-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
What are the best swords?
- Thread starter Heimdall
- Start date
Heimdall, welcome to BladeForums.
May I suggest that your question is a bit too broad for a reasonable answer. Could you give us some more information as to what you intend to do with the sword? If you wish to have a pretty wall hanger, then you might want some of the elaborate swept hilt rapiers, but if you like the Japanese style of sword work, then a katana or similar sword would be your cup of tea (pun intended) and you should talk to folks who know about them as they are a whole science unto themselves.
The gladius was the sidearm of the Roman Legions for about 800 years and it was one of the most deadly weapons ever developed, but it was intended for use at very close quarters, in conjunction with the large shield of the Legions, the scutum, and it was primarily a stabbing weapon, despite Hollywood's representations where you see it used as a chopper. It came in two basic forms, the Mainz style, so called after a large number of them found at the site of a Roman fort and ferry across the Rhine River at Mainz, Germany, and the Pompeii style, so called after examples found in the ruins of that city. THe Mainz style is, to me, one of the most beautiful, if deadly, swords ever made. It has an 18"-22" wasp waisted blade that then tapers gently to a very sharp point designed to penetrate mail. The Pompeii style has a 2" wide blade with parallel sides nearly to the point, which is quite angular. As you can tell, I like the Romans. Try these sites: http://members.aol.com/gijchar/main.htm http://www.hr-replikate.de/
They will give you an idea of what the swords look like.
Other swords are equally tied to specific types of uses and cultures, so you can see that any advice that you seek would need more information from you as to what you seek.
------------------
Walk in the Light,
Hugh Fuller
May I suggest that your question is a bit too broad for a reasonable answer. Could you give us some more information as to what you intend to do with the sword? If you wish to have a pretty wall hanger, then you might want some of the elaborate swept hilt rapiers, but if you like the Japanese style of sword work, then a katana or similar sword would be your cup of tea (pun intended) and you should talk to folks who know about them as they are a whole science unto themselves.
The gladius was the sidearm of the Roman Legions for about 800 years and it was one of the most deadly weapons ever developed, but it was intended for use at very close quarters, in conjunction with the large shield of the Legions, the scutum, and it was primarily a stabbing weapon, despite Hollywood's representations where you see it used as a chopper. It came in two basic forms, the Mainz style, so called after a large number of them found at the site of a Roman fort and ferry across the Rhine River at Mainz, Germany, and the Pompeii style, so called after examples found in the ruins of that city. THe Mainz style is, to me, one of the most beautiful, if deadly, swords ever made. It has an 18"-22" wasp waisted blade that then tapers gently to a very sharp point designed to penetrate mail. The Pompeii style has a 2" wide blade with parallel sides nearly to the point, which is quite angular. As you can tell, I like the Romans. Try these sites: http://members.aol.com/gijchar/main.htm http://www.hr-replikate.de/
They will give you an idea of what the swords look like.
Other swords are equally tied to specific types of uses and cultures, so you can see that any advice that you seek would need more information from you as to what you seek.
------------------
Walk in the Light,
Hugh Fuller
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2000
- Messages
- 941
FullerH:
I agree pretty much fully with that. There's no perfect sword...only a perfect sword for the individual. What that relies upon is personal taste, fighting style, and intentions.
For example...if you want to chop...perhaps a European sword like a falchion would do you good, and you should stay away from Japanese style swords. If your style would be focused in close quarters with prominent thrusting, probably a short sword would be a better idea than a cuphilt rapier.
One thing about swords is that they're not made for ultra-versatility (unlike diapers and skis). They're designed for a purpose and generally they suit that purpose extremely well.
Let us know what you're looking to do with it and what styles appeal to you.
Shinryû.
I agree pretty much fully with that. There's no perfect sword...only a perfect sword for the individual. What that relies upon is personal taste, fighting style, and intentions.
For example...if you want to chop...perhaps a European sword like a falchion would do you good, and you should stay away from Japanese style swords. If your style would be focused in close quarters with prominent thrusting, probably a short sword would be a better idea than a cuphilt rapier.
One thing about swords is that they're not made for ultra-versatility (unlike diapers and skis). They're designed for a purpose and generally they suit that purpose extremely well.
Let us know what you're looking to do with it and what styles appeal to you.
Shinryû.
- Joined
- May 2, 1999
- Messages
- 1,206
My vote goes for the Medieval European longsword. While "best" is a nebulous term under any circumstances, this particular weapon is probably the most versatile.
Comparing its attributes to those of the katana, a perrenial favorite of so many;
The straight and double-edged blade of the longsword makes agressive sheering cuts and opens up the the possibility of false-edge attacks, as well as being a competent thruster.
The katana's single-edged and curved blade can only make true-edged attacks, is most proficient at drawcuts(uneffective against serious armour) due to its thick spine, and the curvature brings the asymetrical point out of line with the handle, giving it an inferior thrusting profile.
The wide arms of the hilt of a longsword provide an infinitely superior defense for the hand and wrist than the diminutive tsuba of a katana, and also allow for the trapping and binding of your opponent's blade, a gambit which the disk-like shape and small size of the katana's gaurd prevents.
The homogenous steel construction and true tempering of the longsword is a product of a more advanced metalurgy than the laminated and differentialy hardened blade of the katana. Katanas continue to be made with a metalurgical process that was obsolete by the end of the Dark Ages in Europe. However, in this case some allowances may be made, due to the inferiority and scarcity of Japanese ores.(one of the factors leading to their decision to invade China earlier in this century)
At two or three pounds, they're both light enough to be used single-handed, but the grips are long enough to accomedate two. The large pommel of the longsword aids in keeping the hand from sliding off the handle, and may also be used for striking. There is no such provision on the katana.
There is no other sword that offers the same degree of flexibility in offence and defence as the Medieval European longsword.
If I seem a bit hard on the old kat, it is only because there are too many who treat them with a veneration which is beyond reasonable. It's unwise to confuse complex and/or intensive craftsmanship with sophistication.
The Japanese swordsmith puts a lot into his product, and deserves credit where credit is due, but it is best to be honest about the weapon's true capabilities, as dictated by its design and method of construction, rather than its imagined omnipotence, as depicted by chop-socky flicks.
Comparing its attributes to those of the katana, a perrenial favorite of so many;
The straight and double-edged blade of the longsword makes agressive sheering cuts and opens up the the possibility of false-edge attacks, as well as being a competent thruster.
The katana's single-edged and curved blade can only make true-edged attacks, is most proficient at drawcuts(uneffective against serious armour) due to its thick spine, and the curvature brings the asymetrical point out of line with the handle, giving it an inferior thrusting profile.
The wide arms of the hilt of a longsword provide an infinitely superior defense for the hand and wrist than the diminutive tsuba of a katana, and also allow for the trapping and binding of your opponent's blade, a gambit which the disk-like shape and small size of the katana's gaurd prevents.
