What are the best swords?

[Watchful]

Overall, I believe the Katana to require a higher degree of skill to forge and finish than say the katzbalger, arming sword or rapier.

Hmmm... this is arguable, because we're covering an amazing amount of ground with those picks. But I won't argue this, because I think it comes down to which you think is more appealing to the eye... and Bors is certainly capable of making his own opinion!

As far as the usage technical skill level and spiritual development aspect that falls into the swordsman’s arena and I also feel here that the Japanese had somewhat of a more formal approach.

Here, though, I'm not sure there's any historical basis for formality. The Japanese did not, as far as I know today, have a formal sword training system until well after the Age of the Samurai.

Indeed, the katana was not a common weapon in Japanese history (in comparison to the spear and arrow), and may not have had any formalized training systems until they were reconstructed in the early 20th Century (or maybe late 19th). By people, I add, who never fought in actual sword-on-sword combat. Unlike the sword schools of Europe.

I don't dispute the effectiveness of the Japanese sword arts or the katana--but formality is an artificial attribute to sword training, not a decisive one.

 

[FullerH]

The Japanese sword evolution was achieved in an artificial environment. By that, I mean an environment in which the development of firearms was halted and, indeed, they were eventually banned to almost all Japanese. The ruling classes felt that such a weapon would prove to be too powerful in the hands of untrained peasant levees.

If you wish to read more on the question of the banning of most firearms in Japan, I suggest that you locate a copy of Giving Up the Gun: Japan's Reversion to the Sword, 1543-1879 by Noel Perrin (Paperback - Jan 1995). It is available through Amazon's used book dealer network.

 

[Bors]

Hmmm... this is arguable, because we're covering an amazing amount of ground with those picks. But I won't argue this, because I think it comes down to which you think is more appealing to the eye... and Bors is certainly capable of making his own opinion!

Actally I don't get distracted like many by how shinny pretty a sword looks. To see the sword I look below the surface.

Here, though, I'm not sure there's any historical basis for formality. The Japanese did not, as far as I know today, have a formal sword training system until well after the Age of the Samurai.

???? From the 11 century on Samurai were required to be educated in arms, art, dance poetry etc...

Samurai were trained by family, schools and private instruction.
It was a deep part of the culture.

Indeed, the katana was not a common weapon in Japanese history (in comparison to the spear and arrow), and may not have had any formalized training systems until they were reconstructed in the early 20th Century (or maybe late 19th). By people, I add, who never fought in actual sword-on-sword combat. Unlike the sword schools of Europe.

Actually the katana was very common but the spear and Bow were regarded higher. The spear is superior to the sword on the field. The Bow was regarded a samurai's primary weapon.

I don't dispute the effectiveness of the Japanese sword arts or the katana--but formality is an artificial attribute to sword training, not a decisive one.

See above


---------------------------------------------------------------------

The Japanese sword evolution was achieved in an artificial environment. By that, I mean an environment in which the development of firearms was halted and, indeed, they were eventually banned to almost all Japanese. The ruling classes felt that such a weapon would prove to be too powerful in the hands of untrained peasant levees.

Artifical might not be the best word Japan was isolated by choice for the most part from the rest of the world. Trade with other countries was limited.
Europe felt the same way about guns and espicially hand guns and regulated them (and still do).

I have not read the book you reference but wikipedia has this to say about guns in japan. I'm sure they were regulated but on the other hand they were used in combat in large numbers and quite effectively.

"The arquebus, a matchlock gun, was introduced by Portuguese via a Chinese pirate ship in 1543 and the Japanese succeeded in naturalizing it within a decade. Groups of mercenaries with mass produced arquebuses played a critical role."

If you wish to read more on the question of the banning of most firearms in Japan, I suggest that you locate a copy of Giving Up the Gun: Japan's Reversion to the Sword, 1543-1879 by Noel Perrin (Paperback - Jan 1995). It is available through Amazon's used book dealer network.

I will have to check it out it's on my list.


Bors

 

[Triton]

Overall, I believe the Katana to require a higher degree of skill to forge and finish than say the katzbalger, arming sword or rapier.

