK said:

But seriously, I'm looking for specific documents, not weak remarks about a blade you haven't seen.

 

Hi @Al_KRK Rafal,

There are some good books about Japanese sword making and polishing (traditional conservation). Check out this online bookstore specializing in Japanese sword books: Sword Books Archives - Japanese sword books and tsuba. He will ship internationally to Poland. I think you also need to do a series of extensive interviews and make detail notes and recordings of all your interviews with a professionally training Japanese sword polisher (someone who has also won polishing awards in Japan) willing to spend time to talk to you. This would take him/her time away from polishing Japanese swords therefore I would expect you would need to pay him/her for their time so having a research budget is necessary (also to purchase topical books). You then can wirte your own specific documents that you can then use as a reference after citing professionally trained Japanese sword polisher and any books you have used as references. I hope this is helpful. 

[ROKUJURO]

2 hours ago, Al_KRK said:

Before cleaning or after cleaning?

Hi Rafal,

to get an idea about the blade and the restoration process, it would be nice to see both conditions, if possible.

Concerning written matter on the subject, I think specific literature will be in Japanese and not easy to come by. I have contacts to a licensed sword-smith who would be familiar with the 'paperwork', so in case I could help passing your questions on, I could do so. 

[DKR]

@ Rafal

 

https://www.touken.or.jp/english/

 

Contact the museum.
If there are any guidelines or legal requirements for preserving Japanese weapons, they'll be able to tell you.

But I'm afraid you personally, as an amateur, won't get an answer to this question.

Perhaps if your contact at the museum in Krakow tried it, the chances would be better.

Sincerely,

Your Tripod 

 

 

[Al_KRK]

3 hours ago, DKR said:

@ Rafal

 

https://www.touken.or.jp/english/

 

Contact the museum.
If there are any guidelines or legal requirements for preserving Japanese weapons, they'll be able to tell you.

But I'm afraid you personally, as an amateur, won't get an answer to this question.

Perhaps if your contact at the museum in Krakow tried it, the chances would be better.

Sincerely,

Your Tripod 

 

 

Thanks a lot, Didier!

[SteveM]

The Japanese Ministry of Justice puts all their laws on a website, but its a bit user-unfriendly for non-Japanese speakers. The laws regarding registration of swords is at the link below;

https://laws.e-gov.go.jp/law/333AC0000000006

 

(These are laws related to registration of swords and firearms. I don't believe there are any laws related to conservation of swords.)

[Al_KRK]

22 hours ago, ROKUJURO said:

I would really like to see your TANTO.

 

[Kantaro]

Its a Tinta.

 

[Robert S]

As would be expected, I think there are many answers to your question - there is no single standard in Japan, just as there are a range of standards in the west.  For instance, major museums in Japan will have detailed and highly conservation oriented guidelines.  It might be worthwhile reaching out to one of those museums to see if they will provide you with their protocol for nihonto.  At the other end of things, your tanto is a pretty good example.  I suspect that far more grinder/belt sander desecrations happen in Japan than anywhere else - many people there seem to regard nihonto simply as a quick buck, unlike the very dedicated collectors represented on this site.  I've seen a lot like that, which simply made me shake my head.

[ROKUJURO]

Rafal,

has this TANTO even been certified or at least been shown to experts? In case it was an authentic SA blade, it would be very valuable and worth to be restored in Japan by experts. SAMONJI was one of the MASAMUNE JUTETSU (10 pupils of MASAMUNE), so one has to be very careful with an assessment as there were very many blades with false SA signatures.  

[DKR]

I see the pictures and... exactly what I feared...

and now it's clear why Rafal were asking about regulations and guidelines in Japan. Unfortunately, it's too late. What a pity.

 

But this is just my  personal opinion.

[Al_KRK]

8 hours ago, DKR said:

I see the pictures and... exactly what I feared...

and now it's clear why Rafal were asking about regulations and guidelines in Japan. Unfortunately, it's too late. What a pity.

