Swords Style Comparisons

A

AlienMind

Joined
Apr 26, 2002
Messages
25
Hi there!

I had been involved with martial arts for the about 10 years; all weaponless, except for a little bo and nunchaku. I quit for 3 years and now I have gotten into Arnis. I got into it for the stick fighting aspect, but soon found it was based on the short sword, like an espada. From there I become very interested in swords and have found a whole world of different styles and sword types with long histories of development (and I am sure there are some lost histories and knowledge as well). I was wondering if there is any where I can find comparitive analysis on different styles. Like how a cut and thrust rapier may do against a katana, or an katana against an espada. I am wondering if espada techniques are simular to hanger and falchions. I know the weapon is only as good as the technican, but I am looking more for the strong and weak points of various styles and how two practitioners from different styles would approch a dual against each other.
 
Well you have sort of asked a question of which I have seen many variations of but it infamously known in the sword community as the "rapier vs katana" debate. The short answer is that basically everything depends on the practicioners, what sort of day they are having, what the terrain is, and who is lucky that day. In the end the blades themselves have far less to do with the winner then these other factors.
 
This is a subject of endless debates. Usually few opinions are changed at the end.
For unarmored combat, the katana and rapier tend to be the most commonly chosen weapons. There are also proponents of the short sword styles and those who espouse the kurkhi (spelling) and machete.

My vote would be for the katana, but there are certainly some good arguments for rapier and dagger (2-weapon style). I choose the katana because it can both thrust and slash and the power that comes with 2-hand control of the blade. My experience/training has been with machete and fencing foil so I am not really formally trained for the weapon I chose.
 
Agree that this debate is an old one. Fencers spar with fencers, asian martial artists with asian styles, not much crossing of the genres.

I'd take spear or bow vs. any sword and feel comfortable tho. How's that for crossinng genres? We weren't even talking about spears!

Seriously, tho, styles determine blade type. the Purpose determines the tool. One look @ the foil tells you it is a thrusting weapon. One look at a wakizashi tells you it is a slasher.

Pick up and read the best book you will ever read on sword and its ancestors & cousins--Sir Richard Burton's Book of the Sword. Excellent stuff, covers all sorts of blade geometry and physics, usage, styles from across time and around the world.

Keith
 
I'll add yet another dimension to the disparity.

I can hand a katana to a guy in my rapier club, and beat him with a rapier. I can then take the katana, let him have the rapier and beat him again.

Why?

Because the other fellow, though he may be an excellent Rapier Duelist, doesn't have a clue as to the strengths and weaknesses of the katana. I do. (I'm no expert with a katana, but I'm not too awfully shabby. For that matter, I'm not an expert with a rapier either, but I ain't half bad.) ;)

To be able to defeat a weapon, one must be at least familiar with it. If one opponent is familiar with both, and one is not, guess which one loses?

In the end, there's just no way to compare the two with any meaning.
Both have strengths, both have weaknesses, it's up to the user to exploit them. (or not.)
 
Hi,

I have played at quite a few weapons against a couple of fanatical Bujinkan members who have a couple of dans between them.

All of the below worked more than once.

Rapier vs Katana. Three seconds. Cavatione and thrust in quarte with traverse.

Backsword vs Katana. A little longer Undercut from open ward to his left leg.

Sword and buckler vs Kat and Wak. See above. Undercutting is a great thing.

Bolo vs Wak. Bolo via arm hit during retraction.

Dagger vs Tanto. Armlock with hook.

Knife vs Tanto Sniping hit during retraction.

Did I win because my system was better? Yes although....

The thing is that my system was better because in my school we bout with steel using realistic techniques and plenty of armour.

In the Booj, they don't spar.

Conclusion. It isn't the techniques that win the battle, it is mindset and experience. If you don't pressure test everything you learn, then you haven't really learned it and cannot possibly decide whether or not to use a given technique or not in a fight.
Cheers
Stu.
 
Thank you all for posting to this thread. I realize I am really questioning if the study of the espada in Arnis is a good choice for an all around sword. I see that it is more of a matter of how good the school is and how well I can do. I also see it is a matter of knowing something well and a little about everything else. Also the need for sparring makes prefect sense.
 
Also along the lines of sparring is slow fighting, or slow sparring. This allows you and your sparring partner to notice a number of things, and is a great observation and learning tool:

1. Can spot balance or technique problems.
2. Can see 'telegraphed' attacks.
3. Can observe weight and stance shifts, and how they relate to attack/defence.
4. Can see openings in guards, yours & opponents.
5. Good training for determining counter attacks, voids, wards, guards.

Try it sometime, give it a chance. Then, when you pour on the speed in regular sparring, you will note a marked improvemnt in technique.

