Hawley's ratings....

[huntershooter]

Correct me if wrong here; I don't recall seeing any gendai smith rated higer than 10-15 pts. in Hawley's. Is my impression that he (Haw;ey) didn't have much use/respect for blades much newer than Shinto era? Being (at best) a novice, some of the blades I've seen (gendaito) seem entirely comparable to some good shinto/koto blades rated much higher by him.

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

Take Hawley's ratings with a grain of salt.

They have not a definitive meaning or importance.

[Gabriel L]

As Carlo said, plus more specifically you're right, Hawley pretty much ignored most gendai smiths (some of whom were actually quite good).

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

Gabriel, do you know if the new 2 volume set have the duplicate

entries grouped together or in someway better arranged ?

[Gabriel L]

Hi Carlo,

 

I have the 1998 Commemorative Centenary Edition, and I don't know entirely how it differs from earlier editions. There is a 2-page spread at the end of each volume that gives some changes on reference #s from the "Revised" edition, but that's not a lot of entries. I also don't know what specifically you are referring to with duplicate entries; I haven't been perusing the names thoroughly. There might be a ton of duplicate entries for all I know.

 

As far as I know the system for arranging names is the same as before; currently it goes by first kanji of the smith's name, in order of number of strokes, then second character, then province, then date.

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

Well, might be I've found what I want for xmas.

Mine is the old "revised", 1981.

 

This one has signatures listed separately when they should have

been grouped, even if the main kanji and the smith are the same.

I've not exaple now to give you.

 

With so much names and different sources something wrong

was inevitable.

[nagamaki - Franco]

If not mistaken Hawley's rating correlated to some dollar value, much like the Taikan rates smiths via the Yen. Though, you have to go back and figure out how it correlated according to what the dollar was worth back then, not like the pennies the dollar is worth today, ugh.

Remember too, newer swords were not as highly sought after at the time Hawley wrote his book as in recent times.

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

Yes, if I'm not mistaking it was based on actualizing (at hawley's times...)

the currency exchange taken from other sources even much older if

not ancient.

Good old Yumoto is buried somewhere in my libraries, but if I recall well it

makes the same with the same result.