A new counter-evidence on “Nanking Massacre" found!

Sankei Shimbun Newspaper, August 10, 1985

A new counter-evidence on “Nanking Massacre" found!

It was said that, during the period between December 1937 and January 1938, a charitable organization called "Chongshantang (崇善堂)," reportedly buried the bodies of over 110,000 Chinese peopled in Nanking who were massacred by the former Japanese army -- that is so-called Nanking Massacre for which Japan was accused (at Tokyo Tribunal) that Japan killed a large number of Chinese civilians and prisoners of war. However, Chinese records, which suggested that the Chongshantang did not actually conduct any burial activities, were found by the ninth day of August, 1985 (yesterday).
The records were discovered in the National Diet Library's archives by a private historical researcher.
At the postwar International Military Tribunal for the Far East (Tokyo Tribunal), the prosecution side presented the number of burials based on the allegations of Chongshantang and others as "irrefutable evidence of the massacre," and this has been the main basis for the theory that the number of victims was "200,000" or "300,000”. The newly found records are likely to have a strong impact on the still-unsettled debate over the number of victims.

By Mizuho Ishikawa 石川水穂氏 (passed away on June 4, 2022)

Main Title: There was no burial activity by the charitable organization "Chongshantang (崇善堂)"

Subtitle: Doubts about the number of 110,000
Overrides Prosecution's Evidence at the Tokyo Tribunal, raising a question about the counting of victims.

The three newly unearthed historical documents are: "Overview of Nanking City Administration in the 27th Fiscal Year of the Republic of China (FY 1937)" (edited by the Nanking Municipal Government Secretariat), "Nanking City Government Administrative Statistical Report in the 24th Fiscal Year of the Republic of China (FY 1939)" (published by the Nanking Municipal Government Secretariat), and "Nanking" (compiled by the Nanking Japanese Chamber of Commerce and Industry and published in August 1941).

The "Overview" and "Report" are written in Chinese, while "Nanking" is written in Japanese. These were found by Mr. Kenichi Ara (41 years old as of 1985), a publisher and author in Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, who has been researching Showa history.

At the Tokyo tribunal, the prosecution claimed that at least 155,000 persons were massacred, based on a statistical table submitted by Chongshantang, which claimed to have buried the bodies of 112,266 victims in the four months following the said massacre incident, and by the Red Swastika Society, another charity, which claimed to have buried 43,071 persons in the ten months. However, the new documents contradict this claim.

First, all three historical documents contain items describing charities and their activities in Nanking at the time, and for the Red Swastika Society, the description included the usual preliminary activities such as "rice alms(施米)," "medical examinations(施診)," and "giving medicine(施薬)", then the words "burial(掩埋)," and "storing(収容)" were added which clearly indicating that they actually handled the bodies of the dead.

However, although the Chongshantang's activities include the words "orphanage (保嬰)“, "medical examinations(施診)", "giving medicine(施薬)," and "rice alms(散米)", no burial-related words found.
More conclusively, in the "Overview of Nanking City Government(*1)" which was compiled and published immediately after the so-called Nanking Incident, the entry for the Red Swastika Society states that "work is ongoing," while the entry for Chongshantang states that "work is ongoing, but on a smaller scale”. In the section (掩埋隊之組織) which described the burial of bodies after the time of the said incident, the names of "Red Swastika Society " and "Autonomy Committee Relief Section (Autonomy Committee is an autonomous organization established in the refugee district of Nanking)" are mentioned, but the name of Chongshantang is not found.

In "Nanking" edited by the Nanking Japanese Chamber of Commerce and Industry, there is a paragraph stating that "various private charities were temporarily suspended due to financial difficulties caused by the war, but they gradually recovered with the assistance of the Nanking Zhenmu Committee..." and that the Chongshantang resumed full-scale activities "in September 1938," which is eight months later after the said incident. This contradicts the prosecution's claim that more than 110,000 persons were buried in the four months after the said incident.

“The three documents show no evidence of burial activities by Chongshantang before or after the battle for capturing Nanking. Even if they had done so, it would have been minimal, and it is highly unlikely that they could have buried 110,000 bodies in the four months following the battle for capturing Nanking (from December 26, 1937, to May 1, 1938). I think it is now clear that among the evidence presented to the Tokyo Tribunal, the burial records of the Red Swastika Society is reasonably acceptable but the records of Chongshantang lack credibility." Mr. Ara said.
Mr. Ara also said for his motivation for excavation. “The figures given by the prosecution may be too exaggerated compared to those of the Red Swastika Society, which had been questioned since the tribunal, so, I wanted to find conclusive evidence to prove it.”

The new documents cast serious doubt on the previously reported burial activities of Chongshantang and the prosecution's evidence at the Tokyo tribunal, and are likely to carry weight as new historical documents in the Nanking incident debate.

The Nanking Massacre

At the Tokyo Tribunals after the war, the Japanese people heard for the first time of the Nanking Massacre, which is said to have occurred when the former Japanese army attacked and occupied the Chinese capital of Nanking.
At the tribunal, the defense countered the prosecution's (the Allies') argument that the figures were too exaggerated, but Judge Webb fully adopted the prosecution's argument and determined that the total number of killed civilians and prisoners was "over 200,000”.
Meanwhile, the Chinese government took testimonies from citizens of Nanking at the time, and added them to the burial records of these two groups, then announced that the total number of victims was 300,000.
Based on these figures, a considerable number of Japanese history textbooks use the numbers "200,000" and "300,000”.

Arguing against the above number, a hot debate continues by those who question (1) how many citizens were evacuated from Nanking just prior to the fall of Nanking and how many remained (the peacetime population was one million *2) and (2) whether the victims of the massacre included Chinese soldiers who died in regular combat.

