Swords

[68Hawk]

Good stuff Biggles,

Remember there is a difference between battlefield combat and personal duels outside the pub.  From time to time, especially before the Tokugawa period (warring states period), open field combat between armies was much more common.  The long period of relative peace established by the Tokugawa Shogunate almost eliminated large armies meeting one another.  Depends again on period.  I've also been told that Samurai actually preferred the bow, and considered it a more honorable weapon.

Also, the Japanese emphasis on a cut to the neck is partly because it was the weakest point in their armor.  Why worry about beheading an unarmored opponent when one can slice many other pieces off?  

Consider also that much of what we think we know, possibly some of my above writing, is actually reinvented tradition that the Imperialists drummed up and rehashed for their own purposes during the 1920s and 30s.  Bushido is actually more a reinvention, or rather its significance as we take it today.  Hara-kiri is also misunderstood, and should better be thought of as ritual execution in which the condemned was forced to take their own life.  Wasn't really suicide.  How better to enforce 'honor' (discipline).  Ronin were masterless samurai, who didn't have to follow anyone's orders, but being a Ronin was being a bum.  Where else could they make a living?  Samurai means 'one who serves'.  Without service a Samurai was nothing.  

Samurai could be seen as the ultra-conservatives of their day.  The Spanish Inquisition comes to mind as a relatively close European parallel.  European Colonialism kind of fits the pattern as well.

[Suave]

Not to mention that most samurai were gay, as in homosexual.

[vorticon]

by the time the katana was in use (according to wikipedia), europeans had firearms.



the 2 european peasants with a pair of Arquebus would have beat the samurai and knight before either one got close enough to swing there pretty hunks of metal.

[68Hawk]

Originally posted by vorticon
by the time the katana was in use (according to wikipedia), europeans had firearms.



the 2 european peasants with a pair of Arquebus would have beat the samurai and knight before either one got close enough to swing there pretty hunks of metal.

IF they hit <- big if.

If not no chance, but the same goes for a good archer or crossbowman.  The crossbow comes from China, btw.

Wikipedia usually has good stuff on weapons, and This isn't bad, but it contradicts itself.

"The katana as we know it today with its deep, graceful curve developed sometime around the middle of the Heian period to service the need of the growing military class." (794 to 1185)

"In the 15th and 16th centuries,...As the Sengoku civil wars progressed, the uchigatana evolved into the modern katana, and replaced the tachi as the primary weapon of the samurai, especially when not wearing armor."

I can't really say which is more right, except that there is a difference between the battlefield weapons and the ones they would wear around the house. Still, if the golden age of sword making for the Japanese was the Kamakura period(1185–1333), this was before firearms made any huge mark on European battlefields.  A Samurai at this time would have been far more likely to encounter a firearm or incendiary in China than in Europe.

[68Hawk]

Originally posted by Suave
Not to mention that most samurai were gay, as in homosexual.

Well some certainly were.

Parallel back to Braveheart and the heir to Longshanks.

[vorticon]

"Still, if the golden age of sword making for the Japanese was the Kamakura period(1185–1333), this was before firearms made any huge mark on European battlefields. "


ah, i was using the first line of the article...

" type of Japanese backsword or longsword (大刀:だいとう, daitō?). In use after the 1400s,"



"
IF they hit <- big if."


true enough.

[ink]

awesome points but in all reality,none of us now the "truth". history is written by those who won the wars. i have the tiger katana, its cutting ability is astounding it will cut plate armour, no matter what some of you may think, and the swords of the past are just as good, or better.
  i sold a sword i owed to a buddy it was the musashi miyamoto, non folded but heat treated the same as the tiger, he wanted to know what it could do, so he started out cutting smaller stuff, 2 liter bottles, full capped.
  two by fours stuff like that.{ i was pissed when he told me this} he was finaly happy when he took his old computer monitor you know the kind it was like ten years old. whatever it was, he cut it in half without chipping the blade, scratched it was all. i wass'nt there, so again what is the truth????

[leitwolf]

Originally posted by ink
[..] i have the tiger katana, its cutting ability is astounding it will cut plate armour, no matter what some of you may think, and the swords of the past are just as good, or better.[..]