 

But this is just my  personal opinion.

The blade was cleaned with strict adherence to all principles by my friendly conservator. He described in detail the technique he used, and he did not use any chemicals that could interfere with the steel (the middle pictures show the condition of the steel before cleaning under a microscope). After cleaning, he protected it with clove oil. The blade will soon receive a new shirasaya.

 

I'm not thinking about polishing this blade right now. For my work, I want to prepare two mountings for it and describe the differences in conservation principles in Europe and Japan. When I manage to find out something about the blade's origin, I will decide what to do with it next. 

 

Again, I specifically bought this damaged piece to write a paper. I have several other blades in much better condition

[Al_KRK]

17 hours ago, ROKUJURO said:

Rafal,

has this TANTO even been certified or at least been shown to experts? In case it was an authentic SA blade, it would be very valuable and worth to be restored in Japan by experts. SAMONJI was one of the MASAMUNE JUTETSU (10 pupils of MASAMUNE), so one has to be very careful with an assessment as there were very many blades with false SA signatures.  

I had no idea before that the signature on the damaged blade I bought could have any value other than historical (time of creation). A few weeks ago, I came across a post by Paul Martin and saw a beautiful sword signed by... Sa. It made me wonder, but who would get rid of a tanto from such a renowned swordsmith just like that?

 

The tanto has its document, however, it certainly won't be considered a high-quality sword. The seller pointed out that it has Hakabore.

 

I've already written to Mr. Martin, but not about the signature, only to ask for help in finding conservation rules. Maybe it's worth sending him some pictures, I'll see

 

Thank you for pointing out the mei, but I'm not getting my hopes up that my tanto was forged by MASAMUNE JUTETSU, although it would be good to have his blade even in this condition and with hakabore.

[ROKUJURO]

Rafal,

SAMONJI (signature SA) was one of the ten pupils ( = JUTETSU) of Japan's most famous sword-smith MASAMUNE.

I would be interested to know what you mean by "he blade was cleaned with strict adherence to all principles....".

Japanese blades should absolutely be treated with strict adherence to Japanese restoration principles. These are learned in a long apprenticeship which may take as much as 10 years or more.

Any other treatment is not suitable with Japanese swords, and only traditionally trained polishers can judge their respective condition. 

 

 

[Cola]

On 3/16/2025 at 5:00 PM, Al_KRK said:

Hi Fellows,

I'm looking for specific Japanese cultural property protection laws regarding nihonto. I'm writing a postgraduate thesis at the "Academy of Heritage" and want to compare the European and Japanese systems. I specifically purchased a damaged tanto (Muromachi period), which has been cleaned and conserved according to European principles (rust and dirt removal, pitting stabilization). As a practical component, I want to create a shirasaya and koshirae for this blade.
I also have to write a theoretical part – I want to compare the approach to the protection of cultural heritage in the form of edged weapons. In the case of the European approach, I have no problem with sources and studies; during the conservation of the tanto, I received a great deal of help from the chief conservator of antique edged weapons at the National Museum in Krakow. However, I am unable to find documents regarding the principles of Japanese antique weapon conservation.
The guidelines of the Bunkazai Hogo Hō are rather enigmatic...
Can you give me a hand?

Regards

Rafal

 

This all sounds very confusing to me. There is no "protection system" for swords, aside from registration and export laws. If you want to wrap your sword in an old newspaper oiled with old frying pan grease as a way of preservation, there is no law against it.

So for that matter, you can make a shirasaya or a paper mache sheathe, but what do you hope to learn from it? Who will judge whether it was done correctly? I can guarantee that whatever you make, people on the internet will tell you you did it wrong. 

If you want to look at best practices for conservation, or common practices for that matter, of course you can find a lot, but as it's not laws as much as many different opinions (people fight wars over the correct oil or uchiko). 

