Why curved not straight?

[kronckew]

... Straight blades make contact later so you have more room to gain speed....

only true with recurved blades like the kopis, khukuri. in a shamshir/pala/tulwar/1796LC the edge arrives after where a straight blade on the same hilt would. most cuts use the forward 1/3 of the blade or less, which in a well curved sword may be quite a few inches 'behind'. also note that for a similar edge length the straight sword puts you further away from your opponent when contact is made, and conversely the curved sword puts you closer (and a bit more vulnerable to other hand weapons like a parrying dagger).

most people who used the sword in combat would only really sharpen the forward third, the rest being left relatively unsharpened to make them more resistant to notching during an inadvertent edge parry.

Ok now I'm wondering why were broad swords so popular? I would think the knights of Europe would of taken advantage of the curve.... especially since they knew about them from the crusades.

during the crusades and up to around the 16th c., the arabs used a straight bladed sword. the curved ones came later after they (the arabs) were in contact with the eastern mongols, persians, indians, etc. the east europeans also adopted curved cavalry sabres after they interacted with the eastern asian tribes. the poles especially were fond of the sabre rather than the sword. many of them also carried an estoc, a very long straight bladed thrusting sword, for use after they'd broken or lost their lance, but before the close press of the melee. additionally of course they'd carry an axe, mace or war hammer for crunching power.

in fact, one of the last great cavalry battles with swords on both sides was at omdurman in the late 19th century. the arab sudanese on the mahdi's side preferred the straight double edged kaskara and the long bladed (and frequently barbed) spear.
View attachment 307244
the brits used a straight backsword 'sabre' and the lance. one participant was winston churchill (21st lancers), who preferred his service pistol.
View attachment 307247
[video=youtube;f6UmKsqz6aQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6UmKsqz6aQ[/video]

as an aside, apparently the better class arabs were in chain mail, which did not protect them very well, it was apparently mostly rusty and brittle with age and would easily break on impact.

 

[SeaxyBeast]

Please pardon this bit of a drive-by posting from a lurker/non-regular here.

To understand sword shapes you have to understand both what material and technology they had available to make the blade and what sort of armor and defenses those swords would have to face most often. You'll most often find a straight sword used in a culture and time where iron is plentiful and armor is common. Western sword development makes no sense unless you look at armor and consider what must be done to get through or around it.

 

[Browning A Bolt]

Interesting discussion on swords and armor. Makes a lot of sense.

 

[glubse]

basically, it all comes down to the user knowing his blade. When I first held a kukri it felt kinda weird because of the unusual shape of the handle, the heavy weight and its distribution was another thing I had to get used to.
Now, even though I'm far from being an expert with it, I feel very confident handling it and I wouldn't go back to something lighter or differently shaped.
Kukris are, in my opinion, the best all around tools a man can have. Combine it with a little knife and you're good to go.

 

[tedwca]

Metalurgy in Europe was way behind the metallurgy in the Middle East and Asia. Damascus steel was a very advanced metal for the time, and it became legendary during the crusades because it out performed the blades made in Europe.

The Vikings actually had crucible steel made swords from 800-1000 AD or so. No one is sure how they got it, but theories point to trade with Asia. The only known swords with this steel were branded Ulfberht and were very rare and expensive. Nova just did a show on these Viking swords and how they might have been made. They even had counterfeit blades that were inferior, but had a similar name. The real ones were spelled +vlfberh+t and the fakes were +vlfberht+. For a mostly illiterate clientele it would pass muster until it failed in battle.

The steel was so good that it compares favorably to modern carbon steels. The technique would be lost for another 1000 years or so.

 

[GoodStuff]

Please pardon this bit of a drive-by posting from a lurker/non-regular here.

To understand sword shapes you have to understand both what material and technology they had available to make the blade and what sort of armor and defenses those swords would have to face most often. You'll most often find a straight sword used in a culture and time where iron is plentiful and armor is common. Western sword development makes no sense unless you look at armor and consider what must be done to get through or around it.

Very true. Consider the British saber drills of the Nepolonic wars. Cuts to the face and arms, but no thrusts. This makes no sense, till you consider they were going up against the armored Cuirassiers.

 

[pap11y]

What's the advantage of a curved blade over a straight blade?

Seems to me that a curved blade would be heavier for same reaching distance. There's good & bad here. Curved blade may give you shorter swing windup space albeit not by much. Straight blades make contact later so you have more room to gain speed....

If you are talking about japanese swords...

The curvature is a result of the forging process.

I believe there would be little no discernable difference between a straight and curved blade if you are cutting correctly.

Curved blades are great for horse back as well (cavalry).

I agree that the skill of the smiths and available metals would have had a big impact on this..

 

[Raymond1000]

Have a stick—say a 12” dowel—and a partner. Lock your elbow to your side, hold your arm level. Grab the end of the stick, hold it in line with your forearm. Have your buddy lift the far end of the stick. How strong is your wrist, in that position?

Repeat the test. This time hold the stick in your natural fist. For me that means the stick is at maybe a seventy degree angle. Have your friend repeat the test. How strong is your wrist in this position? I know I am a lot stronger in test two.

The kukri lets you strike your target as though you were using a straight blade, but with your hand close to its position of greatest strength. This is a difference that makes a difference. Compare chopping with a heavy machete and with a kukri, and you will see.

 

[Raymond1000]

Very true. Consider the British saber drills of the Nepolonic wars. Cuts to the face and arms, but no thrusts. This makes no sense, till you consider they were going up against the armored Cuirassiers.

A medieval knight’s sword had to work against armor. A draw cut is deadly against the unarmed. Against a mail hauberk? (Think the Bayeux Tapestry) Not so much. Even less so as plate armor came in. Most knightly swords were designed to give a straight chopping blow.

The curved cavalry saber only got popular in the west as gunpowder drove armor from the field. At Waterloo, British cavalry rode against Napoleon’s Cuirassiers shouting, “Cut the neck!”