Lewis B

The original post says this is a Shodei Norinaga Shikkake but neither the Juyo paper you posted nor the sayagaki mention the generation. Does the Zufu clarify this attribution? I ask because the nidei also worked in a similar style. NORINAGA (則長), 1st gen., Shōō (正応, 1288-1293), Yamato – “Yamato Norinaga” (大和則長), “Yamato Norinaga saku” (大和則長作), “Yamato no Kuni Shikkake-jū Norinaga saku” (大和国尻懸住則長作), “Yamato Shikkake-jū Norinaga saku” (大和尻懸住則長作), first name Tarōzaemon (太郎左衛門), Shikkake school, according to tradition the son of Norihiro (則弘), because there are no blades extant by Norihiro – who is considered as ancestor of the Shikkake school – the 1st gen. Norinaga as often regarded as actual founder of the school, he worked according to tradition in the vicinity of the old marketplace of Kishida village (岸田) in the Yamabe district (山辺) of Yamato province, he was active from about Shōō to Ryakuō (暦応, 1338-1342), there exists a tantō with the date signature of the third year of Bunpō (文保, 1319) and the information “made at the age of 48” and a tantō with the date of the third year of Ryakuō (1340) and the age of 69, that means we can calculate his year of birth with Bun´ei nine (文永, 1272), there are tachi, tantō, and naginata are extant whereas tantō can also be in kanmuri-otoshi-zukuri or shōbu-zukuri, tachi have a shallower sori than contemporary blades, the jigane is an itame mixed with masame, ji-nie, chikei, and some yubashiri, and appears as so-called “Shikkake-hada” (mokume along the shinogi and masame along the hamon), the hamon is a suguha or suguha-chō mixed with uniform ko-gunome elements in nie-deki, in addition hotsure, nijūba, kinsuji, and sunagashi appear, the bōshi ist sugu, runs out as yakitsume, and tends with its hakikake often to kaen but can also appear as midare-komi, some hamon interpretations with uniform ko-gunome remind of the Dōei school (道永), this characteristic feature is already mentioned in the Keifun Ki (解紛記) which was published in Keichō twelve (慶長, 1607), ō-wazamono, jō-saku ◎ NORINAGA (則長), 2nd gen., Jōji (貞治, 1362-1368), Yamato – “Yamato no Kuni Norinaga” (大和国則長), “Yamato Sakon no Jō Norinaga saku” (大和左近允則長作), “Yamato no Kuni Shikkake Norinaga” (大和国尻懸 則長), son of the 1st gen., successive generations Norinaga continue to work in the style of the 1st gen. but from the start of the Muromachi period a noticeable decline in quality can be seen, old records of the school say that short signatures of the kind “Yamato Norinaga saku” belong to the 1st gen. and longer naga-mei with the supplement “no Kuni,” “Shikkake,” or “Sakon no Jō” (左近允) to the 2nd gen., but recent comparative studies of extant signatures have disproved this, i.e. no conclusions can be drawn just on the basis of the length of early Norinaga signatures

Check out Sesko's Kotozen-HC kantei reference. There are 3 Norinaga swords, a tachi and 2 katana, described in detail with oshigata on p46-51. Very useful to compare with your blade, especially as these are also mumei although two have kinzogan Mei by Hon'ami Koshitsu and Hon'ami Koson.

Anything is possible given the quality of those photos

Darcy would be my point of reference for this opinion. AI also agrees Yes, NBTHK Juyo is a competition, in the sense that a blade's passing is not solely based on meeting a set of absolute criteria but also on how it compares to other swords submitted in the same session. While the Nihon Bijutsu Token Hozon Kyokai (NBTHK) evaluates swords based on quality and condition, the Juyo Token (Important Sword) designation involves a competitive element where only a limited number of blades can pass each year, meaning a superior sword might be passed over for a better example from the same smith or school. Understanding the "Competition" Aspect of Juyo Shinsa: Relative Quality: Even if a sword meets the minimum requirements for Juyo, it might not pass if other swords in the same submission are considered superior. Limited Passes: The NBTHK only awards Juyo status to a specific number of swords annually, making it a competitive process where blades vie for a limited number of slots. Historical Context and Comparison: Judges consider the historical context and how a blade compares to other examples by the same smith or school, potentially leading to changes in opinion over time. Polish Matters: The condition of the sword's polish is also a factor in the evaluation process, and it must meet the NBTHK's standards. Voluntary Entry: Submitting a sword for Juyo shinsa is voluntary, and by entering, you agree to the NBTHK's rules and evaluation criteria.

I wouldn't expect anything less.

Tough one. A signed blade is going to have a greater commercial value vs one thats mumei. Yours has quite an early registration number which doesn't do it any harm.

