Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: ODBAL on April 29, 2009, 09:58:57 AM
-
Anyone else been watching this series on Spike? I have been sucked in and record all of the to the DVR. I was a little dissapointed in the results of last nights Pirates V. Knights.
-
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,263632.0.html
-
:D
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,263632.0.html
-
I guess I should have looked a little more into it. Regardless, I kind of like it! If for no other reason than it would be a blast to beat the crap out of those ballistic gel skeletons with those types of weapons.
-
I guess I should have looked a little more into it. Regardless, I kind of like it! If for no other reason than it would be a blast to beat the crap out of those ballistic gel skeletons with those types of weapons.
I own a sick Katana blade made by Paul Chen called the "tiger", the first time I saw the show I was wishing I could use it, on those. :rofl
I wanted to see the Samurai vs Viking but I missed it, anyone know the results? I say the Samurai, hands down. this match up is a conundrum for me, I have Norseman blood in me, but I love and respect Bushido.
-
I want to see Samurai vs. Marine Scout-Sniper.
Or maybe Viking vs M1 Tanker.
-
I own a sick Katana blade made by Paul Chen called the "tiger", the first time I saw the show I was wishing I could use it, on those. :rofl
I wanted to see the Samurai vs Viking but I missed it, anyone know the results? I say the Samurai, hands down. this match up is a conundrum for me, I have Norseman blood in me, but I love and respect Bushido.
Samuri wins.
-
Even a katana cannot cut through an oak boarded shield with metal rim and boss. A Danish sea raiding party of 200 men in a shield wall would trample 200 samurai into the earth. Not to mention that even a stunted norseman would tower a good twelve inches over the average samurai.
One on one the samurai would stand a chance if he was skilled with the naginata or nodachi, or some other longer blade.
It would take an exceptional master of the katana to beat a sword Dane armed with heavy sheild and axe or blade. The swordmanship of european history is hardly recognised. A sword Dane trained to fight from birth just as a samurai and could easily double the strength of their Asian cousins. Eastern weapons and disciplines have a romantic notion about them today, and often seem more appealing to us visualy and spiritualy. Nothing about fighting with sharp metal is romantic or spiritual. Vikings own Samurai.
-
doh
-
Anyone else been watching this series on Spike? I have been sucked in and record all of the to the DVR. I was a little dissapointed in the results of last nights Pirates V. Knights.
You really thought the knight had a chance?
ack-ack
-
Did the Pirate eat at Arrrrby's? :uhoh
-
You really thought the knight had a chance?
ack-ack
Yes, and I think it was fixed. The refs clearly wanted the pirates.
-
You really thought the knight had a chance?
ack-ack
I don't know why, but i just watched it on youtube. Once again, someone gets bashed in the head with a one strike kill weapon, and jumps up like he was hit with a nerf baseball bat.
-
I own a sick Katana blade made by Paul Chen called the "tiger", the first time I saw the show I was wishing I could use it, on those. :rofl
I wanted to see the Samurai vs Viking but I missed it, anyone know the results? I say the Samurai, hands down. this match up is a conundrum for me, I have Norseman blood in me, but I love and respect Bushido.
The samurai won by such a LUDICROUSLY slim margin its stupid they even gave him a victory.
He was helped by a horrible misunderstanding on the show of how Germanic warriors fought, unfairly weakened the Viking's shield, (those things were STRONG) and they cheated by giving the samurai a weapon that arguably could have been disqualified as something the typical samurai wouldn't have carried (kanabo).
-
Just watched it and was not impressed. They also totaly disregarded the viking double spear throw, those things went through wooden logs they would not bounce off.
-
The double spear throw was just gay, I don't believe it would be any more effective than your average person shooting 2 handguns at one time. Samurai victory.
-
pirate vs knight. Man Id love to see the knight swim to the boat AAARRR.
-
The double spear throw was just gay, I don't believe it would be any more effective than your average person shooting 2 handguns at one time. Samurai victory.
The double spear throw was a load of BS and I don't know WHERE the hell they got that from. A Viking would have USED HIS SHIELD. Javelin in his right hand ready to throw, with 2-3 more in his shield hand. Throw the first spear. Get another from your hand. Throw a second spear. Rinse repeat. More accurate and better power, plus he wouldn't sacrifice his defense.
Their entire premise was flawed from the start, and I wouldn't be surprised if they applied "Big and dumb" modifiers to the Viking to get his scores, and included the erroneous stereotype that Western Europe had no martial arts giving the samurai an unfair and inaccurate advantage.
