# The claim that the 1937–1938 Nanjing Massacre was fabricated or exaggerated is a debunked nationalist revisionist campaign, contradicted by overwhelming contemporaneous and judicial evidence

**Verdict: Contradicted.** The Nanjing Massacre is one of the most thoroughly documented atrocities of the twentieth century, and the campaign to deny or minimize it is false. Beginning with the Japanese army's capture of Nanjing on 13 December 1937, tens of thousands of Chinese prisoners of war and civilians were murdered and tens of thousands of women raped over roughly six weeks. Two postwar tribunals found the killing proven: the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) put the toll at more than 200,000, and the Nanjing War Crimes Tribunal found it exceeded 300,000. The evidence is, as historians of the Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus and elsewhere describe it, plentiful and irrefutable: contemporaneous diaries by John Rabe and other members of the Nanjing Safety Zone committee, foreign eyewitness dispatches, photographs, film, and Japanese military records. The denialist “illusion school” claims (that the numbers are inflated, that the record is wartime propaganda, that Nanjing was “just a battle”) are reported here only to be refuted. The target of this file is the denial, never the Japanese people, who are among those who documented and exposed the crime.

Category: Hoaxes & Pop Culture · Era: 1930s · First circulated: Organized denial took shape in Japan from the early 1970s, when nationalist writers such as Suzuki Akira and Tanaka Masaaki responded to renewed reporting on the massacre by calling it a fabrication; the claims recur in politicians' statements and textbook fights to the present day · Believed by: Rejected by the international historical mainstream and by both postwar tribunals. Outright denial is confined to a nationalist “illusion school” and its political allies in Japan; a broader, softer revisionism that quarrels over numbers has more reach, but the core event is not in scholarly dispute.
URL: https://theconspiratory.com/theory/nanjing-massacre-denial

## Summary
After the Imperial Japanese Army captured the Chinese capital of Nanjing on 13 December 1937, its soldiers spent roughly six weeks murdering Chinese prisoners of war and civilians and raping women on a mass scale. The atrocity was recorded as it happened: by Western residents who ran the Nanjing Safety Zone, above all the German businessman John Rabe, whose diary runs to more than 2,000 pages; by missionary teacher Minnie Vautrin; by foreign correspondents; and, later, by Japanese soldiers' own accounts. Two postwar courts convicted commanders and fixed the toll in the hundreds of thousands. Despite this, a revisionist campaign in Japan has long insisted the massacre was invented or wildly exaggerated for Chinese and Allied propaganda. This file centers the documentary and judicial record, which historians describe as plentiful and irrefutable, and reports the denialist claims solely in order to refute them.

## The claim
That the Nanjing Massacre never happened as described, or was so exaggerated as to be effectively a myth: that the death tolls of 200,000 or 300,000 are propaganda figures manufactured by China and the postwar Allied tribunals, that the foreign and Chinese records are unreliable or fabricated, and that what occurred at Nanjing was merely the ordinary violence of capturing a defended city, “just a battle” rather than a systematic massacre of prisoners and civilians.