The homogenous steel construction and true tempering of the longsword is a product of a more advanced metalurgy than the laminated and differentialy hardened blade of the katana. Katanas continue to be made with a metalurgical process that was obsolete by the end of the Dark Ages in Europe. However, in this case some allowances may be made, due to the inferiority and scarcity of Japanese ores.(one of the factors leading to their decision to invade China earlier in this century)
At two or three pounds, they're both light enough to be used single-handed, but the grips are long enough to accomedate two. The large pommel of the longsword aids in keeping the hand from sliding off the handle, and may also be used for striking. There is no such provision on the katana.
There is no other sword that offers the same degree of flexibility in offence and defence as the Medieval European longsword.
If I seem a bit hard on the old kat, it is only because there are too many who treat them with a veneration which is beyond reasonable. It's unwise to confuse complex and/or intensive craftsmanship with sophistication.
The Japanese swordsmith puts a lot into his product, and deserves credit where credit is due, but it is best to be honest about the weapon's true capabilities, as dictated by its design and method of construction, rather than its imagined omnipotence, as depicted by chop-socky flicks.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2000
- Messages
- 941
You know, frankly I get sick of people trying to shoot down the katana in an attempt to make it seem realistic. See, people know that the katana isn't a magical omnipotent weapon. It was designed for a specific task and is EXTREMELY evolved and capable in that task. HOWEVER, people DO know that it is NOT a super-weapon. Those who do not need lessons in practical physics or the ability to have a lot of fun screwing up Chen swords (I know I'd have fun watching that).
People don't need to dwarf the katana to beef up the style they like either. I sometimes have to wonder if people get a kick out of it, like it's retribution for someone saying "sam-you-rye swords are the best!" in an SCA group.
Also, techniques are very different, styles are very different, the situations in which they were used were very different. We're talking serious apples to grapefruit comparison.
Plus, the process is not very good, but the people who are very very successful and capable with the processes can make VERY great swords, just as people using different techniques can make VERY great swords with theirs.
I'm just sick of this delusion that everyone loves the katana and thinks it's the best. The vast majority of folks I know are not serious Nihonto addicts, rather they like Medieval Europe, Middle-Eastern, Scandinavian, and stuff from the Philippines among others. Anyone who has a serious enough interest in swords SHOULD know by now at least SOME of the limitations and benefits of the more popular swords out there.
Shinryû.
[This message has been edited by Robert Marotz (edited 12-01-2000).]
People don't need to dwarf the katana to beef up the style they like either. I sometimes have to wonder if people get a kick out of it, like it's retribution for someone saying "sam-you-rye swords are the best!" in an SCA group.
Also, techniques are very different, styles are very different, the situations in which they were used were very different. We're talking serious apples to grapefruit comparison.
Plus, the process is not very good, but the people who are very very successful and capable with the processes can make VERY great swords, just as people using different techniques can make VERY great swords with theirs.
I'm just sick of this delusion that everyone loves the katana and thinks it's the best. The vast majority of folks I know are not serious Nihonto addicts, rather they like Medieval Europe, Middle-Eastern, Scandinavian, and stuff from the Philippines among others. Anyone who has a serious enough interest in swords SHOULD know by now at least SOME of the limitations and benefits of the more popular swords out there.
Shinryû.
[This message has been edited by Robert Marotz (edited 12-01-2000).]
Brian Jones
Moderator
- Joined
- Jan 17, 1999
- Messages
- 7,560
Snick, no offense, and with all due respect, but your post displays your complete lack of knowledge of the katana and techniques surrounding it. It's late and I'm tired, but I'll get into more detail tomorrow so maybe you can learn something instead of pontficating about things based on your personal theory and conjecture.
Peace,
Brian.
[This message has been edited by Brian Jones (edited 12-01-2000).]
Peace,
Brian.
[This message has been edited by Brian Jones (edited 12-01-2000).]
Each type of sword evolved in its own historical context, which is why I suggested to Heimdall that he would do well to discuss the katana and its ilk with those who knew Japanese sword science. I would also heartily recommend the same of any other sword style. I gave a small hint of this in my short discourse on the gladius hispaniensis, but believe me when I say that I only touched the surface of that discussion. There have been volumes written, in small pieces here and there, on the history, construction, design, use, and tactics of the gladius. The same could also be said for almost any other style of sword. Hell, I have seen huge volumes on the use of the rapier, alone.
So, what I am trying to say is this: YOU CANNOT COMPARE THESE SWORDS TO ONE ANOTHER OUTSIDE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE HISTORICAL CONTEXTS. As friend Marotz put it, it is a serious apples to grapefruit situation. To com,pare them, you really need to compare the whole cultures and their histories which is clearly impossible. If you have a specific use in mind, then you may easily compare them for THAT specific use and how you will use them, but that is a most subjective judgement.
------------------
Walk in the Light,
Hugh Fuller
So, what I am trying to say is this: YOU CANNOT COMPARE THESE SWORDS TO ONE ANOTHER OUTSIDE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE HISTORICAL CONTEXTS. As friend Marotz put it, it is a serious apples to grapefruit situation. To com,pare them, you really need to compare the whole cultures and their histories which is clearly impossible. If you have a specific use in mind, then you may easily compare them for THAT specific use and how you will use them, but that is a most subjective judgement.
------------------
Walk in the Light,
Hugh Fuller
- Joined
- Feb 19, 1999
- Messages
- 2,959
I'm not touching the concept of which is "best" but my FAVORITE is always going to be the Rapier.
The elegance and subtlety of the clean thrust is a thing of beauty that can never be matched by any other sword.
Yeah, I like my Katana too, and am pretty good with it, but I'll always love the Rapier best.
BTW, I'm totally convinced that the answer to the "Rapier and gauche v. Katana" question has only one answer.
KATANA!
Doesn't matter though, I'm fortunate enough to live in a time when my choice of sword doesn't affect my longevity. (My .45 acp does that.)
So having the luxury of being able to choose the one I LIKE best, instead of which is most effective,
I love my rapiers.
------------------
I cut it, and I cut it, and it's STILL too short!
The elegance and subtlety of the clean thrust is a thing of beauty that can never be matched by any other sword.
Yeah, I like my Katana too, and am pretty good with it, but I'll always love the Rapier best.
BTW, I'm totally convinced that the answer to the "Rapier and gauche v. Katana" question has only one answer.
KATANA!
Doesn't matter though, I'm fortunate enough to live in a time when my choice of sword doesn't affect my longevity. (My .45 acp does that.)
So having the luxury of being able to choose the one I LIKE best, instead of which is most effective,
I love my rapiers.
------------------
I cut it, and I cut it, and it's STILL too short!