-
I just like seeing them mutilate pig carcasses... But nah i think it is a good show. I think that they should have modeled the fight between the pirate and the night better to reflect the results of the test. I mean the pirate did get whacked in the head with the morning star and you don't just get up from that, plus he threw sand in the knights eye, technically that was a weapon and should not have been included.
-
I just like seeing them mutilate pig carcasses... But nah i think it is a good show. I think that they should have modeled the fight between the pirate and the night better to reflect the results of the test. I mean the pirate did get whacked in the head with the morning star and you don't just get up from that, plus he threw sand in the knights eye, technically that was a weapon and should not have been included.
you certainly would not be able to get up after a hit from a morning star, unless you were wearing a helmet, which pirates did not :rolleyes:
sounds like the show is typically biased, not gonna bother watching it again.
-
I'm glad someone else knows just what a task beating a large shield+weapon is for a single sword of any type. :D
Let me put it this way. A large shield closes off at least an entire quadrant of the opponent to attack. A shield is a tough obstacle to get around even when the shield bearer is untrained. The closing off of so much target for the opponent makes attacks to anything he can conceivably aim at that much more predictable. Say for instance, the seemingly least covered target on a guy holding a large round shield, the legs. I can't say what Viking martial arts were like, but if they were anything like later European sword arts, time cuts and thrusts to the attackers sword hand, wrist, shoulder (or head, in the case of low attack) combined with evasives were standard procedure. Not only that, but the shield can be used to effectively close off the line of counter-attack for a time cut or thrust against the sword&shield wielder when he himself is on the offensive.
I consider the Samurai's prime advantage in this match to be the fact they clad him in head-to-toe armor, protection not quite as comprehensive or technically sophisticated as suits of full plate from the European 15th century, but formidable none-the-less. Of course, the show inanely inverted the issue of speed; The Viking, wearing only a maille-shirt and helmet, would have been the one enjoying far fewer restrictions on his mobility and agility, at the cost of less protection.
To be fair though, a spear, naginata, or other pole-arm would always be the warrior's first choice for battlefield conditions, including the samurai. And samurai would often have carried a larger sword more effective for the battlefield than the standard
It is an interesting aberration of martial history that shields don't seem to have seen much use in Japan. I attribute it to how warfare developed in Japan. The Samurai began as a mounted-archer...by the time he became a dismounted fighter, his armor had developed to the point to defend him sufficiently well and make two-handed weaponry more desirable. You see the same progression in Europe, shields becoming smaller and less used as the knights began to be covered head-to-toe with maille and plate defenses were added, simultaneously two-handed polearms and swords with a better chance to attack the new armor become more common.
-
I'm glad someone else knows just what a task beating a large shield+weapon is for a single sword of any type. :D
Let me put it this way. A large shield closes off at least an entire quadrant of the opponent to attack. A shield is a tough obstacle to get around even when the shield bearer is untrained. The closing off of so much target for the opponent makes attacks to anything he can conceivably aim at that much more predictable. Say for instance, the seemingly least covered target on a guy holding a large round shield, the legs. I can't say what Viking martial arts were like, but if they were anything like later European sword arts, time cuts and thrusts to the attackers sword hand, wrist, shoulder (or head, in the case of low attack) combined with evasives were standard procedure. Not only that, but the shield can be used to effectively close off the line of counter-attack for a time cut or thrust against the sword&shield wielder when he himself is on the offensive.
I consider the Samurai's prime advantage in this match to be the fact they clad him in head-to-toe armor, protection not quite as comprehensive or technically sophisticated as suits of full plate from the European 15th century, but formidable none-the-less. Of course, the show inanely inverted the issue of speed; The Viking, wearing only a maille-shirt and helmet, would have been the one enjoying far fewer restrictions on his mobility and agility, at the cost of less protection.
To be fair though, a spear, naginata, or other pole-arm would always be the warrior's first choice for battlefield conditions, including the samurai. And samurai would often have carried a larger sword more effective for the battlefield than the standard
It is an interesting aberration of martial history that shields don't seem to have seen much use in Japan. I attribute it to how warfare developed in Japan. The Samurai began as a mounted-archer...by the time he became a dismounted fighter, his armor had developed to the point to defend him sufficiently well and make two-handed weaponry more desirable. You see the same progression in Europe, shields becoming smaller and less used as the knights began to be covered head-to-toe with maille and plate defenses were added, simultaneously two-handed polearms and swords with a better chance to attack the new armor become more common.