Since everyone today is in such a damn hurry, many are resistant to 'slow' anything. Speed comes naturally after you learn an efficient technique.
Think about how fast or efficiently you are able to walk. When you were 2, you had to go slow, perhaps mum and dad worked with you on the 'slow' techniques of walking (left foot forward....right foot now....and left and again....and right...good!). Then, you grew with the technique, got better, better balance, and --voila! You could eventually run, which is STILL BASED ON THOSE SLOW, TENTATIVE STEPS those long years ago.

Keith
 
I think Ken Cook has got it. Know thy ememy, know thy self. If you are a world class fencer and you hand some guy off the street a Katana and say let's get it on, your gonna hand him his ass. But say any of us ran up against the top japanese swordsman in the word with a rapier we'd be toast. It is a matter of knowing your weapon and what it is capable of. Practice practice practice. Always train to use your art in the hopes that you never will right? I am all about some Bushido. And I admire the fencers for their grace and speed. Rapiers are very fast deadly weapons. But Katanas are very beefy weapon which pack an all around frightening punch in every aspect.
 
sword play evolution in the west and the east was very different. i'm filipino, by the way. weapons development in the west was much faster after the first millenium. new and better weapons keep showing up so old weapons had to be improved if they were to stay. with projectile weapons and long weapons becoming the new king of the battlefield, the usefullness of swordplay began to be questioned. since it was still agreed that a sword was a handy weapon if the others failed, they went into it fundamentally. the thrust was more effective than the cut. alright, a pure thrusting weapon then. not too heavy. ok, make it slim and long as possible. a two-handed stance makes you stand squarely against your opponent, increasing your risk and possibly slowing you down. well then, a side stance using the loooongest weapon you can wield to keep you out of harm's way and still have a window to attack. and thus, the rapier evolved into what is perhaps the most effective sword there is.

in the east, cultural cul-de-sacs tended to nurture a weapons system barely changed for centuries. the japanese sword is simply a development over the two-handed broadsword of old. the filipino blade techniques developed as a combination of greco-roman-ottoman influence (read: muslim) with short swords and spanish fencing. weapons were utilitarian to mask the art form the occupying forces (and for economics, real swords are expensive).

where am i getting to? well, fighting is largely situational. i say a well-rounded training program would be nice if you want to be a lethal bladesman. train in FMA, kendo, the rapier and saber, and maybe try the staff, spear and whip for good measure.
 
Hi Hank,

Good post. I must strongly disagree with your statement about rapiers though, they are not the be all and end all of swords by any stretch. They came to be favoured in England over the sword due to things Italian being in fashion and the fact that against somebody who doesn't know what to do they are deadly.

This is a hot topic for me at the moment because we have been playing Rapier vs Sword at training recently. To begin with, I "killed" the swordsman over and over again. It is worth mentioning that I am a scholar (first rank) and he is a provost (teaching rank). Anyway after our fist evening's encounter, he went away and re-read Silver. Silver advises to fight at the edge of wide distance and to make your space narrow. So, you keep enough distance that he must put a long lunge in to attack you and engage blades in a shallow fashion. Due to the superior leverage offered by the shorter weapon, this allows the swordsman to control the cectreline. From there the swordsman can quite easily pass the point. If the rapier man attacks, his weapon is easily dealt with.

The Katana sword shares some similarities with the longsword but far more differences IMHO. Hard parrying with a longsword will nick it but not do all that much damage. Hard parrying with a Kat will severely damage it. A longsword is a relatively blunt (except perhaps for the last few inches so the weapon can make sort push and pull cuts) cutting weapon with a good thrusting tip. A longsword is long enough to close fencing lines but often too long to uncross in distance.
A Katana is a very short slicing sword that relies less on impact and more on the draw for cutting. It is very difficult to beat or bind a curved sword which in addition to it's relative fragility means that there is little blade engagement in the style. The Kat most certainly can thrust and from difficult angles too but it isn't as good at thrusting as a longsword.
Katana and longsword have only the fact that they are both two handed weapons in common. They are different lengths, have differing durability, different curvature and different edges which all adds up to a completely different system of employment.

Cheers
Stu.
 
hi, Stu! i agree you that a long weapon has a built-in weakness to it but i still think range and speed rule in joint-kingship with regard to blades. an arnis grand master is notorious for throwing challenges, using live blades, not just at fellow-FMA practitioners but also at kendo and fencing stylists. he still admits it's hard to go against a trained rapier and he says he can face one only because of cross-training with that particular weapon. this is a slight admission that FMA may not be able to deal with rapiers.
 
To deal with rapiers, I'd use a spear! Heehee! Really tho, I'd feel comfortable against rapier if I had a longsword and shield, or any weapon and shield combo. even sword and buckler.