- Joined
- May 2, 1999
- Messages
- 1,206
I specificaly stated my reason for supporting the Medieval European longsword, tactical flexibility. Its physical form and construction makes it an extremely versatile weapon. In its own right, regardless of the style of swordsmanship traditionaly associated with it.
There's no favoritism involved, as a point of fact my personal weapon of choice would be a saber or an espada ancha. Less versatile weapons, but they have other characteristics that appeal to me.
Chief among those characteristics would be the "D" gaurd, a great selling point if you fight primarily from a hanging gaurd, as I do; suitability for both the cut and thrust, and the compact over-all dimensions. I also feel that the nature of these later blades more closely mirrors my own personality.
Perhaps the vast majority of people known by any one particular forum member prefer other swords to the katana, but the immense popularity of the kat is well established. In fact, on a grand scale, I would be perfectly comfortable wagering all I own on the notion that it is presently the most popular sword in the world.
It's rather odd that there are assertions that swords cannot be compared outside their historical and cultural contexts. While it's certainly true that any given sword may have been wholey adequate in its native land and time, you can still quite easily compare quantitative features such as blade geometery and handle configurations, between two swords that are hundreds of years, and miles, apart.
As far as that goes, these were once weapons used by people to defend themselves against invasion or to repel invaders. In their historical context, they would be brought against weapons of another culture in battle.
I would be perfectly open to being educated on katanas, but the accusation seems to primarily be that I don't know how to use a katana. True enough, I've never been particularly intrested in Asian martial arts. However, I am highly doubtful that there are any secret fighting skills to physicaly alter the specifications of the weapon.
I never said this weapon will beat out that weapon, or this art is better than that. I only assert that one weapon, by nature of its design and physical configuration, is more versatile.
There's no apples, oranges, grapefruit, or potatos, or even carrots for that matter, about it. Any two items or philosophies may be compared and contrasted, and preferences drawn from the results.
There's no favoritism involved, as a point of fact my personal weapon of choice would be a saber or an espada ancha. Less versatile weapons, but they have other characteristics that appeal to me.
Chief among those characteristics would be the "D" gaurd, a great selling point if you fight primarily from a hanging gaurd, as I do; suitability for both the cut and thrust, and the compact over-all dimensions. I also feel that the nature of these later blades more closely mirrors my own personality.
Perhaps the vast majority of people known by any one particular forum member prefer other swords to the katana, but the immense popularity of the kat is well established. In fact, on a grand scale, I would be perfectly comfortable wagering all I own on the notion that it is presently the most popular sword in the world.
It's rather odd that there are assertions that swords cannot be compared outside their historical and cultural contexts. While it's certainly true that any given sword may have been wholey adequate in its native land and time, you can still quite easily compare quantitative features such as blade geometery and handle configurations, between two swords that are hundreds of years, and miles, apart.
As far as that goes, these were once weapons used by people to defend themselves against invasion or to repel invaders. In their historical context, they would be brought against weapons of another culture in battle.
I would be perfectly open to being educated on katanas, but the accusation seems to primarily be that I don't know how to use a katana. True enough, I've never been particularly intrested in Asian martial arts. However, I am highly doubtful that there are any secret fighting skills to physicaly alter the specifications of the weapon.
I never said this weapon will beat out that weapon, or this art is better than that. I only assert that one weapon, by nature of its design and physical configuration, is more versatile.
There's no apples, oranges, grapefruit, or potatos, or even carrots for that matter, about it. Any two items or philosophies may be compared and contrasted, and preferences drawn from the results.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2000
- Messages
- 941
Mr. Cook:
Glad you like a weapon regardless of how others see its effectiveness. I think a duelling warrior of high proficiency of the rapier would stand a good chance against a good Japanese swordsman. However, that's just my opinion...the better warrior wins, not the weapon.
Snickersnee:
Again, I disagree with you. While the katana is one of the most popular, most people cannot even pronounce it correctly, and most people would probably mistake it for many other types of swords. The name is much more popular than the sword itself. Also, as far as swords go, there ARE serious differences in use and technique and design and scenarios in which the respective weapons were used. I do not try to draw parallels, and most other relatively informed people also avoid trying to draw parallels because they simply do not exist. They are both swords, and utensils of war. They both have handles and blades, and have edge(s). That is where the similarities end.
To expound slightly, I'll take 2 examples you used in a previous post by you. First, the tsuba (guard) on Japanese sword is not intended to defend you against an opponent's blade. That's not what it's there for. Next, the lack of pommel. True, a kat has no pommel in the same context as a Euro sword, however...a Japanese sword has a "pommel" in terms of what we call a kashira. This comes in varying shapes, sizes, and materials. The grip on the Japanese sword, combined with the way it is used do not display any problems with maintaining a secure hold on the sword. Then, in addition, it CAN be used in an offensive manner. If crowded while drawing, one can grasp the tsuka (handle) and saya (scabbard) and thrust the whole sword forward through the obi (belt) to strike the kashira into the opponent, then retracting the sheath and pushing the blade out to continue the draw. The style of combat in which it is used does not see much or any other type of situation in which striking with the kashira would be even viable.
I'm not trying to insult you or anything, not my intention. I'm just saying that there are vast differences between the two, and it's an injustice to try to compare them directly. If you want to compare them in a subjective manner, by all means feel free. But that's only formulating what you LIKE more based on your own opinions.
Shinryû.
Addendum...
I think this post has strayed a little from what Heimdall was seeking. We'd like his/her input on what qualities he/she desires in a sword, what they wish to use it for, et cetera. Most swords have accompanying sword arts that should be trained in. If you want a most versatile weapon...Truck-Fu and Hand-Gun-Do are pretty good arts to learn. Check with the HACA, look around for schools in FMA, JSA, and whatever other styles appeal to you. Find what you like, the philosophies you find yourself most akin to...all of that happy squishy stuff, and then take it from there. We can help, but we need input on what ya are looking for.
Unless...Heimdall was just trying to spark some flames *hmmmmm* ahh well!
Anyone for Orange Juice?
[This message has been edited by Robert Marotz (edited 12-02-2000).]
Glad you like a weapon regardless of how others see its effectiveness. I think a duelling warrior of high proficiency of the rapier would stand a good chance against a good Japanese swordsman. However, that's just my opinion...the better warrior wins, not the weapon.
Snickersnee:
Again, I disagree with you. While the katana is one of the most popular, most people cannot even pronounce it correctly, and most people would probably mistake it for many other types of swords. The name is much more popular than the sword itself. Also, as far as swords go, there ARE serious differences in use and technique and design and scenarios in which the respective weapons were used. I do not try to draw parallels, and most other relatively informed people also avoid trying to draw parallels because they simply do not exist. They are both swords, and utensils of war. They both have handles and blades, and have edge(s). That is where the similarities end.