The weight and mobility restrictions of plate-style armor is a bit overdone, tho. Keep in mind that mail weighs directly on the shoulders. It gets heavy the longer you wear it (I've recently taken to wearing mail at my longsword class. It DEFINITELY takes a toll). When you first put it on you're like, "Hey, this isn't so bad." Then twenty minutes later you're like "God, I'm dying!" A LOT has to do with your physical conditioning, but mail WILL eventually slow you down.
The issue with plate was NOT restrictions to mobility, or even weight. Plate was heavier, but the weight was evenly distributed because it strapped TO the parts it protected. The problem with plate was the HEAT. It gets dammed hot in there which tires you out much faster.
As far as weaponry, if the program had treated the shield PROPERLY (see my post on the other thread about how that shield SHOULD have been constructed) then even a heavy weapon like the kanabo would have been hard-pressed to get past the Viking's defenses. It wouldn't be breakage that would render the shield useless. It would be a big, heavy spear or javelin getting stuck in it and weighing it down! Germanic warriors even used a variant of the Roman angon SPECIFICALLY for this purpose: extended iron head that bent on impact to prevent extraction and hacking it off. The limited utility of the much-vaunted katana would be crippling to the Samurai in this case, because while the longsword could be used to hook around the shield (short-edge cuts, hooking with the guard and pommel, etc) the katana is far less versatile.
-
Sax dont forget that a warrior would have put that chain shirt on every morning and not taken it off till bedtime. They would be so accustomed to the weight that bare chested they would feel unaturaly light footed and out of balance.
-
Sax dont forget that a warrior would have put that chain shirt on every morning and not taken it off till bedtime. They would be so accustomed to the weight that bare chested they would feel unaturaly light footed and out of balance.
Hate to disagree Mech, but this is actually an exaggeration. A professional fighting man would be in tip-top shape and quite able to execute his martial art in armor, but if you will remember even Harald Hardrada and his men were caught at Stanford bridge *without* their mail shirts. If you doff your mail shirt while on a march through potentially hostile territory, you probably also don't wear continually it while tending the cattle or otherwise going about your daily business.
Sax: I've had a mail shirt on a few times myself. I agree about the comfort factor, but still find it ironic that the producers of the show stereotyped the Viking as slow, ponderous, and over-burdened when in fact the Samurai was wearing the heavier kit.
I find the Apache/Gladiator, Ninja/Spartan, Pirate/Knight match-ups fatally flawed, they are apples-to-oranges comparisons. In every case you are taking generalists who train many skills *besides* combat with hand weapons and putting them in close combat with specialists whose main raison d'etre IS fighting with hand weapons, and who are better armed and equipped for this specific task, THEN predicting that the guy who is better trained and equipped for this particular situation will loose. That is like taking someone who has a good all-around MA score, bomber, gv, attack, and is a passably good pick-and-run fighter stick, then putting them in the DA with someone like Batfink and predicting that the latter player will come out on the short end.
-
triple posts are rare and beautifull things. I actualy blame my crappy internet for 1/3 of my post count here.
-
argh
-
Should have been more specific there than just 'warriors', sorry. I was refering only about Danish raiders in Wessex around the time of Alfred the Great, very much what the definition of a viking would be, except smart, spiritual and cunning as well as strong and fearless.
I have learnt a little of how they lived and was taught that the chain shirt was worn at all waking hours to accustom the sword Dane to the weight. They would not feel at ease without the comforting weight. Movements would take time to get used to the lack of resistance.
Obviously i am no historian.
I also agree with your premise about the match up flaws, but enjoyed the testing sessions alot for all weapons.
-
I would put my money on Miyamoto Musashi,
if they had the samurai wearing heaver armor they are way off :rofl not that I lived back then and know 100%, but as far as I know Samurai armor was mostly bamboo.
I personally believe the Japanese Samurai, were the greatest warriors of all time, Miyamoto was the greatest of them all.
I also think Bruce Lee read his book "the Book Of Five Rings" and built his "jute kune do" from that. (That is a great read BTW.)
The dedication of the Oriental people, in all that they do is amazing.
-
I would put my money on Miyamoto Musashi,
if they had the samurai wearing heaver armor they are way off :rofl not that I lived back then and know 100%, but as far as I know Samurai armor was mostly bamboo.