Shields really shut down certain attacks, and the thrust is certainly one of them. with a shield, you can deflect, even pin the attack by rushing in.
Also, you know that the rapier is pretty much limited to an in-line thrust, and you can use footwork to keep moving off-line with the rapier fighter. Rapier fighting or fencing tends to be linear (back and forward in a straight line). Knowing this, you can use positioning to your advantage.

Rapier centered on the thrust philosophy that states the thrust is the shortest line between two points. A slash travels in an arc between two points, covering more distance, taking more time to reach the target. Cut and thrust swords try to strike a medium between these two attack types.

"two-handed stance makes you stand squarely against your opponent"--Gotta disagree here, on this one. You can open or close your stance to your liking to increase or decrease your profile, much like crouching and sitting lower on your balance center can reduce target area. Good spear fighters close their stance at least as much as a fencer would. just a good practice to reduce target areas.

Keith
 
Hi All,

There seems to be a little problem of definition here as to what a rapier is.

1. Cut. I have seen a cut with a blunt rapier using a pulled blow on an exposed head when someone slipped and exposed the back of their head in training. Needed stitches. Imagine what a sharp one swung full force could do.
2. Linearity. A rapier is not wielded like a fencing foil. A double time defence involving a parry riposte is not sound with this weapon which is played at in the round. Traversing to the side against attack is very important as is counterthrusting against incoming attacks and defence with the off hand or with a dagger. As a result, rapier is definitely not played from a side stance. The body is turned forwards so that the dagger or off hand can parry thrusts.
3. Speed. It is important to remember that a true rapier is heavier than a shortsword, even a basket hilted one so attacks are fast only given the speed and no telegraphic nature of the lunge which has little to do with the weapon.
4. The weapon that is used in a back and forth fashion employing the parry riposte is called a smallsword and is a very different beast.

My FMA instructor is a former modern fencer and has no problem with the thrusting attacks I employ against him using rapier techniques. A spear and shield I think would be a great option against a rapier. A sword and shield would be better.
Cheers
Stu.
 
I must admit I needed stu's refinements of what a rapier can/cannot do. Still, I stand by my basic beliefs :)

Regarding the shield, one true military genius who lived in modern times, king shaka of the zulu, perfected the concept of shield-thrust fighting for open warfare. With a shield, you don't have to rely on straight-line movements. You can use the shield to perform a tangential/oblique attack. However, the underlying purpose is still to open a window for the straigth thrust. And shaka preferred a rapier-like spear (just 3 feet) to a full-length asegai.
 
got these from HACA (now ARMA). there IS a difference:

renaissance short sword (isn't it really just a rapier whose overall length shouldn't exceed navel height???):

svlng.jpg


and the rapier:

haca9.jpg


any comments, stuart?
 
Err,

Yeah Hank. Both of these are rapier pictures although the wards and hand positions look like no manual I have ever seen.

These pictures quite honestly are good examples of what not to do.

In the first pic, the guy on the left has lunged from well out of distance. His footwork is a whole lot better than the guy on the right but he is leaning forward and hasn't grounded his rear heel properly. This is going to make his recovery very difficult. The guy on the right has thrown his bodyweight forward without lowering his centre of gravity by bending his front knee. This is going to make his lunge recovery very difficult. Unless he was going to counterthrustin opposition, I can't see why the guy on the right would choose to block the blow with his sword rather than the dagger.
Strange.

In the second pic, the guy on the right looks to have lunged without closing a fencing line or moving off the line via a slope pace. To lunge straight in at single rapier without dealing with the other guy's sword is to invite a double kill. Again, some grounded heels and a little less extension on the attacks would have kept both fighter's safer.
Cheers
Stu.
 
thanks for the critique, stu. and to think i was considering joining ARMA! well, while in the philippines, i might as well start with sports fencing since that's what we have here. i'll give my swashbuckling fantasies a rest for now :)
 
Hi Hank,

Where are you located? There are more people doing this stuff than you might think.

Joining the fencing school and learning enough to have a go at manuals on your own is not a bad way to go, this is what most of us downunder have done btw. Having a modern or classical fencing background is a useful thing to have when looking at period manuals.
Cheers
Stu.
 
hey stu!

filipino living in manila. there are at least 2 fencing clubs here. the older one used to practice in the old spanish fort of intramuros: rather idyllic, practicing atop old battlements. but then they transfered to an airconditioned shopping mall farther uptown. another's in a defunct university built during the time of the dictator. i don't know of any traditional european weapons fighting system here. i might be assigned to the US for a couple of months, though.

the FMA clubs here are too varied and their training regimens don't exactly encourage longevity (drills up close with live blades and rattan sparring while wearing only hockey gloves and head masks).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top