The point of plate armor is to prevent exactly that. There is a reason why medieval knights were using maces or axes against plate, not swords.
They would literally "not cut it".

[DiabloTX]

It's a common myth to think that European swords were strictly slashing weapons.  This is incorrect and it also explains why most of the swords in Europe at that time were straight with a point for piercing chain and plate armors.

[leitwolf]

but not the Katana

I'm not saying swords can't be used for piercing armor, i just dont see how a Katana (or any sword for that matter) will cut through plate.

[68Hawk]

A hack flat against good plate seems unlikely to fracture the plate.  It could crush bone against chainmail, but probably wouldn't go through a quality shirt.

European swords that the armor was designed to defend against were no joke, and the arms that wielded them were not weak.  They were skilled and strong.

ink, I don't mean to cut you down, but I've got to ask, what do "tiger" and "Musashi Myamoto" signify here?  I know who Musashi was, I've got his book on my shelf, but he never made swords.  They seem like modern marketing terms.  I gotta ask as well, have you ever tried them against plate?  Cutting a bottle is more about sharpness and technique.  Cutting forged plate armor is another matter.  I don't mean to say its impossible, but I've never seen it done and it seems highly unlikely.  I also don't mean to suggest that your swords are not high quality, but I wonder about the naming.

Others in this thread are correct in pointing out the European trend of development as a direct response to heavy plate armor.  Someone mentioned the hand and a half, which comes in more predominantly as the shield is phased out since it was considered somewhat redundant and encumbersome to a knight fully plated.  Blades designed to pierce and not hack or slash became more commonplace, whereas other weapons gravitated towards the type that could bring a crushing force to the armor.  I think I mentioned war hammers and maces.  

In the middle of this are some specific edged weapons such as Falchions, which function much as cleavers do and kind of get the best of both worlds.  A super strong Katana might have a chance as a falchion did of cracking the armor, but it would be better for a samurai to knock an armored knight down and take him with a Tanto.

[ink]

check em out do a search, for "paul chen Tiger katana" the other is the miyamoto or musashi Katana paul chen is the fabricator, of these swords,
   ive held the damascus viking "GODfred" sword, absalutly beautifull but on that day i bought the miyamoto sword, at $500 when the viking was $300.
  the viking sword was sharp, but dull in comparison to the katana which  could have cut the Damascus viking sword in half,  check em out for yourself. you can also find plenty of videos showing off the cutting power of all kinds of swords,one of my favorites is where they take the "agincourt bastard" sword from museum replicas, and chop a cinderblock into pieces.

[Major Biggles]

Originally posted by ink
check em out do a search, for "paul chen Tiger katana" the other is the miyamoto or musashi Katana paul chen is the fabricator, of these swords,
   ive held the damascus viking "GODfred" sword, absalutly beautifull but on that day i bought the miyamoto sword, at $500 when the viking was $300.
  the viking sword was sharp, but dull in comparison to the katana which  could have cut the Damascus viking sword in half,  check em out for yourself. you can also find plenty of videos showing off the cutting power of all kinds of swords,one of my favorites is where they take the "agincourt bastard" sword from museum replicas, and chop a cinderblock into pieces.

there's no way a tiger kat would cut that sword in half. it's not truly damascus steel (no one knows how TRUE damascus steel was made, but it is made using modern pattern welding to look purty, and use a more traditional way of spreading the carbon)

paul chen's katanas are great production swords, probably the finest around, but against the REAL deal, even today, they aren't as good quality, balance or cutwise. there is no way that sword would cut through another high carbon blade.

if you took a cheap 440 stainless steel fantasy sword and hit it edge on edge, providing the thing doesn't fall apart first, then perhaps you would cut through it. i doubt any respecting sword owner would do it though, it would permanently damage your blade.

but the thing is, swords just can't cut through metal, it's just too hard, they were never designed to do it. take your tiger and hack into a big tree, you'll probably damage it! swords are designed to cut flesh. plate armour was designed to protect from these. this wasn't just a bit of metal, it was a skillfully forged high carbon steel plate with ridges and angles for strength, which also gave further protecting from slashes.