This is something of a myth. Rest assured that bamboo would make a poor armor in terms of protection offered compared to the burden it would impose. Japanese armor typically consisted of small iron plates laced together and lacquered against rust, gradually evolving to include larger pieces of plate. The scale-type armor is somewhat heavier than either maille or European plate in relation to area of the body covered, the plate armor is approximately equivalent. It seems to have been about as effective at rendering the cutting edge of the sword impotent as European armor was...interestingly, I've seen demonstrations Koryu techniques that are similar to Medieval European sword arts in their penchant for techniques for attacking relatively poorly protected/vulnerable areas (counter-striking at hands or exposed legs, thrusting for the exposed face/eyes, armpit, elbow gap, groin, etc). This is distinct from the disemboweling/head splitting/decapitating they like to depict in movies but which in reality would only result in ineffectively striking the most heavily protected areas of the body.
(http://www.sengokudaimyo.com/katchu/graphics/01graphs/gusoku.jpg)
I personally believe the Japanese Samurai, were the greatest warriors of all time, Miyamoto was the greatest of them all.
I also think Bruce Lee read his book "the Book Of Five Rings" and built his "jute kune do" from that. (That is a great read BTW.)
The dedication of the Oriental people, in all that they do is amazing.
This is also something of a myth. When you get past Hollywood, there is nothing particularly superior about Japanese weapon or unarmed martial arts...or really anybody's martial arts, you see the same techniques over and over again. Convergent evolution. Longsword and katana technique is sometimes eerily similar, but it is logical that two peoples trying to solve the same problem (how to kill an opponent with a two-handed sword, in and out of armor) would come up with similar solutions. And when you look you end up seeing similar things in Fillipino martial art, Chinese martial art, etc.
One thing about the Medieval Japanese warrior culture though is that they were insular, isolated, and *never* had much chance to either clash or cross-pollinate with the warriors of other lands. A Medieval Japanese army faced outsiders exactly once, in a battle with the invading Mongols, in which the Japanese forces were driven from the field. Japan was saved from Mongol domination by a quirk of the weather. Of course, one great benefit of this isolationism and Japanese preservationism is that the martial arts revolving around their obsolete weapons have been more fully preserved into the modern era than those of many other cultures.
Bruce Lee based his personal fighting style which he presents in "The Tao of Jeet Kune Do" upon three principle sources: Wing Tsun Kung-Fu, Western boxing, and Western fencing, the latter which Lee found so fascinating and useful that the name for his martial art, "Way of the Intercepting Fist", refers to the stop-thrust concept from fencing. Musashi is claimed by some to have been inspired to devise his method of wielding the katana and wakizashi by watching Portuguese sailors fence with sword and dagger, though this is impossible to prove either way. The thing that is for certain is that his book of Five Rings is highly critical of martial art in practiced in Japan at the time and Musashi seems to have had his own ideas. All we really know about Musashi's greatness is that he probably won a large number of single combats, but the same thing can be said Fiore de Liberi or Johannes Liechtenauer.
-
It also sounds like he's SERIOUSLY overestimating the katana, which has an extremely limited utility as a slicing blade and would be a very poor choice against a heavily armored opponent. For armored fighting especially the edge would go towards someone trained in and weilding a longsword. A point designed for thrusting (curved blades are VERY awkward for accurate thrusts) combined with half-sword techniques allows for precision strikes at gaps in the plate. Add in use of the pommel and guard in both strikes and grappling/hooking, and the longsword has a clear advantage in harnischfechten.
-
It also sounds like he's SERIOUSLY overestimating the katana, which has an extremely limited utility as a slicing blade and would be a very poor choice against a heavily armored opponent. For armored fighting especially the edge would go towards someone trained in and weilding a longsword. A point designed for thrusting (curved blades are VERY awkward for accurate thrusts) combined with half-sword techniques allows for precision strikes at gaps in the plate. Add in use of the pommel and guard in both strikes and grappling/hooking, and the longsword has a clear advantage in harnischfechten.
the bold on your quote, :rofl :rofl, I have seen what they can do, (not on a human mind you),But the Katana I have, is a 3 foot long scuple.
concidering I have owned Many swords, all have been combat ready, I would take the Katana over all.
BnZs
sounds good.
-
Let me clarify: Its use as a slicing blade isn't what's limited. It's that it's pretty much what the katana's utility is limited TO.