 

From an academic perspective, I would recommend to define a research hypothesis that can be tested to some extent, and to define a scope that fits within the timelines of your project (comparing European versus Japanese "sword conservation practices" in general is way to broad).

 

[Mikaveli]

From these two photos, it looks like you've removed significant detail and material from the tang:

 

 

If we're talking about conservation, to me, that's a destructive operation (ironically, as you've asserted that the Japanese have no regard for originality).

 

It doesn't appear to have given any more insight into the object, nor influenced its longevity - so I'm struggling to understand the rationale. 🤷‍♂️

[Al_KRK]

22 hours ago, Cola said:

This all sounds very confusing to me. There is no "protection system" for swords, aside from registration and export laws. If you want to wrap your sword in an old newspaper oiled with old frying pan grease as a way of preservation, there is no law against it.

So for that matter, you can make a shirasaya or a paper mache sheathe, but what do you hope to learn from it? Who will judge whether it was done correctly? I can guarantee that whatever you make, people on the internet will tell you you did it wrong. 

If you want to look at best practices for conservation, or common practices for that matter, of course you can find a lot, but as it's not laws as much as many different opinions (people fight wars over the correct oil or uchiko). 

 

From an academic perspective, I would recommend to define a research hypothesis that can be tested to some extent, and to define a scope that fits within the timelines of your project (comparing European versus Japanese "sword conservation practices" in general is way to broad).

That's not what I meant. I'm asking if there are legally described rules for sword conservation. I need this for a theoretical paper. As for the practical side, I don't have any plans to give this blade to a polisher yet (in Poland, you can find good, experienced ones who previously practiced in Japan). I'm looking for documents and best practices. That's all.

[Al_KRK]

9 hours ago, Mikaveli said:

From these two photos, it looks like you've removed significant detail and material from the tang:

 

 

If we're talking about conservation, to me, that's a destructive operation (ironically, as you've asserted that the Japanese have no regard for originality).

 

It doesn't appear to have given any more insight into the object, nor influenced its longevity - so I'm struggling to understand the rationale. 🤷‍♂️

I never wrote that the Japanese have no respect for historical artifacts! 

 

This blade came to me from Japan damaged, including by the use of improper tools. The bottom photograph has been color-adjusted to create a suitable plate for heliogravure. The tang was also specially positioned and lit to better capture the details.

[Rivkin]

Per se Japanese have little appreciation of old objects conservation in a white men's sense. They see a cultural object as continuing its existence and function until its demise rather than being fixed in a specific state. Its most obvious when looking at the architecture - the "gold pavilion" is one of the most iconic Japanese buildings yet today its very different than it was 100 years and 100 years ago it was very different compared to Muromachi. Wooden architecture, straw elements as part of floor and roof construction means each building is continuously rebuild, maybe couple of beams can survive the entire lifetime, but otherwise when it says "this is 1000 years old" it usually refers to the institution, not exactly this building in exactly this place and in exactly this form. There are relicts where >50% is something very old, but they are rare exceptions. City of Hiraizumi is a great example - in the west this would not happen and if it would, it would not be considered a national historical treasure. In Japan its seen as such.

 

By the same token as long the blade's function and purpose are exactly retained as original, the need is not to preserve the original polish as part of the sword's history, but rather repolish it to fit the contemporary perception of what today is an appropriate appearance for this blade. By the same token Japanese give very little consideration to any second tier (i.e. not properly sealed and written account by government entities) historical provenance associated with a blade; by default they believe such information is faked and therefore unless its confirmed with zero doubt by a modern authority it does not even enter the radar. At the top tier the original Daimyo receipt from Meiji period solicits only shrugs and sniffs, while modern sayagaki of unquestionable authenticity claiming the same provenance is treated as end of discussion argument. For a white person its weird since it is old documents which are needed to confirm the old provenance; for a Japanese its natural since the qualifications of the modern authority are accepted, while old things remain uncertain.