*1 Overview of Nanking City Government: Published in 1942 by Nanking Tokumukikan 南京特務機関 (Equivalent to "A special operating agency")
*2 Nanking Capital Police Statement (end of March 1937): 1019,667 ppl.

1985年8月10日　産経新聞

「南京大虐殺」に新史料！
日中戦争当時の昭和十二年十二月から翌年一月にかけ、旧日本軍が中国・南京市で多数の中国市民や捕虜を虐殺したとされる「南京大虐殺」の直後、十一万人余の遺体を埋めたと伝えられる南京市の慈善団体「崇善堂」が、実際には埋葬活動を行っていないと読みとれる中国側の記録などが九日までにみつかった。民間の歴史研究家が国立国会図書館の史料の中から発掘したもの。戦後の極東国際軍事裁判（東京裁判）では、検察側が崇善堂などの申し立てに基づく埋葬数を「大虐殺の動かぬ証拠」として提出、それが犠牲者数「二十万人」「三十万人」説の最大の基礎となっているが、新発見の記録は、今日なお決着のつかぬ犠牲者数論争に強く影響しそうだ。【石川水穂記者】

慈善団体「崇善堂」の埋葬活動はなかった

11万の数に疑問
東京裁判　検察側証拠くつがえす　犠牲者数論争に一石

発掘された新史料は、「中華民国二十七年度（昭和十三年度）南京市政概況」（督辨南京市政公署秘書処編集）「南京市政府行政統計報告 民国二十四年度（昭和十年度）」（南京市政府秘書処発行）、「南京」（南京日本商工会議所編、昭和十六年八月発行）の三点。
いずれも南京市の行政の実情などをまとめたもので、「概況」と「報告」は中国語で、「南京」は日本語で書いてある。これらを見つけたのは、昭和史を研究している東京都文京区本郷、出版兼著述業、阿羅健一さん（四一）。

東京裁判で検察側は、崇善堂が虐殺事件後四カ月間に犠牲者十一万二千二百六十六人の遺体を、同じく慈善団体の紅卍字会が十カ月間に四万三千七十一人を埋葬したとして提出した統計表に基づき、合わせて少なくとも十五万五千人余が虐殺されたと主張したが、新史料の記述はそれをくつがえす内容となっている。
まず、三点の史料には、いずれも当時の南京市内の慈善団体、その活動について記した項目があり、紅卍字会については「施米」「施診」「施薬」など通常の事前活動のほか、「掩埋（えんまい＝埋葬の意味）」「収容」「埋葬」といった文字が書き込まれ、実際に遺体処理を行っていたことがはっきりと記録されている。
ところが、崇善堂の活動項目には、「保嬰（ほえい＝乳のみ子を育てること）」「施診」「施薬」「散米」といった文字はあるものの、埋葬に関係する文字はどこにも見当たらない。
さらに決定的なのは南京事件の直後に編集、発行された「南京市政概況」では、紅卍字会の項目には「工作進行（活動が続いている）」と記してあるが、崇善堂の項目には「工作進行範囲狭小（活動は続いているが、規模が小さい）」とあり、事件後の遺体埋葬について書いたくだり（掩埋隊之組織）でも、「紅卍字会」「自治委員会救済課（自治委員会は南京市の難民区にできた自治組織）」の名前はあるが、崇善堂の名前はない。
また、南京日本商工会議所編の「南京」には、「民間各種慈善団体は事変の為資金難に陥り、一時停頓したが、振務委員会の補助を受け漸次復旧し…」というくだりがあり、崇善堂が本格的な活動を再開したのは事件後八カ月も経った「昭和十三年九月から」と記録され、事件後四カ月間に十一万余埋葬という検察側主張とくい違っている。

「この三点の史料を見る限り、南京攻略戦の前後に崇善堂が埋葬活動を行っていた形跡はどこにもない。仮に行っていたとしても微々たるもので、日本軍の南京攻略後四カ月間（昭和十二年十二月二十六日から十三年五月一日まで）に十一万人もの遺体を埋めることができたとはとても思えない。東京裁判に出された証拠の中で、紅卍字会はともかく、崇善堂の埋葬記録は信ぴょう性を欠くものであることがこれではっきりしたと思う」と阿羅さんはいう。
発掘の動機について「検察側が出した数字は、紅卍字会に比べて崇善堂の数字が誇大に過ぎるのではないか、とういう疑問が裁判当時から指摘されてきたが、証明する決定的な証拠を探そうと思った」と語る。
今回の史料を見る限り、従来伝えられていた崇善堂の埋葬活動や東京裁判での検察側証拠に大きな疑問が投げかけられたことになり、南京事件論争に新史料としての重みを持ちそうだ。

南京大虐殺
旧日本軍が当時の中国の首都、南京市を攻略、占領した際に発生したとされる南京虐殺については、日本国民は終戦後の東京裁判で初めて知った。
この裁判で検察側（連合国側）の主張に対し、弁護側は「数字が誇大すぎるのではないか」と反論したが、ウェッブ裁判長は検察側の主張を全面的に取り入れ、殺された市民と捕虜の総数を「二十万人以上」と認定した。
一方、中国政府はこの二団体の埋葬記録以外に、当時の南京市民の証言を加え、犠牲者総数三十万人と発表。
これらを根拠に日本のかなりの歴史教科書が「二十万」「三十万」という数字を使用している。
これに対し、①南京陥落の直前、南京からどれだけの市民が避難し、どれだけ残っていたのか（平時の人口は百万）②虐殺の被害者の中に正規の戦闘で死んだ中国兵を含めていないか、などの疑問を持つ人々との間でホットな論争が続いている。

事件直後に発行された中国側の記録「南京市政概況」の、紅卍字会の項目には「掩埋（えんまい）」「収容」の文字はあるが、崇善堂の項目にはない。