Thats interesting. As we all know, Shinsa is a competition. If too many from a school or Gokaden are submitted in a given year the best ones will go through but others, that might have otherwise passed, could pass another year if the competition is weaker. Congratulations on your pass. I might not have been able to afford mine if it had passed.

Here is a 2nd or 3rd gen signed Norinaga Shikkake with 1991 Juyo papers. The pricing is 10 years old but gives a reference point. https://www.aoijapan.net/masterpieceyamato-kuni-sikkake-norinaga/

Swordsmiths and schools can wax and wain in the market. I see many Juyo Papered Shikkake from the 60's and 70's but I think Shikkake in particular has lost favour more recently, hence the lower market pricing. Personally speaking I do think they are undervalued and a good purchase option. My first blade was a 70.6cm Yamato Shikkake. It passed TH in 2022 but failed at Juyo the following year, despite Tanobe sensei stating it was a candidate in his opinion. 2023 and 2024 have had especially low Juyo pass numbers for whatever reason.

That's not all. Looks like someone carved out the Hi with chisel and angle grinder.

I don't see Pechalov mentioned in the organization list or acknowledgements. Appears to be mainly a locally organised event. And Koto blades are not represented.

I know how a nakago is Suriage just not how that relates to the file marks and only on one side.

Please explain how this sort of effect relates to suriage?

Its carved in a more cursive style which makes interpretation more difficult for non native speakers.

Yes, looks like the upper image is the ha. Thought it was the mune. The lower one is a different kirikomi. If not for the boshi this would be a very valuable and desirable sword.

There are 3 kirikomi pictured. This blade has seen some serious action, both on and off the battlefield. Nice long, survivor tachi with lots to appreciate so I can see how a buyer might be attracted. From a purests perspective though its got problems. Any idea what this could be. A welded repair patch? And whats going on with the nakago? Would this be a very poor effort to remove gimei carving? Only one side so can't be habaki wear. Biggest issue for me is the boshi running off the kissaki. I thought this was a fatal flaw, yet it gets Hozon. Case of age trumping condition?

Its Tanobe speak for very important and valuable. Sometimes he uses chin cho, and other times the more emphatic chin chin cho cho. As Darcy Brockbank once quipped, it's the equivalent of, if there's a house fire, this is the blade to save first.

The differences are quite pronounced. Its clear one must choose carefully. Which style was the togishi championing?

The 'patina' on the shirosaya is not very convincing. The whole setup does look a little engineered to appear older and as for the provenance and backstory.... crazy...as you would expect for Jauce.

Yes, actually great timing to resurrect this thread. I'm also in a dilemma with regards my tanto. Much of the nioiguchi in the hamon has been worn away through repeated polishes over the centuries. No surprises as the dealer was open about it and I could see what was going on in the photos. Under normal circumstances a sashikomi polish would be the order of the day but I wonder, in this case, if a proper hadori/kesho polish by an expert togishi is the most appropriate. I also need to read this thread to understand the arguments for and against.

My first interest as a teenager cutting my teeth on Japanese antiques was Netsuke (like Colin, ivory seemed to be the primary medium at least in the UK) and lots of discussion on how to tell the difference between the natural material and resin copies. These were fairly widely available and while not cheap, attainable.

Well it says chin chin cho cho and the style matches Tanobe. There must be additional writing on the reverse side.

Very nice looking blade and a great memory of your father. I would also say it's a tanto. The only picture missing is of the complete sword preferably against a dark background, without the habaki (metal collar). Does it have a pointed or flat spine (3 facets)?

I'm reading it slightly different. Less critical rather curious. Certainly there is no question regarding the quality of the forging meeting Shintogo Kunimitsu standards. This is the google translation for the opinion piece. The blade is a shallow furisode, slightly polished, with a small ridge, a small rounded manho, and a bell-like hi-katsu-de. The blade has a fine and thick ji-fure. The blade has a thin and straight blade, a strong ko-fure, and a gold-suji-like edge in the middle of the blade, which is connected to the ji-kei. The blade is deeply turned into a small rounded hat tip. The front has a koshi-hi. For some reason, the date has been written in a way that makes it seem like a bottom inscription, but the two characters for Kagen are also written in cursive script. Is Sei a substitute inscription? The inscription written by Gyokou, which has been looked at, is notable for the fact that the characters are not in the so-called Kita-kanmuri style. However, there is no fake smell at all, and it is rather more dried and relaxed than usual, which is pleasing. As mentioned above, there is a two-character inscription and a date, and the workmanship of the blade can be easily attributed to Shintogo, but Kunimitsu's two characters are closer to cursive writing, and according to his memories, there seems to have been a demand for these characters and men. (We appreciate a glimpse of the beloved works of the late collector Tsushima Sohei.)