even the sharpest sword would glance off. by the high of the plate mail perios, where the only exposed parts of the plate are covered in thick chain (which is also highly effective at protecting against slashes) some european swords had lost their edge altogether, with just a long thin sharp blade with an almost square cross section to punch right through armour (and even with these things is was bloody hard).



simple fact is though, that these armoured knights were the elite. the most successful armies were those with cheap effective troops who could kill any enemy quickly. i'm instantly reminded by the battle of crecy, where 30-40000 fully armoured french knights were massacred by an english force of 8000, primarily longbowmen. english losses were about 200 men. the entire french force was obliterated. often the best solution to a problem is the simplest...



the evolution of the european sword is quite interesting. a guy called oakeshott wrote a book describing the changes and influences in sword design, relative to the armour of the period.

check out this page below:

http://www.albion-swords.com/swords/albion/swords-albion-mark-nextgen.htm

those guys sell high quality fully functional swords from across the ages, all highly researched. just take a look at the top and scroll down. you'll see how the wide sharp blades began to turn into thin pointy ones

great thread though guys, interesting stuff, keep it up:aok

[lazs2]

as was shown...  some of the most intricate and impressive artistry was lavished, and still is.. on the firearm.    Nothing can match the precision and pure mechanical sophistication of the gun.

While a sword is relagated to the mantle or a holloween costume.. the gun is being carried and used and having resources lavished on today.

Handguns are even more personal and likely to be both a work of art and a very personal thing.  the utilitarian plastic ones excepted.

Knives are another thing.   most here carry 4" folders they can be works of art and are very useful.   Custom offerings often cost as much as a good firearm.

Biggles... I know you don't get to be around firearms much and handguns in general so you might be amazed at the diversity and art and pure usefulness of em...  Like I said..  they can weigh 12 oz and shoot through an engine block or hit a can at 500 yards.   They can have thousands of dollars of engraving and exotic material grips and be a thing of beauty..  In every case... the craftsmanship and cleverness of the design are watchlike.

My grandfather was an antique dealer.. I grew up around a lot of antique weapons... hundreds of swords passed through my hands...  I felt very little.. Some history but...

The first cap and ball revolver that I handled was a colt navy with ivory grips and some minor engraving...  I was hooked for life.

lazs

[Major Biggles]

Originally posted by lazs2
as was shown...  some of the most intricate and impressive artistry was lavished, and still is.. on the firearm.    Nothing can match the precision and pure mechanical sophistication of the gun.

While a sword is relagated to the mantle or a holloween costume.. the gun is being carried and used and having resources lavished on today.

Handguns are even more personal and likely to be both a work of art and a very personal thing.  the utilitarian plastic ones excepted.

Knives are another thing.   most here carry 4" folders they can be works of art and are very useful.   Custom offerings often cost as much as a good firearm.

Biggles... I know you don't get to be around firearms much and handguns in general so you might be amazed at the diversity and art and pure usefulness of em...  Like I said..  they can weigh 12 oz and shoot through an engine block or hit a can at 500 yards.   They can have thousands of dollars of engraving and exotic material grips and be a thing of beauty..  In every case... the craftsmanship and cleverness of the design are watchlike.

My grandfather was an antique dealer.. I grew up around a lot of antique weapons... hundreds of swords passed through my hands...  I felt very little.. Some history but...

The first cap and ball revolver that I handled was a colt navy with ivory grips and some minor engraving...  I was hooked for life.

lazs

cool. i love guns too lazs back in the day though, a sword was like a gun, not only beautiful but an advanced weapon i guess it's also a thing of history and taste though. here in europe, the sword and bow are what forged empires and won wars. there isn't much of that in american history.

american history is the success story of the firearm, rifling, advanced artillery and good old fashioned cowbow vs indian shootouts for a proud american, a gun is much more a part of history than a sword, and vice versa for proud europeans. it's all down to taste.

personally, i would rather have a sword because it means more to me, but hell, if i ever come by your way lazs, i hope i can come shooting with ya trips to shooting ranges when i visit the states are always a lot of fun, despite the weird gung-ho guys that work there