To expound slightly, I'll take 2 examples you used in a previous post by you. First, the tsuba (guard) on Japanese sword is not intended to defend you against an opponent's blade. That's not what it's there for. Next, the lack of pommel. True, a kat has no pommel in the same context as a Euro sword, however...a Japanese sword has a "pommel" in terms of what we call a kashira. This comes in varying shapes, sizes, and materials. The grip on the Japanese sword, combined with the way it is used do not display any problems with maintaining a secure hold on the sword. Then, in addition, it CAN be used in an offensive manner. If crowded while drawing, one can grasp the tsuka (handle) and saya (scabbard) and thrust the whole sword forward through the obi (belt) to strike the kashira into the opponent, then retracting the sheath and pushing the blade out to continue the draw. The style of combat in which it is used does not see much or any other type of situation in which striking with the kashira would be even viable.
I'm not trying to insult you or anything, not my intention. I'm just saying that there are vast differences between the two, and it's an injustice to try to compare them directly. If you want to compare them in a subjective manner, by all means feel free. But that's only formulating what you LIKE more based on your own opinions.
Shinryû.
Addendum...
I think this post has strayed a little from what Heimdall was seeking. We'd like his/her input on what qualities he/she desires in a sword, what they wish to use it for, et cetera. Most swords have accompanying sword arts that should be trained in. If you want a most versatile weapon...Truck-Fu and Hand-Gun-Do are pretty good arts to learn. Check with the HACA, look around for schools in FMA, JSA, and whatever other styles appeal to you. Find what you like, the philosophies you find yourself most akin to...all of that happy squishy stuff, and then take it from there. We can help, but we need input on what ya are looking for.
Unless...Heimdall was just trying to spark some flames *hmmmmm* ahh well!
Anyone for Orange Juice?
[This message has been edited by Robert Marotz (edited 12-02-2000).]
- Joined
- May 2, 1999
- Messages
- 1,206
I'm not sure of the proper Japanese pronounciation of "katana", maybe I say it correctly, maybe I don't, I still know one when I see one. It remains a readily recognizable martial arts icon, even when wielded by 15th century Scottish immortals.
Well, perhaps it can be confused with other popular Japanese swords, like the tachi or wakazashi.
It's pretty much impossible for me to come up with a scientific survey, but the katana is as far from "obscure" or "underground" as it gets - even in Europe, the native land of its chief competitors in terms of popularity.
You stated that the tsuba is not intended to defend against an opponent's blade. I don't see how that refutes my point at all, in fact, it seems to strengthen it. As I said, the form of the tsuba does not allow for the same range of of application as the hilt of a longsword.
Your argument seems to be that it doesn't matter, since trapping and offering a strong defense are not the intended purpose of the tsuba. That's true, and the katana may be superbly adapted for a particular aplication, but being that I've been talking about tactical flexibility this whole time, it only reaffirms my point.
As far as the wrapped handle of the katana providing sufficient purchase for the hands to hold their grip on the handle, that's true. Wire or cord wrapping and textured surfaces fufill the same function on a longsword. The pommel provides a degree of security above and beyond such measures.
I suppose it would be unfair to compare the kashira to the spiked pommels found on some Medieval tounrey weapons, such as those depicted in Talhoffer, since they weren't common battlefield fare.
The poster who started this thread asked which the best sword is. The second sentence I wrote was the same "I'm okay, you're okay" disclaimer that everyone else wrote, about how it's difficult, perhaps impossible, to say which sword is universaly best. Again, I specified the criteria I personaly would chose to take the place of "best", for me it's tactical flexibility, and then I attempted to illustrate how specific traits are manifest in the weapon I chose, and not really present in another very popular sword.
Somehow I think I'd be catching a lot less static if I chose a less popular sword, like a pata.
Nonetheless, I do not take insult at anyone's comments, corrections, input, or observations. Likewise, it's not my intention to goad or needle anyone else.
I figured that someone else would venture forth into the uncertain and offer what specific characteristics they look for in a sword, and which sword they feel best embodies those same specified traits, and then we could discuss a myriad of weapons and see what sort of things matter to different people, and way.
Instead it looks like we're stuck in the "there is no best sword" routine, which is great for not upsetting anyone or stepping on any toes, but it's a circular argument and makes for less intresting reading.
As an alternative to circular argument, I would be much more intrested in what specific traits are particularly important to other forum memembers, and which weapon they feels best embodies those characteristics.
Well, perhaps it can be confused with other popular Japanese swords, like the tachi or wakazashi.
It's pretty much impossible for me to come up with a scientific survey, but the katana is as far from "obscure" or "underground" as it gets - even in Europe, the native land of its chief competitors in terms of popularity.
You stated that the tsuba is not intended to defend against an opponent's blade. I don't see how that refutes my point at all, in fact, it seems to strengthen it. As I said, the form of the tsuba does not allow for the same range of of application as the hilt of a longsword.
Your argument seems to be that it doesn't matter, since trapping and offering a strong defense are not the intended purpose of the tsuba. That's true, and the katana may be superbly adapted for a particular aplication, but being that I've been talking about tactical flexibility this whole time, it only reaffirms my point.
As far as the wrapped handle of the katana providing sufficient purchase for the hands to hold their grip on the handle, that's true. Wire or cord wrapping and textured surfaces fufill the same function on a longsword. The pommel provides a degree of security above and beyond such measures.
I suppose it would be unfair to compare the kashira to the spiked pommels found on some Medieval tounrey weapons, such as those depicted in Talhoffer, since they weren't common battlefield fare.
The poster who started this thread asked which the best sword is. The second sentence I wrote was the same "I'm okay, you're okay" disclaimer that everyone else wrote, about how it's difficult, perhaps impossible, to say which sword is universaly best. Again, I specified the criteria I personaly would chose to take the place of "best", for me it's tactical flexibility, and then I attempted to illustrate how specific traits are manifest in the weapon I chose, and not really present in another very popular sword.
Somehow I think I'd be catching a lot less static if I chose a less popular sword, like a pata.
Nonetheless, I do not take insult at anyone's comments, corrections, input, or observations. Likewise, it's not my intention to goad or needle anyone else.
I figured that someone else would venture forth into the uncertain and offer what specific characteristics they look for in a sword, and which sword they feel best embodies those same specified traits, and then we could discuss a myriad of weapons and see what sort of things matter to different people, and way.
Instead it looks like we're stuck in the "there is no best sword" routine, which is great for not upsetting anyone or stepping on any toes, but it's a circular argument and makes for less intresting reading.
As an alternative to circular argument, I would be much more intrested in what specific traits are particularly important to other forum memembers, and which weapon they feels best embodies those characteristics.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2000
- Messages
- 941
Actually I'm not strengthening any of your "points" at all...