That probably debatable in and of itself I don't know that a multi steel folded Japanese blade is any harder to forge then a pattern welded viking sword for example. Also it is probably worth noting that all the effort that went into building a Japanese sword was necessary because of the poor quality of the raw materials available not because of any inherent superiority of the method of construction.

As far as the usage technical skill level and spiritual development aspect that falls into the swordsman’s arena and I also feel here that the Japanese had somewhat of a more formal approach.

I would certainly agree that they have a more formal approach whatever it's origins. However as you say that has more to do with swordsmanship then the sword itself.

So does this mean that European sword’s are chopped liver no it just means that in my opinion the Japanese sword process is more refined.

You are of course certainly entitled to your opinion. My point (again not attempting to pick on anyone in particular here) is that a katana is what it is, and touting its superiority as a matter of aesthetics is completely subjective and touting its superiority as a matter of performance is entirely situationally dependent as it is for any other sword type.

 

[Watchful]

From the 11 century on Samurai were required to be educated in arms, art, dance poetry etc... Samurai were trained by family, schools and private instruction. It was a deep part of the culture.

I agree that there was instruction in all the items you mention, but am not confident there is any historical evidence of formal sword instruction. Archery and spear, perhaps, but even Musashi notes that sword schools were more informal styles.

Actually the katana was very common...

Yes, in that you could see it. No, proportionately: the katana was used by perhaps 5% of the samurai, by one estimate I've read. I don't believe you're disagreeing with that, though, so I'll certainly accept your point.

 

[FullerH]

Bors, Perrin's argument is that, under the Tokagawa Shogunate, the Japanese first consolidated all gun makers in one village and then refused to allow anyone else to learn the trade. They then allowed the gunsmiths in that village to die off until there wwere only enough to make a very few low-powered matchlock shotguns for hunting waterfowl. These were carefully kept weak enough that they could not be realistically used as military weapons. Since Japan was a closed society and one that was very much more accustomed to obedience at all levels than were Europeans, they were successful where the Europeans were not. Hell, the nobility and the Church in Western Europe had tried to get the crossbow banned with an equal lack of success.

 

[Bors]

That probably debatable in and of itself I don't know that a multi steel folded Japanese blade is any harder to forge then a pattern welded viking sword for example. Also it is probably worth noting that all the effort that went into building a Japanese sword was necessary because of the poor quality of the raw materials available not because of any inherent superiority of the method of construction.

This could still be debated but for the most part I agree with your argument.

I would certainly agree that they have a more formal approach whatever it's origins. However as you say that has more to do with swordsmanship then the sword itself.

OK

You are of course certainly entitled to your opinion. My point (again not attempting to pick on anyone in particular here) is that a katana is what it is, and touting its superiority as a matter of aesthetics is completely subjective and touting its superiority as a matter of performance is entirely situationally dependent as it is for any other sword type.

I agree well said.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bors, Perrin's argument is that, under the Tokagawa Shogunate, the Japanese first consolidated all gun makers in one village and then refused to allow anyone else to learn the trade. They then allowed the gunsmiths in that village to die off until there wwere only enough to make a very few low-powered matchlock shotguns for hunting waterfowl. These were carefully kept weak enough that they could not be realistically used as military weapons. Since Japan was a closed society and one that was very much more accustomed to obedience at all levels than were Europeans, they were successful where the Europeans were not. Hell, the nobility and the Church in Western Europe had tried to get the crossbow banned with an equal lack of success.

That's a very good argument and if any culture could pull that off the Japanese could because of the isolation and closed society.
Yep, that crossbow was an evil thing....from the knights point of view LOL .
I will have to check out that book sounds like good reading.

Gentlemen good stuff !!!


Bors

 

[Triton]

I agree well said.

Bors

Thanks!:thumbup:

 

[Robert Marotz]

This is the best sword ever.

 

[FullerH]

Hey, Robert, good to hear from you! Nice to know that you're still around.

 

[Robert Marotz]

Hey, Robert, good to hear from you! Nice to know that you're still around.

Hey Hugh! I've been kinda away for a few...er...years. Life kinda got in the way of the internet

I don't think I'll be doing much consistent posting in the immediate future, but I'll come in with a smart-ass comment or two from time to time, and will probably be around more when life stabilizes a bit more.