You have a single edge which limits the sort of cuts you can perform. Thrusting is awkard because of the curve of the blade, and is also further limited by blade geometry. A sword WILL NOT cut through plate armor. I don't care what magical properties you think Japanese swords had. Steel does NOT cut steel (I think the Mythbusters proved this pretty conclusively) in this manner. The katana is a very specialized sword. At best you could cause blunt-force trauma, but against high-quality plate (which used ridges and roping to further stiffen it) you're going to ruin your edge before doing significant damage to an opponent.
For sheer flexibility and versatility the katana is hopelessly outdone by the longsword, and its pure cutting ability isn't so far behind the katana as you might think. The two edges of the longsword provides more versatility in the cut, and the guard is as much an offensive tool as it is to protect the hand (hooking, tripping, striking, binding the blade, etc). The pommel is also just as often used offensively as it is to counterweight the blade (where do you think the verb "pummel" comes from?) The taper of the blade makes it ideally suited for the thrust which, combined with half-sword techniques, makes the longsword idea for close-quarters fighting against armored opponents where precision thrusts can defeat the best suit of armor.
-
the bold on your quote, :rofl :rofl, I have seen what they can do, (not on a human mind you),But the Katana I have, is a 3 foot long scuple.
concidering I have owned Many swords, all have been combat ready, I would take the Katana over all.
BnZs
sounds good.
Absolutely... Not sure what the other guy (Sax) is talking about... Maybe he's mistaking a saber for a Katana....? A Katana could easily get in between pieces of armor and do damage..
As far as sharpness, I'm not so sure Sax knows what a Katana is unless he's thinking about the stainless steel replicas one can buy.. Those replicas are made only for show and wouldn't even
hold an edge after cutting through a loaf of bread... True Katanas (and the ones built today as well as the past by swordsmiths) are razor sharp and they remain razor sharp due to the processes used in creating it.. Katanas were also well known for being able to cut through metal.. A Katana would be just as durable as a long sword and much less unwieldy.. The only true capability the long sword was useful in was thrusting which would be easy for a Katana wielder to parry or block and make a fight-ending counter strike.. Sorry, but these two weapons just aren't even comparable..
Two experienced swordsman: one with a katana, the other with a longsword.... I'd put my money on the Katana wielder any day...
-
Anodizer,
Thanks for proving just as clueless as ink, who misread my first post.
A Katana could easily get in between pieces of armor and do damage..
Define easily. At full range you don't have the point control for that degree of accuracy with a cut. The best way to do it is at close range with a thrust.
Katanas were also well known for being able to cut through metal.
According to what scientific source and study? A katana couldn't even slice through the mail hauberk in their tests for Deadliest Warrior.
...much less unwieldy
Total myth. This was a lightweight, (2-3lbs max) extremely well balanced (3" from hilt) weapon. The longsword is quick and very agile.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rdg-ooGKgoY
Very evenly matched, here and certainly no overwhelming edge to the katana (waster vs. bokken, so no one decides to be a smartass and point it out)
-
the longsword was intended for use with a sheild, dont forget. The katana is not a heavy weapon and penetration with a cut or slash would depend on intimate knoledge of the enemy's weak spots. What part of history makes everyone believe the oriental warriors had such overpowering agility and weapon skill compared to European races? Sure they looked at combat in different ways and trained more intensively than your average militia army....but what about the yeoman who trained as an archer every single day of his young and mature life BY LAW. The raining death of 40,000 longbows makes samurai look like action figures.
Like BnZs said, put a casual player into the DA with a regular dueler and the outcome is often obvious. But flip that round and put the regular dueler in a furball and watch them die fast. Just like the samurai who complains that they use cannons and rifles, only to be killed and forgotten because of the foolish notion that warfare should be man to man with honour.
A viking vs a samurai in 1 on 1 combat? The whole idea is flawed that the viking would agree to fight on the samurai's terms like that.
-
the longsword was intended for use with a sheild, dont forget.
NO IT WAS NOT. The longsword was a two-handed sword. PERIOD.
And does this look like an unwieldly sword:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsGU5KI1qJA
Here's an even better one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GhKrgUmKGc&NR=1
-
Really? Ok then my mistake. Well when are we going to set the rules of this fight in stone then? The vikings in general would have prefered to use a sheild and one handed weapon in combat unless maybe they were vastly stronger an the enemy. Why are we now saying the viking is fighting with a two handed sword? Or maybe why did the TV show chose a two handed weapon vs a katana? Why dont we just have a contest to see which one of them speaks more fluent japanese?