If you hand a guy with no experience in swords a kat and a longsword, it's a much different scenario than handing a trained swordsman one weapon or the other. It is the style in which they are used that matters, it is not the physical characteristics of the swords themselves. The problem is people are looking at swords as weapons alone, they neglect all the training and orthodox that comes with the respective styles. And that training is what matters. Many people nowadays are saying "well I just use whatever will suit my needs" and I'm trying to figure out "WHAT THE HELL ARE YOUR NEEDS?!" As swords are no longer the weapons of war and status they used to be, they're not really intended to suit any REAL needs nowadays. In fact, a fair portion of folks will scoff at people who have a keen interest in swords because the media has downgraded the value of such weapons dramatically in the same way they glorified them for so long...so their value as status symbols is very very variable depending on who you talk to.
If your intentions are something that would be used in the context of a particular style of swordsmanship, get a sword that would suit that need. If you just want to "wing it" and go on your own, get a damn machete, and sharpen the back edge if you want to.
You are likely not going to accomplish squat with a katana if you don't know how to use it. You will likely have a bit more luck with a longsword at first. But, when the swordsman reaches a high level of proficiency, both weapons are at their peak and in my opinion, are about equal. The reason is that the swordsman makes the weapon good...not the other way around.
In a tactical standpoint, such as larger-scale war, I think the longsword has an advantage because it can be used with a half-ass level of proficiency by basically untrained men. So in a way I have to agree with you. Baskethilts are another good versatile sword. With these points I can agree and fully understand. However, the key to the success and true ability of a sword will be the swordsman.
Sorry for the rant...
Shinryû.
Sorry, in addition:
I like swords that are made of steel, iron, or bronze...with cutting edges, handles, and good balance!
In general, I like light, fast swords that can be used for cutting as well as thrusting...Angus Trim 15th Century Riding Sword appeals to me a lot, and I'd like to get it someday soon.
I also like the jian, and I like all sorts of single-edged styles from dao to kat to sabers and backswords.
Favorite for various artistic and personal reasons is the edo-period uchigatana.
[This message has been edited by Robert Marotz (edited 12-02-2000).]
If you hand a guy with no experience in swords a kat and a longsword, it's a much different scenario than handing a trained swordsman one weapon or the other. It is the style in which they are used that matters, it is not the physical characteristics of the swords themselves. The problem is people are looking at swords as weapons alone, they neglect all the training and orthodox that comes with the respective styles. And that training is what matters. Many people nowadays are saying "well I just use whatever will suit my needs" and I'm trying to figure out "WHAT THE HELL ARE YOUR NEEDS?!" As swords are no longer the weapons of war and status they used to be, they're not really intended to suit any REAL needs nowadays. In fact, a fair portion of folks will scoff at people who have a keen interest in swords because the media has downgraded the value of such weapons dramatically in the same way they glorified them for so long...so their value as status symbols is very very variable depending on who you talk to.
If your intentions are something that would be used in the context of a particular style of swordsmanship, get a sword that would suit that need. If you just want to "wing it" and go on your own, get a damn machete, and sharpen the back edge if you want to.
You are likely not going to accomplish squat with a katana if you don't know how to use it. You will likely have a bit more luck with a longsword at first. But, when the swordsman reaches a high level of proficiency, both weapons are at their peak and in my opinion, are about equal. The reason is that the swordsman makes the weapon good...not the other way around.
In a tactical standpoint, such as larger-scale war, I think the longsword has an advantage because it can be used with a half-ass level of proficiency by basically untrained men. So in a way I have to agree with you. Baskethilts are another good versatile sword. With these points I can agree and fully understand. However, the key to the success and true ability of a sword will be the swordsman.
Sorry for the rant...
Shinryû.
Sorry, in addition:
I like swords that are made of steel, iron, or bronze...with cutting edges, handles, and good balance!
In general, I like light, fast swords that can be used for cutting as well as thrusting...Angus Trim 15th Century Riding Sword appeals to me a lot, and I'd like to get it someday soon.
I also like the jian, and I like all sorts of single-edged styles from dao to kat to sabers and backswords.
Favorite for various artistic and personal reasons is the edo-period uchigatana.
[This message has been edited by Robert Marotz (edited 12-02-2000).]
- Joined
- May 2, 1999
- Messages
- 1,206
So you're saying that it's not the weapon, but the way you use it?
There's a certain degree of truth to that, but the part you're missing is that the tool determines what you can do with it.
A Buck 110 is a good knife little pocketknife, but a Leatherman, by virtue of its physical characteristics, is capable of doing a much wider variety of tasks than the 110.
No matter how good a tool-user the owner of the 110 is, there is just no way that he will be able to successfuly use it as a pair of pliers to remove a rusted on bolt(yes, I've thought of and tried that, too, but it breaks a chunk out of the edge). Because of the nature of the Leatherman supertool, it can be successfuly used to remove such a bolt, and can still cut anything the 110 can.
This is why there are hammers, screwdrivers, and saws, and not just drill presses and extremely skilled operators.
Different tools are required for different jobs, and some tools are much more versatile than others, regardless of operator proficiency.
I also find it funny that katanas should be so hard to use for the novice. Of course, we are all well aware of the high degree of skill and lifetime of devotion demanded by Asian martial arts, and therefore only the highly skilled and devoted would ever have a chance at successfuly wielding Asian weaponry.
There's a certain degree of truth to that, but the part you're missing is that the tool determines what you can do with it.
A Buck 110 is a good knife little pocketknife, but a Leatherman, by virtue of its physical characteristics, is capable of doing a much wider variety of tasks than the 110.
No matter how good a tool-user the owner of the 110 is, there is just no way that he will be able to successfuly use it as a pair of pliers to remove a rusted on bolt(yes, I've thought of and tried that, too, but it breaks a chunk out of the edge). Because of the nature of the Leatherman supertool, it can be successfuly used to remove such a bolt, and can still cut anything the 110 can.
This is why there are hammers, screwdrivers, and saws, and not just drill presses and extremely skilled operators.
Different tools are required for different jobs, and some tools are much more versatile than others, regardless of operator proficiency.
I also find it funny that katanas should be so hard to use for the novice. Of course, we are all well aware of the high degree of skill and lifetime of devotion demanded by Asian martial arts, and therefore only the highly skilled and devoted would ever have a chance at successfuly wielding Asian weaponry.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2000
- Messages
- 941
What I'm saying is it's not the weapon in itself, it's the manner in which it is used.
And yes, a Japanese sword is harder to PROPERLY use by a novice than a number of other styles. I also don't appreciate any of your sarcasm, I would expect you to take a higher road than that.
Also, swords are used for one real task, and that task is to be used to kill in war (unless you consider social status to be a task to fulfill). And they had indivdual styles of fighting for all sorts of weapons. If you are unable to comprehend the notion that different swords had different orthodox methods of use, please do not bother replying.
