What has changed? NBTHK Shinsa

[MassiveMoonHeh]

Since Juyo Shinsa 69 and TokuJu Shinsa 28, it appears things have changed dramatically at the NBTHK, with the result that getting higher classifications for swords & parts are now extremely hard with numbers falling off a cliff for both Juyo and TokuJu classifications.

 

Some people say it is a good thing. The best swords & parts should be revered and as such deserve the rating. It should not just be because it has a nice polish.

 

Others think it is now excessively hard and that they need more moderation.

 

Others still think that new Juyo and TokuJu discoveries are waining, meaning there are less great swords still out there to be found.

 

And finally, others think that this is was a regime change that resulted in this new approach meaning, another regime change could lead to a shift again.

 

What is going on at the NBTHK and why are we seeing such a drop in Juyo and TokuJu numbers?

 

Can anyone enlighten the community?

 

Thank you.

[PNSSHOGUN]

There was a recent period where items could be submitted in tandem for Hozon & Tokubetsu Hozon, which made it appear that they were handing out TH papers like candy. They have since reverted this, and I wonder if the stricter Juyo & TBJ sessions are a product of an attempt to restore the status of these attributions. There has been many discussion and opinions on certain Juyo sessions being "weak" (i.e. large numbers of swords passing, with some being questionable), given the absolute faith the market has in the NBTHK it would make sense they stamp out any perceptions that the value has been watered down. 

 

Who knows, maybe in thirty years all of these NBTHK papers will be obsolete and 'worthless' like the previous papers.....

[eternal_newbie]

A few other things to consider:

• Without any prominent experts on the Juyo panel, a modern Juyo certification may be seen as less prestigious than e.g. a Tanobe-sensei sayagaki
• Reduced number of swords passing does not necessarily mean that standards have gotten higher; in fact I have spoken with more than one person who feels that the last couple of sessions' worth of Juyo blades have been a decidedly mixed bag, with some swords among them that, and I quote, "should not even have gotten TH, let alone Juyo." I personally do not share that opinion but admittedly I do not collect at as high a level as they do, and thus my standards are probably lower
• Reading some of the recent Juyo and TokuJu setsumei, one can definitely sense a shift in certain long-held assumptions/assertions. For example, the decision to finally certify a Chogi tanto with a date 10 years older than the previous oldest acknowledged work, and noting in the setsumei for a TJ Shizu blade that the blade is attributed to the Shizu group, of which Kaneuji was the foremost, whereas previously an attribution of Shizu meant Kaneuji himself, with a slight plus or minus of confidence
• From my understanding there has definitely been an attempt to broaden the gap between Hozon and Tokubetsu Hozon of late. The number of older blades being approved, and the tightening guidelines for qualifying for TH, may also be related to the fact that we are now approaching a period in which works by some of the early gendai smiths are posthumous candidates for TH, and someday even Juyo
• The increasing availability of documentation on a given blade's history — the Wayback Machine, forum and Reddit threads, as well as the tireless work of big data gatherers and analysts — now means that it's easier than ever to determine whether a blade a) has been submitted multiple times for Juyo, b) has been passed around from seller to seller, and/or c) does not quite measure up to other Juyo specimens from that school or maker, meaning blades that are good enough to be considered Juyo candidates but not good enough to actually pass Juyo are now likely to be submitted less often (as an aside: I wonder what the record is for "number of Juyo attempts by a single blade")

[Rivkin]

I always find messages hidden inside sayagaki or setsumei to mark the blade as amazing or evil which only those who can't read between the lines would buy a bit too arcane topic. 

Good blade is a good blade, interesting blade is an interesting blade. If it was submitted five times, passed around, I am sure competing dealers will make a great story why "IT IS NOT REALLY JUYO LEVEL", but they are able to tell this story about any blade. Or vice versa, with absolute certainty declare that sequence of words in sayagaki does not say what it says, but attributes it to another, unwritten name, five notches higher.

I never liked these whispers which echo in every collecting field. 100 years from now there will be so many Juyos most of it will not matter.

Edited Monday at 08:53 AM by Rivkin

[eternal_newbie]

2 hours ago, Rivkin said:

I always find messages hidden inside sayagaki or setsumei to mark the blade as amazing or evil which only those who can't read between the lines would buy a bit too arcane topic. 

Good blade is a good blade, interesting blade is an interesting blade. If it was submitted five times, passed around, I am sure competing dealers will make a great story why "IT IS NOT REALLY JUYO LEVEL", but they are able to tell this story about any blade. Or vice versa, with absolute certainty declare that sequence of words in sayagaki does not say what it says, but attributes it to another, unwritten name, five notches higher.

I never liked these whispers which echo in every collecting field. 100 years from now there will be so many Juyos most of it will not matter.

 

I agree - the blade is what it is, and no amount of papers, sayagaki or dealer verbiage will change that. But a significant portion of the market out there does care, and until that changes, stuff like this will have an effect on which blades get submitted and which blades get bought.

