“Swords of the Emperor” vs Dawson’s

[Kaigunto230]

For those of you who purchased Headstamp Publishing’s “Swords of the Emperor” by John Plimpton, how does it compare to Dawson’s “Cyclopedia”? Plimpton’s book looks beautiful, but I’m worried that it won’t add much information for the collector. I already own Dawson, Fuller/Gregory etc. At $130 plus shipping, I don’t want to buy something duplicative when I could put the money to something else.
 

Anyone have opinions on if the book is worth it if you’ve already got a decent library? 

[Conway S]

Michael, 

 

I have both books. Think of Plimpton's book more as a "guide to sword identification." There are very few pictures of blades in the book. Dawson's provides more in-depth details and analysis about the study of Japanese military swords and it is my go-to book at the moment. That being said, I find the NMB infinitely more useful to my study and understanding than any reference book I have come across. I am still happy with the purchase of Plimpton's book because it is very nicely arranged and has many unique pieces. One day it will be out of print too and more than $130 to procure. Just some of my thoughts.  

 

Conway

[Kaigunto230]

Thanks, Conway! From the few snippits I've seen, it's a really pretty book without as much meat as Dawson's and the other previous go-tos. A friend bought a Type 32 a few days ago and needed to ask me for photos from Dawson and Fuller/Gregory. He has the new Plimpton's book, and it didn't cover what he needed beyond "hey, you bought a Type 32."

[Bruce Pennington]

I agree Conway. The Plimpton book has some very unique police swords, and other swords like that, that might not be in Dawson or Fuller. But overall both Dawson and Fuller are more educational.