As swords are no longer practical weapons, there are no real modern martial arts being made for the sword to deal with modern situations and vastly different styles. The sword is a weapon of the past, and will remain a weapon of the past. Swords had sword arts to accompany them...proper use and function of the sword were what make a sword work.
You simply are not understanding anything I'm telling you. Perhaps it's my lack of communication skills. Sorry if it is. Maybe someone else can elaborate what I'm saying in a different fashion.
Shinryû.
P.S. and yoda said this in chat "<Yodel> U tell him yoda said to go back to his swamp and kill some gators"
*sipping orange juice*
[This message has been edited by Robert Marotz (edited 12-02-2000).]
And yes, a Japanese sword is harder to PROPERLY use by a novice than a number of other styles. I also don't appreciate any of your sarcasm, I would expect you to take a higher road than that.
Also, swords are used for one real task, and that task is to be used to kill in war (unless you consider social status to be a task to fulfill). And they had indivdual styles of fighting for all sorts of weapons. If you are unable to comprehend the notion that different swords had different orthodox methods of use, please do not bother replying.
As swords are no longer practical weapons, there are no real modern martial arts being made for the sword to deal with modern situations and vastly different styles. The sword is a weapon of the past, and will remain a weapon of the past. Swords had sword arts to accompany them...proper use and function of the sword were what make a sword work.
You simply are not understanding anything I'm telling you. Perhaps it's my lack of communication skills. Sorry if it is. Maybe someone else can elaborate what I'm saying in a different fashion.
Shinryû.
P.S. and yoda said this in chat "<Yodel> U tell him yoda said to go back to his swamp and kill some gators"
*sipping orange juice*
[This message has been edited by Robert Marotz (edited 12-02-2000).]
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2000
- Messages
- 941
hmmm...ya know what?
I think I'll concede this. Al Gore has set an example that I do not want to follow, so I'll back off on this one.
A hammer with a screwdriver attachment does not make it more versatile for pounding nails. For other tasks, yeah a hammer with a screwdriver attachment has more versatility than a regular one. I'm trying to explain swords in terms of how they were used and in what context they were used. However, I failed to realize that the object of the thread originator's question was not aimed at such specifics.
but to answer the question in the blunt way Heimdall (I think that's the originator of this thread) asked it...
The best sword is the one you like most.
Shinryû.
I think I'll concede this. Al Gore has set an example that I do not want to follow, so I'll back off on this one.
A hammer with a screwdriver attachment does not make it more versatile for pounding nails. For other tasks, yeah a hammer with a screwdriver attachment has more versatility than a regular one. I'm trying to explain swords in terms of how they were used and in what context they were used. However, I failed to realize that the object of the thread originator's question was not aimed at such specifics.
but to answer the question in the blunt way Heimdall (I think that's the originator of this thread) asked it...
The best sword is the one you like most.
Shinryû.
I think I have to chime in now. Having been owning a little bit of old swords of various cultures and playing around with my friend's Glen Parrell "hand and a half sword". And having been learning the Japanese swordsmanship (Toyama Ryu) for a few months I understand a little bit about the swords I think.
<The straight and double-edged blade of the longsword makes agressive sheering cuts and opens up the the possibility of false-edge attacks, as well as being a competent thruster.>
-ever tried to use the long sword for cutting? a 37" blade, 2" wide at the base with continuous distal taper still weight close to 3 lbs. I've tried that, back-cutting(false edge attack) is almost impossible because of the weight and the co-ordinations required between the two hands.
<The katana's single-edged and curved blade can only make true-edged attacks, is most proficient at drawcuts(uneffective against serious armour) due to its thick spine, and the curvature brings the asymetrical point out of line with the handle, giving it an inferior thrusting profile>
- first not every katana are very curve. Most very curved katana called Taichi are used on horseback. After a few months in Toyama Ryu, I understand that Katana are not mean to draw cut, it is meant to chop-cut. For serious armour, can a long sword deal with it? I think it was more efficient to use war-hammer, war-axe or the like. Most katana are not very curve and is very efficient at thrusting too, although most of the kata are cutting strokes
<The wide arms of the hilt of a longsword provide an infinitely superior defense for the hand and wrist than the diminutive tsuba of a katana, and also allow for the trapping and binding of your opponent's blade, a gambit which the disk-like shape and small size of the katana's gaurd prevents>
- I was thinking like this before I learnt the art, thank you very much for all the hollywood films
duellings oftens ends with 1-2 strokes, unless in a large scale battle, there are very few chances of parries, not to mention to used the tsuba for defense....
<The homogenous steel construction and true tempering of the longsword is a product of a more advanced metalurgy than the laminated and differentialy hardened blade of the katana. Katanas continue to be made with a metalurgical process that was obsolete by the end of the Dark Ages in Europe>
For steel to hold an edge, with equal materials, it has to be made hard. If in case of a long sword, with its lengthen, spring through tempering will give the advantage of less easy to be bent, but sacrified some edge holding ability. With the length of a katana, differential tempering maximized the edge holding and at the same time make it tough, it rather band than break in use.... actually edge quenching or differential heat -treating may have the history as long as steel itself and makers of longswords, I think, chose not to do so...
<At two or three pounds, they're both light enough to be used single-handed, but the grips are long enough to accomedate two. The large pommel of the longsword aids in keeping the hand from sliding off the handle, and may also be used for striking. There is no such provision on the katana>
-you obviously never cut with a sword.....you never use the pommel to keep the sword sliding off, the thing you are cutting offer resistance, and pommel in a longsword is more to used first to retained the tang of the blade and second to balance the sword. Try to grip tight when you cut and you will find that you are only beating the target with your sword. Besides, try to weild a 3 lb sword with single hand for say 50 times. I use a katana a little more than 2 lbs and we practice weilding it at least 100 times everyday with 2 hands grip and still it is quite an exercise
<The straight and double-edged blade of the longsword makes agressive sheering cuts and opens up the the possibility of false-edge attacks, as well as being a competent thruster.>
-ever tried to use the long sword for cutting? a 37" blade, 2" wide at the base with continuous distal taper still weight close to 3 lbs. I've tried that, back-cutting(false edge attack) is almost impossible because of the weight and the co-ordinations required between the two hands.