## Origin and timeline
- 1937-12-13: The Imperial Japanese Army captures Nanjing, then the capital of Nationalist China, after the fall of Shanghai. Over the following weeks its troops carry out mass killings of surrendered soldiers and civilians and widespread rape. A committee of about two dozen Western residents runs the Nanjing Safety Zone, which shelters an estimated 200,000 to 250,000 people.
- 1937-12: Foreign correspondents in the city, including Frank Tillman Durdin and Archibald Steele of American papers, file dispatches describing the slaughter before they are forced out. John Rabe, Minnie Vautrin, George Fitch, Robert Wilson, and other Safety Zone members keep diaries and letters, and the missionary John Magee shoots film of victims. These become foundational contemporaneous records.
- 1946-1948: The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) in Tokyo hears extensive evidence on Nanjing. Its 1948 judgment states that more than 200,000 civilians and prisoners of war were murdered in the city and its vicinity in the first six weeks, with over 20,000 cases of rape. General Matsui Iwane is convicted and hanged for failing to prevent the atrocities.
- 1947: The Nanjing War Crimes Tribunal, convened by the Chinese Nationalist government, finds that the death toll exceeded 300,000 and sentences several Japanese officers to death, among them Tani Hisao, a division commander directly implicated in the killings.
- 1971-1972: Journalist Honda Katsuichi's reporting on Japanese wartime atrocities in the Asahi Shimbun reignites public debate in Japan. In reaction, writers such as Suzuki Akira (“The Phantom of the Nanjing Massacre”) and later Tanaka Masaaki launch the organized denialist “illusion school,” arguing the massacre was largely or wholly fabricated.
- 1984: Tanaka Masaaki publishes “The Fabrication of the ‘Nanjing Massacre,’” asserting there was no systematic killing and that the event was invented by the Tokyo tribunal and China for propaganda. Historians later document that Tanaka altered and misrepresented the very sources he cited, including General Matsui's own diary.
- 1990: A wave of high-profile denial by Japanese public figures begins: Ishihara Shintaro, later governor of Tokyo, tells a magazine that the massacre is “a story made up by the Chinese” and “a lie.” Similar statements by cabinet ministers and lawmakers recur through the following decades, several forcing resignations or diplomatic protests.
- 1997: Iris Chang's best-seller “The Rape of Nanking” brings the atrocity to a mass Western audience and provokes renewed denialist pushback, sharpening an international argument over numbers and memory that continues in textbook disputes and museum politics.
- 2012: Nagoya mayor Kawamura Takashi publicly doubts the massacre; Ishihara backs him. China suspends official exchanges with Nagoya. The episode shows that state-level denial persists, even as the historical record has only grown more complete, including the 2017 donation of Rabe's original diaries to China's Central Archives.

## The evidence, claim by claim
- Claim: The massacre is a postwar invention with no contemporaneous evidence; the record was assembled after the fact by the victors and the Chinese.
  Evidence: This is false, and it is the claim the documentary record most directly demolishes. The killing was recorded as it happened by neutral and even Axis-aligned observers inside the city. John Rabe, a German businessman and Nazi Party member who chaired the Safety Zone committee, kept a diary of more than 2,000 pages with over 80 photographs; Minnie Vautrin, George Fitch, Robert Wilson, and Lewis Smythe left parallel accounts; John Magee filmed victims; and American correspondents cabled dispatches out of Nanjing in December 1937. These are contemporaneous, mutually corroborating sources created before any tribunal or propaganda campaign existed.
- Claim: The death-toll figures of 200,000 and 300,000 are propaganda numbers with no judicial basis.
  Evidence: Both figures come from courts that examined the evidence. The International Military Tribunal for the Far East found in 1948 that more than 200,000 civilians and prisoners of war were murdered in the first six weeks; the Nanjing War Crimes Tribunal found in 1947 that the toll exceeded 300,000. Historians debate the precise number, with mainstream estimates commonly ranging from roughly 100,000 to over 300,000, but a genuine scholarly argument about magnitude is not the same as the denialist claim that the massacre did not happen. The range concerns how many; it does not put the fact of a mass atrocity in doubt.
- Claim: Nanjing's prewar population was too small for 300,000 to have been killed, so the whole account collapses.
  Evidence: This is the illusion school's signature argument, and it rests on a definitional trick. Deniers count only the reduced population inside the Safety Zone at one moment, then treat any larger toll as arithmetically impossible. But the recognized atrocity extends beyond the zone to the surrounding countryside and to the tens of thousands of surrendered and captured Chinese soldiers executed en masse, over a six-week period, not a single day. Once the actual time span and geography the tribunals used are applied, the population objection dissolves; it works only by quietly shrinking the event to defeat a number.
- Claim: The eyewitness records, especially Tanaka Masaaki's reading of Matsui's diary, show the massacre was fabricated.
  Evidence: The opposite is true, and Tanaka is a cautionary example. When scholars checked Tanaka Masaaki's use of General Matsui Iwane's wartime diary, they found he had altered and misrepresented the text, changing wording to manufacture support for denial. Far from proving fabrication, the primary Japanese sources, including soldiers' own diaries and later testimony, corroborate mass killings of prisoners and civilians. The denialist case has repeatedly required doctoring or discarding the very documents it claims to rely on.
- Claim: What happened at Nanjing was just the normal violence of taking a defended city in wartime, not a massacre.
  Evidence: The evidence describes something categorically different from combat. Large numbers of Chinese soldiers had surrendered or disarmed and were then executed in organized groups, which is a war crime, not battle. Civilians, including women, children, and the elderly sheltering in the Safety Zone, were killed and raped over weeks after the fighting for the city had ended. The IMTFE convicted Matsui and the Nanjing tribunal convicted Tani Hisao precisely because the killing was found to be systematic and directed at people no longer resisting. “Just a battle” is a reframing designed to launder mass murder into ordinary war.
- Claim: Because historians disagree about the exact number, the whole event is unproven.
  Evidence: Disagreement over a figure is not doubt about the fact. Historians distinguish a “great massacre school” (toll in the six figures, now the mainstream view), a “middle-of-the-road” group arguing for tens of thousands, and an “illusion school” of outright deniers whose estimates approach zero. Only the last is rejected as denial; the first two are arguing about scale within an agreed atrocity. Presenting a live numbers debate as if it undermined the event is a standard denialist move, the same one used against other documented mass killings.
- Claim: The atrocity story serves Chinese nationalism today, so it must be a nationalist construction.
  Evidence: That the massacre is invoked in modern China-Japan politics is true and worth noting, but it says nothing about whether it occurred. The core documentation predates the People's Republic entirely: it was created in 1937–1938 by Western residents and journalists and adjudicated by an Allied tribunal in Tokyo. A crime can be both historically real and politically contested. Deniers exploit the political dimension to imply the underlying event is fabricated, which does not follow and which the contemporaneous record refutes.