[Jussi Ekholm]

It is extremely complicated in my eyes. I am happy to focus my interest on items that are not seen that interesting by NBTHK. My sword appreciation is different from high level appreciation.

 

I had the privilege to see the 29th Tokubetsu Jūyō exhibition. All of the swords were amazing swords. However I know if I would have seen all of the submitted swords I would probably switched several items from personal appreciation reasons 😁😁 yet they are the experts on the panel and they most likely chose the right items.

 

I think I've been NBTHK member for 15+ years now. I have never been a fan of the multiple tier papering process, yet I understand some of the reasons behind it. And of course given the currently absurdly large submission numbers for shinsa they cannot give too much time for every single sword.

 

Some smiths/attributions are starting to have very large Jūyō numbers. And for me personally I find myself often wondering if yet another mumei XX sword should have passed Jūyō and not a signed Muromachi or Edo sword by YY for a fresh change. 

[eternal_newbie]

2 hours ago, Jussi Ekholm said:

Some smiths/attributions are starting to have very large Jūyō numbers.

 

Kanemitsu and Shizu in particular are cases where it's more or less understood by everyone that there's no way a single smith, or even a couple of generations, could have made enough swords for that many of them to survive to become Juyo in our time. It's just that there isn't enough evidence and historical documentation for the shinsa panels to distinguish between the named smith and their immediate successors/contemporaries, and therefore "Kanemitsu" or "Shizu" remains the best guess, given the information we have available.

[Takezo]

I think it would be great if the NBTHK would incorporate a system closer to the NTHK, or at least augment their current system with it. The point system lets you have a fairly transparent view and it leaves no room for questions of where a sword stands, at least in the moment of judging by that particular group of people. Would be nice to know if a blade is barely passing TokuHu by points or if it's already right below Juyo, etc. I have the NTHK catalogues of excellent swords and it is obviously much easier to follow than the opaque reasoning of NBTHK.

[MassiveMoonHeh]

It is the only system in the world that I know of where you have to spend time and money to submit the same object multiple times to the same organisation to arrive at a final decision. Can you imagine imagine if they graded other collectables like this? Submit a Babe Ruth Baseball bat three times for them to decide it is worth keeping or really worth keeping, then deciding that yes because it was used a Yankee Stadium for the Called shot it was now important to the game and finally because it is such an important bat we needed to submit it again to be told yes, it is a very important bat.

[Hector]

On 6/22/2026 at 1:44 PM, PNSSHOGUN said:

There was a recent period where items could be submitted in tandem for Hozon & Tokubetsu Hozon, which made it appear that they were handing out TH papers like candy. They have since reverted this, and I wonder if the stricter Juyo & TBJ sessions are a product of an attempt to restore the status of these attributions. There has been many discussion and opinions on certain Juyo sessions being "weak" (i.e. large numbers of swords passing, with some being questionable), given the absolute faith the market has in the NBTHK it would make sense they stamp out any perceptions that the value has been watered down. 

 

Who knows, maybe in thirty years all of these NBTHK papers will be obsolete and 'worthless' like the previous papers.....

Actually, they haven't reverted this; it is still current practice.

 

I was considering putting a tanto of mine in for both levels and checked today if it was still possible. 

[eternal_newbie]

59 minutes ago, Hector said:

Actually, they haven't reverted this; it is still current practice.

 

I was considering putting a tanto of mine in for both levels and checked today if it was still possible. 

 

Yep, I believe the practice they ended was being able to apply for Juyo token with just Hozon papers. Now, to qualify for Juyo the submission must have TH papers issued at least x months ago.

[Mushin]

On 6/22/2026 at 5:37 AM, eternal_newbie said:

I agree - the blade is what it is, and no amount of papers, sayagaki or dealer verbiage will change that. But a significant portion of the market out there does care, and until that changes, stuff like this will have an effect on which blades get submitted and which blades get bought.

Rohan, I agree with you, but only up to a point.

While papers or designations don't change the steel or workmanship of a sword, what they can—and often do—change is our perception of the blade. When a sword that you hope will receive higher papers does, you are elated, feel proud or vindicated, and often develop a deeper connection to it, even though nothing has really changed about the piece other than the certificate that accompanies it. And when it doesn't happen, that emotional connection can be affected, sometimes profoundly.

Darcy once told me that people would often get rid of blades after a failed Jūyō submission because, in the owner's mind, somehow the sword was no longer worthy of the same love, admiration, or ownership. I used to say that the only reason to pursue higher papers was to make a future sale or trade easier, or to leave your family something concrete and understandable when you eventually pop your clogs. But the truth is that collectors often behave exactly as Darcy described.

And I get it.