<The katana's single-edged and curved blade can only make true-edged attacks, is most proficient at drawcuts(uneffective against serious armour) due to its thick spine, and the curvature brings the asymetrical point out of line with the handle, giving it an inferior thrusting profile>
- first not every katana are very curve. Most very curved katana called Taichi are used on horseback. After a few months in Toyama Ryu, I understand that Katana are not mean to draw cut, it is meant to chop-cut. For serious armour, can a long sword deal with it? I think it was more efficient to use war-hammer, war-axe or the like. Most katana are not very curve and is very efficient at thrusting too, although most of the kata are cutting strokes
<The wide arms of the hilt of a longsword provide an infinitely superior defense for the hand and wrist than the diminutive tsuba of a katana, and also allow for the trapping and binding of your opponent's blade, a gambit which the disk-like shape and small size of the katana's gaurd prevents>
- I was thinking like this before I learnt the art, thank you very much for all the hollywood films
<The homogenous steel construction and true tempering of the longsword is a product of a more advanced metalurgy than the laminated and differentialy hardened blade of the katana. Katanas continue to be made with a metalurgical process that was obsolete by the end of the Dark Ages in Europe>
For steel to hold an edge, with equal materials, it has to be made hard. If in case of a long sword, with its lengthen, spring through tempering will give the advantage of less easy to be bent, but sacrified some edge holding ability. With the length of a katana, differential tempering maximized the edge holding and at the same time make it tough, it rather band than break in use.... actually edge quenching or differential heat -treating may have the history as long as steel itself and makers of longswords, I think, chose not to do so...
<At two or three pounds, they're both light enough to be used single-handed, but the grips are long enough to accomedate two. The large pommel of the longsword aids in keeping the hand from sliding off the handle, and may also be used for striking. There is no such provision on the katana>
-you obviously never cut with a sword.....you never use the pommel to keep the sword sliding off, the thing you are cutting offer resistance, and pommel in a longsword is more to used first to retained the tang of the blade and second to balance the sword. Try to grip tight when you cut and you will find that you are only beating the target with your sword. Besides, try to weild a 3 lb sword with single hand for say 50 times. I use a katana a little more than 2 lbs and we practice weilding it at least 100 times everyday with 2 hands grip and still it is quite an exercise
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2000
- Messages
- 941
Hey Joe...
just a few minor historical and technical corrections for the Japanese stuff (hope you don't mind too much).
The tachi was the predecessor to the uchigatana...it was your typical cavalry saber worn edge down through the obi with a particular style of koshirae (mountings). In the Nambokucho and Muromachi periods where the uchigatana (katana) came to exist, the tactics were shifting from large scale cavalry to large scale infantry. The uchigatana was born, sported different koshirae, and was worn edge-up through the obi. As a rule most tachi are not necessarily deeper curved, but to generalize, most were a wee bit longer and a wee bit deeper curved and were more inclined to be koshi-zori (focus of curvature closest to handle). And there were "transition" swords that were going from tachi to uchigatana...and still sported obvious tachi mountings. These were called handachi. But that's not really of much significance anyways...
And additionally...as far as you saying it's not a draw cut, but rather a chop-cut. I have to *almost* agree, however the concept of chopping is basically splitting the target like a wedge. This is not really what's done. The natural flow and the arc of the properly extended swing will generally reach an apogee just before striking the target, and the actual cut is made while the blade is being pulled back from that apogee ever so slightly. You are dealing with an actual slicing motion is so minor that it's not really even noticed. It's not a pronounced push/pull draw-cut slice, but it is still a draw cut.
At least this has been in my experience.
Shinryû.
P.S. Post more often man, don't see ya all too often.
just a few minor historical and technical corrections for the Japanese stuff (hope you don't mind too much).
The tachi was the predecessor to the uchigatana...it was your typical cavalry saber worn edge down through the obi with a particular style of koshirae (mountings). In the Nambokucho and Muromachi periods where the uchigatana (katana) came to exist, the tactics were shifting from large scale cavalry to large scale infantry. The uchigatana was born, sported different koshirae, and was worn edge-up through the obi. As a rule most tachi are not necessarily deeper curved, but to generalize, most were a wee bit longer and a wee bit deeper curved and were more inclined to be koshi-zori (focus of curvature closest to handle). And there were "transition" swords that were going from tachi to uchigatana...and still sported obvious tachi mountings. These were called handachi. But that's not really of much significance anyways...
And additionally...as far as you saying it's not a draw cut, but rather a chop-cut. I have to *almost* agree, however the concept of chopping is basically splitting the target like a wedge. This is not really what's done. The natural flow and the arc of the properly extended swing will generally reach an apogee just before striking the target, and the actual cut is made while the blade is being pulled back from that apogee ever so slightly. You are dealing with an actual slicing motion is so minor that it's not really even noticed. It's not a pronounced push/pull draw-cut slice, but it is still a draw cut.
At least this has been in my experience.
Shinryû.
P.S. Post more often man, don't see ya all too often.
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2000
- Messages
- 12
1. There is no best sword. Each sword suits their own circumstances.
2. I'm going to reply Snickersnee post but first I would like you to know who I am.
I'm a sword lover of all cultures but particularly European. I do Full Contact Freestyle Sparring each week with realistic weight, dimensions and balance equipment. We have Katana, Medieval Long Sword, Chinese various Weapons and so on. In addition, we have different martial arts practitioners here. Some were Chinese Kung Fu, the others were Japanese swordsmanship, while a couple, including myself, are European swordsmanship practitioners. I myself, is a user of 2 medieval bastard swords. So you can say I'm by nowhere bias on katana. Despite that, I found what you are stating is showing your lack of knowledge on katana.
--------
The straight and double-edged blade of the longsword makes agressive sheering cuts and opens up the the possibility of false-edge attacks, as well as being a competent thruster.
--------
True, but I see katana not any weaker in aggressive sheering cuts. Have you watched any high quality test-cutting clips? They do cut the heavy wetted straw mat that simulate human's flesh well into halves in 1 cut. Moreover, some higher grade practitioners may put a "bone" into the target as the core to make the cut harder to accomplish. Yet, katana get through it if the technique is proper. I don't doubt katana's cutting ability at all....
--------
The katana's single-edged and curved blade can only make true-edged attacks, is most proficient at drawcuts(uneffective against serious armour) due to its thick spine, and the curvature brings the asymetrical point out of line with the handle, giving it an inferior thrusting profile.
--------
Yes, katana's cut is limited to true-edge, but it does not only DRAW CUT. In fact, CHOPPING CUT is their aim. You can goto the following link:
<a href="http://www.trifox.com/aux/kenshinkan/cattle.html"> Preparing cattle for food </a>
and read how the founder of Toyama Ryu beheaded 3 cattle, each with 1 cut, for food around the end of WWII. No draw cut can do that, you can be sure.
Moreover, try to face the Kissaki (the thrusting section) of a katana, and you will regret for what you've said about the WEAK ability of thrusting of a katana. I can't comment whether a long sword thrust better than a katana or not, but a katana's thrust is just EQUALLY lethal.
Yes, it's curved, but it's not curved THAT much that your thrust would miss. Generally, the later the era, the straighter the katana.
---------
The wide arms of the hilt of a longsword provide an infinitely superior defense for the hand and wrist than the diminutive tsuba of a katana, and also allow for the trapping and binding of your opponent's blade, a gambit which the disk-like shape and small size of the katana's gaurd prevents.