## Why people believe it
- National honor and a reluctance to inherit guilt. For a strand of Japanese nationalism, conceding a massacre of this scale feels like accepting a permanent stain on the country and its wartime military, so denial offers a way to protect a heroic self-image. This is about the psychology of memory, not the strength of the evidence, which points entirely the other way.
- The numbers debate provides cover. Because reputable historians genuinely disagree about the death toll, deniers can dress minimization up as mere skepticism about statistics, blurring the line between a legitimate scholarly argument over magnitude and the illegitimate claim that nothing happened.
- Politicization makes it easy to cry propaganda. The massacre's prominent role in Chinese public memory and in China-Japan diplomacy lets deniers wave the whole record away as a foreign political weapon, an emotionally satisfying shortcut that ignores the fact that the primary documentation was made by neutral Westerners in 1937.
- Repetition by respectable-seeming figures. When governors, mayors, and authors assert the massacre was invented, their status lends the claim a veneer of credibility and keeps it circulating, regardless of how thoroughly historians have refuted it.

## Open questions
- The exact death toll will never be fixed with precision. Records were destroyed, bodies were dumped in the Yangtze or burned, and definitions of the event's time and area differ, which is why honest estimates range widely. This is a real historiographical question about magnitude; it is not, and should not be misread as, doubt about whether the massacre occurred.
- Why organized denial took hold specifically in Japan from the 1970s onward is a question about postwar memory and politics: the incomplete reckoning with the war, textbook battles, and the incentives of nationalist publishing and electoral politics. Understanding that history is how the denial is countered, not evidence for it.
- How much command responsibility reached above the convicted generals remains debated among historians, as with many atrocities. That is a question about the chain of authorship, not about whether the killing happened, which the tribunals and the contemporaneous record settled.
- Why a softer minimization persists in parts of public discourse, even where outright denial has failed, is worth watching: it is the form the myth now most often takes, quarreling over numbers and language rather than denying the event outright.

## Sources
- Nanjing Massacre | History, Summary, & Facts, Encyclopaedia Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/event/Nanjing-Massacre
- New Research on the Nanjing Incident, Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus (David Askew) (2004): https://apjjf.org/david-askew/1729/article
- David vs. Goliath: Resisting the Denial of the Nanking Massacre, Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus (2016): https://apjjf.org/asia-pacific-journal-feature/4786/article
- Nanjing Massacre denial, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanjing_Massacre_denial
- Historiography of the Nanjing Massacre, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historiography_of_the_Nanjing_Massacre
- International Military Tribunal for the Far East, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Military_Tribunal_for_the_Far_East
- John Rabe, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Rabe
- Tokyo War Crimes Trial, The National WWII Museum: https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/topics/tokyo-war-crimes-trial
- Rape of Nanjing: Massacre, Facts & Aftermath, History.com (A&E): https://www.history.com/articles/nanjing-massacre

Rated by The Conspiratory, a neutral, sourced encyclopedia of conspiracy theories. Full page: https://theconspiratory.com/theory/nanjing-massacre-denial