Collecting—and perhaps hoarding as well—are deeply human traits. Humans crave certainty. We want our choices validated. We want our judgment recognized and rewarded. When that happens, it strengthens our attachment to the object. When it doesn't, it can alter our relationship with it, even when logic tells us nothing has changed.

I think the Buddha spent a great deal of time teaching that suffering is rooted in attachment and expectation. That may not make rational sense in the context of a sword that remains exactly the same before and after the shinsa results arrive, but it is what it is. We become attached not only to the object itself, but also to the story we tell ourselves about it and the hope that others will validate that story.

Human nature being what it is, that attachment can be every bit as powerful as the sword itself.

[Takezo]

Well said @Mushin. Everyone has different goals of course, but I think if you are not seeking validation and paper, once you have a firm idea and understanding of "Juyo level (and up) workmanship", you realize many, many Tokubetsu Hozon swords meet this benchmark (and beyond), hence why we are still seeing Juyo and higher papering happening at all. The other qualities NBTHK uses to actually issue those high papers represent a certain group of people's assessment at a certain point in time, but as it's been said - doesn't change the sword at all. However, I also understand the position of collectors who chase or want high papers as an eventual exit or value holding strategy etc.

 

Also yeah @MassiveMoonHeh - I think that is because things like grading cards is an objective process, and much like the NTHK process, point based (whether that is numeric or something like B+/A-) while the Juyo+ certification is partially a subjective contest. That may be a healthier way mentally, to consider Juyo+. Not as an overall objective and absolute answer or grading of your sword, but something that involves luck to a degree, given the workmanship is there. Probably also part of the reason why Tanobe does sayagaki on any thing TokuHo+. Many of these swords are easily Juyo workmanship wise.

Edited Tuesday at 06:52 PM by Takezo

[Takezo]

Also, I am fine with collectors giving up candidate swords after 1 Juyo attempt...I will gladly pick these up, their loss imo 

[Mushin]

16 minutes ago, Takezo said:

Also, I am fine with collectors giving up candidate swords after 1 Juyo attempt...I will gladly pick these up, their loss imo 

I have a very good friend and serious collector who shall remain nameless. He loves attending the various shinsa in Chicago, Tampa, Orlando and San Francisco. His favorite spot was outside the shinsa room where he would wait for the inevitable angry, disappointed collectors emerging with pink slips or attributions they didn't like. He would commiserate with them over the results, sympathize with their frustration, and then, more often than not, buy their swords and fittings from them for peanuts since they couldn't wait to be rid of their "failures." They walked away happy that they bumped into a "sucker" stupid enough to buy their "garbage."

At least three Jūyō swords my friend owns today came from those very rejects. Other pieces received attributions to major names after a good polish. It just goes to show that not all shinsa are created equal, that a mei rejection is not necessarily the end of the story, and that one person's disappointment can become another person's opportunity—especially when that person knows what he is looking at. Knowledge truly is power.

It also illustrates nicely the point I was making earlier: the blade itself did not change. Nothing about the workmanship, condition, or history was altered by the result. What changed was the owner's perception of the blade once it failed shinsa. For some, that shift in perception can be powerful enough to sever the emotional connection they once had with the piece. For others, it just creates the opportunity to acquire something exceptional at a fraction of its true value. 

[eternal_newbie]

15 minutes ago, Mushin said:

It just goes to show that not all shinsa are created equal, that a mei rejection is not necessarily the end of the story, and that one person's disappointment can become another person's opportunity—especially when that person knows what he is looking at. Knowledge truly is power.

 

I remember reading about a dealer/collector who once picked up an obvious gimei Kiyomaro for a very reasonable price - only to have it paper to Shizu Kaneuji after having the mei removed, and eventually reach Juyo.

[Takezo]

1 hour ago, Mushin said:

 

I have a very good friend and serious collector who shall remain nameless. He loves attending the various shinsa in Chicago, Tampa, Orlando and San Francisco. His favorite spot was outside the shinsa room where he would wait for the inevitable angry, disappointed collectors emerging with pink slips or attributions they didn't like. He would commiserate with them over the results, sympathize with their frustration, and then, more often than not, buy their swords and fittings from them for peanuts since they couldn't wait to be rid of their "failures." They walked away happy that they bumped into a "sucker" stupid enough to buy their "garbage."

At least three Jūyō swords my friend owns today came from those very rejects. Other pieces received attributions to major names after a good polish. It just goes to show that not all shinsa are created equal, that a mei rejection is not necessarily the end of the story, and that one person's disappointment can become another person's opportunity—especially when that person knows what he is looking at. Knowledge truly is power.

It also illustrates nicely the point I was making earlier: the blade itself did not change. Nothing about the workmanship, condition, or history was altered by the result. What changed was the owner's perception of the blade once it failed shinsa. For some, that shift in perception can be powerful enough to sever the emotional connection they once had with the piece. For others, it just creates the opportunity to acquire something exceptional at a fraction of its true value. 

Smart.