---------
That showed that you are not familiar with European Medieval Swordsmanship. Go pick up John Clements' (the current director of the leading European swordsmanship organization, HACA, which stands for Historical Armed Combat Association) book "Medieval swordsmanship" to read more about the usage of the crossguard.
In simple words, it's just a horizontal bar of metal. It CANNOT defends your fingers from being cut. In fact, John suggested NOT TO defend yourself with the guard. It's there to protect your hand from smashing right against the shield, and yes, for binding.
On the other hand, for defending against cut, a Tsuba (Japanese's sword's guard) performed much better. This is from my experience in Full Contact Freestyle Sparring.
------
The homogenous steel construction and true tempering of the longsword is a product of a more advanced metalurgy than the laminated and differentialy hardened blade of the katana. Katanas continue to be made with a metalurgical process that was obsolete by the end of the Dark Ages in Europe. However, in this case some allowances may be made, due to the inferiority and scarcity of Japanese ores.(one of the factors leading to their decision to invade China earlier in this century)
--------
I won't say differential heat treating is inferior, or spring tempering is superior. They are just different approaches to cope with the same problem.
A good differential heat treated blade will have better edge holding ability than a spring tempered one. On the other hand, the spring tempered one will be more flexible, thus not easy to be bent. Both are not easy to be broken.
--------
At two or three pounds, they're both light enough to be used single-handed, but the grips are long enough to accomedate two. The large pommel of the longsword aids in keeping the hand from sliding off the handle, and may also be used for striking. There is no such provision on the katana.
---------
Goto <a href="http://www.nosyuiaido.com/">Nosyuiaido</a> and check out the weight of the Shinken (modern nihonto, real stuff with certifications). You will find that they seldom exceeds 2.5 lbs... Many of them are around JUST 2 lbs or lower.
Moreover, there are wrappings on Tsuka (katana's hilt) that prevent the hand from slipping out and there is also technique in Japanese swordsmanship that to release the forward hand and let the back hand to cut alone with more reach.
2. I'm going to reply Snickersnee post but first I would like you to know who I am.
I'm a sword lover of all cultures but particularly European. I do Full Contact Freestyle Sparring each week with realistic weight, dimensions and balance equipment. We have Katana, Medieval Long Sword, Chinese various Weapons and so on. In addition, we have different martial arts practitioners here. Some were Chinese Kung Fu, the others were Japanese swordsmanship, while a couple, including myself, are European swordsmanship practitioners. I myself, is a user of 2 medieval bastard swords. So you can say I'm by nowhere bias on katana. Despite that, I found what you are stating is showing your lack of knowledge on katana.
--------
The straight and double-edged blade of the longsword makes agressive sheering cuts and opens up the the possibility of false-edge attacks, as well as being a competent thruster.
--------
True, but I see katana not any weaker in aggressive sheering cuts. Have you watched any high quality test-cutting clips? They do cut the heavy wetted straw mat that simulate human's flesh well into halves in 1 cut. Moreover, some higher grade practitioners may put a "bone" into the target as the core to make the cut harder to accomplish. Yet, katana get through it if the technique is proper. I don't doubt katana's cutting ability at all....
--------
The katana's single-edged and curved blade can only make true-edged attacks, is most proficient at drawcuts(uneffective against serious armour) due to its thick spine, and the curvature brings the asymetrical point out of line with the handle, giving it an inferior thrusting profile.
--------
Yes, katana's cut is limited to true-edge, but it does not only DRAW CUT. In fact, CHOPPING CUT is their aim. You can goto the following link:
<a href="http://www.trifox.com/aux/kenshinkan/cattle.html"> Preparing cattle for food </a>
and read how the founder of Toyama Ryu beheaded 3 cattle, each with 1 cut, for food around the end of WWII. No draw cut can do that, you can be sure.
Moreover, try to face the Kissaki (the thrusting section) of a katana, and you will regret for what you've said about the WEAK ability of thrusting of a katana. I can't comment whether a long sword thrust better than a katana or not, but a katana's thrust is just EQUALLY lethal.
Yes, it's curved, but it's not curved THAT much that your thrust would miss. Generally, the later the era, the straighter the katana.
---------
The wide arms of the hilt of a longsword provide an infinitely superior defense for the hand and wrist than the diminutive tsuba of a katana, and also allow for the trapping and binding of your opponent's blade, a gambit which the disk-like shape and small size of the katana's gaurd prevents.
---------
That showed that you are not familiar with European Medieval Swordsmanship. Go pick up John Clements' (the current director of the leading European swordsmanship organization, HACA, which stands for Historical Armed Combat Association) book "Medieval swordsmanship" to read more about the usage of the crossguard.
In simple words, it's just a horizontal bar of metal. It CANNOT defends your fingers from being cut. In fact, John suggested NOT TO defend yourself with the guard. It's there to protect your hand from smashing right against the shield, and yes, for binding.
On the other hand, for defending against cut, a Tsuba (Japanese's sword's guard) performed much better. This is from my experience in Full Contact Freestyle Sparring.
------
The homogenous steel construction and true tempering of the longsword is a product of a more advanced metalurgy than the laminated and differentialy hardened blade of the katana. Katanas continue to be made with a metalurgical process that was obsolete by the end of the Dark Ages in Europe. However, in this case some allowances may be made, due to the inferiority and scarcity of Japanese ores.(one of the factors leading to their decision to invade China earlier in this century)
--------
I won't say differential heat treating is inferior, or spring tempering is superior. They are just different approaches to cope with the same problem.
A good differential heat treated blade will have better edge holding ability than a spring tempered one. On the other hand, the spring tempered one will be more flexible, thus not easy to be bent. Both are not easy to be broken.
--------
At two or three pounds, they're both light enough to be used single-handed, but the grips are long enough to accomedate two. The large pommel of the longsword aids in keeping the hand from sliding off the handle, and may also be used for striking. There is no such provision on the katana.
---------
Goto <a href="http://www.nosyuiaido.com/">Nosyuiaido</a> and check out the weight of the Shinken (modern nihonto, real stuff with certifications). You will find that they seldom exceeds 2.5 lbs... Many of them are around JUST 2 lbs or lower.
Moreover, there are wrappings on Tsuka (katana's hilt) that prevent the hand from slipping out and there is also technique in Japanese swordsmanship that to release the forward hand and let the back hand to cut alone with more reach.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2000
- Messages
- 941
Hey Chan Lancelot! Welcome over here...always good to see some more SwordForumites over here to provide their input. Please drop by more often friend!
Shinryû.
Shinryû.
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2000
- Messages
- 12
Hhehehe, you recognized me man!
JoeL asked me to come in and make a comment... so here I'm. I've bookmarked this forum and will visit in a regular basis.
JoeL asked me to come in and make a comment... so here I'm. I've bookmarked this forum and will visit in a regular basis.