USSBS Interrogation Transcription Errors

For the reasons listed below, USSBS interrogations occasionally contain obvious transcription errors. One example is the in the interrogation of war-end Premier Suzuki the name of his Chief Cabinet Secretary Sakomizu Hisatsune (迫水久常) erroneously appears as “Sakamezu.”.

Most likely explanations (ranked)

1) Phonetic mishearing and unfamiliarity with Japanese names

Many USSBS products were created from spoken exchanges, often mediated through interpreters. To an English-speaking ear, the difference between Sa-ko-mi-zu and Sa-ka-me-zu can be subtle—especially if the speaker is soft-spoken, speaking quickly, or has an accent unfamiliar to the listener. When the listener does not already know the name, small vowel shifts such as mi → me are common.

2) Inconsistent romanization practices within USSBS documentation

Although Hepburn-style romanization was widely used by the mid-1940s, it was not uniformly enforced across all USSBS interrogations and typed reports. Personnel with different backgrounds (e.g., military intelligence, language training acquired in other theaters) often produced spellings that were partly Hepburn, partly ad hoc phonetics, and occasionally inconsistent even within a single document series. A spelling like “Sakamezu” fits this broader pattern of variability.

3) Typing from handwritten notes rather than audio recordings

Many USSBS interrogation texts were typed from handwritten notes or draft summaries, sometimes by staff who were not present during the session. Under those conditions, errors easily enter the record through misreading handwriting or copying a draft that already contained a mistake. A poorly formed handwritten mi can be mistaken for me, and once a spelling is “set” by a typist, it can persist through subsequent copies.

4) Orthographic precision was not the primary goal

The USSBS interrogations were produced to capture decision-making narratives and factual claims, not to provide linguistically rigorous name authority control. In many cases, titles and roles carried more analytical weight than exact spellings. This helps explain why inconsistencies in personal names and romanization occur across the corpus.

5) It is unlikely to indicate a different person or an alternate reading

There is no strong reason to suspect that “Sakamezu” refers to someone other than Sakomizu Hisatsune. The surname 迫水 is read Sakomizu, and it would be unusual for a senior Japanese official of the period to use a casual alternate reading in an official or semi-official context. Absent corroborating evidence, the simplest explanation remains an ordinary transcription/romanization error.

Conclusion

Errors such as the appearance of “Sakamezu” in the USSBS interrogation record is best explained as a routine product of postwar documentation practices: phonetic mishearing, inconsistent romanization conventions, note-based transcription, and a low institutional priority on orthographic exactness. In context, the variant spelling is most plausibly an error rather than a clue to a distinct identity or alternate name usage.