Do you disagree with anything else i posted before this one?
-
We kind of got off track thanks to ink and anodizer and their "OMFG TEH SAMURI WOULD WIN 'CAUS TEH KITANA IZ TEH SUPERIORIST SWORD EVAR!! ROFL!!!1!!!11111!!!" ignorance.
Here's another waster vs. bokken. They're pulling their shots, but there's a more clear winning cuts to the openings by the longsword:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFGPCTMp2cw&feature=related
-
I think the pairing in this show is ridiculous. They put warriors with different strategies against each other. Spartan vs Ninja? Pirate vs Knight?
How about Ninja vs Pirate and Spartan vs Knight. Now THAT is something I would like to see.
-
Anodizer,
Thanks for proving just as clueless as ink, who misread my first post.
Define easily. At full range you don't have the point control for that degree of accuracy with a cut. The best way to do it is at close range with a thrust.
According to what scientific source and study? A katana couldn't even slice through the mail hauberk in their tests for Deadliest Warrior.
Total myth. This was a lightweight, (2-3lbs max) extremely well balanced (3" from hilt) weapon. The longsword is quick and very agile.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rdg-ooGKgoY
Very evenly matched, here and certainly no overwhelming edge to the katana (waster vs. bokken, so no one decides to be a smartass and point it out)
First of all, to use information gathered from a severely flawed TV show is invalid.. The show is for entertainment purposes.. Much like the show Dogfights..
You think that show is viable as well?
Frankly, I'm on vacation at the moment and don't feel the time or need to cite information. All I know is the information I've read about and spoken to others
in the Kendo community, of which I am a part of as well as research I've done on my own regarding Medieval martial arts and weaponry..
Also, you posted a video of two gentlemen fight with nothing more than wooden analogues of a Katana and Longsword.. Neither are wearing traditional armor..
Neither seems properly schooled, especially the guy wielding the Bokken.. To compare something on this is as well as a TV show......well..... It's not right...
What other kinds of information to find accurate as far as TV and YouTube is concerned?
-
Lightsaber pwns all.
-
Not all of fencing is DONE in armor. In fact Blossfechten plays as much of a role in longsword as harnischfechten.
BUT you want armor? Here it is, couple guys from ARMA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnqOMbFDEAI
More ARMA, blossfechten with steel practice swords:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNja00FNyeg&feature=related
These aren't just "two guys on YouTube." ARMA is one of the foremost martial arts revival societies.
http://www.thehaca.com/
And I just KNEW you were going to dismiss the bokken vs. waster out of hand.
-
The show would have been great if they showed two "possible" outcomes, with each warrior winning the fight.
-
I think the pairing in this show is ridiculous. They put warriors with different strategies against each other. Spartan vs Ninja? Pirate vs Knight?
How about Ninja vs Pirate and Spartan vs Knight. Now THAT is something I would like to see.
ninja vs samuri, gladiator vs spartan. sounds better to me .
-
Not all of fencing is DONE in armor. In fact Blossfechten plays as much of a role in longsword as harnischfechten.
BUT you want armor? Here it is, couple guys from ARMA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnqOMbFDEAI
More ARMA, blossfechten with steel practice swords:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNja00FNyeg&feature=related
These aren't just "two guys on YouTube." ARMA is one of the foremost martial arts revival societies.
http://www.thehaca.com/
And I just KNEW you were going to dismiss the bokken vs. waster out of hand.
You're missing my point completely... You are showing guys fighting in the same style with the same type of sword.... How is this relevant to the conversation?
I thought we were talking about Katana versus Longsword???
-
Lightsaber pwns all.
Totally....... :rock
-
First of all, to use information gathered from a severely flawed TV show is invalid.. The show is for entertainment purposes.. Much like the show Dogfights..
You think that show is viable as well?
Frankly, I'm on vacation at the moment and don't feel the time or need to cite information. All I know is the information I've read about and spoken to others
in the Kendo community, of which I am a part of as well as research I've done on my own regarding Medieval martial arts and weaponry..
Also, you posted a video of two gentlemen fight with nothing more than wooden analogues of a Katana and Longsword.. Neither are wearing traditional armor..
Neither seems properly schooled, especially the guy wielding the Bokken.. To compare something on this is as well as a TV show......well..... It's not right...
What other kinds of information to find accurate as far as TV and YouTube is concerned?
Just so I understand here... You're flat our refusing to bring any sources into the discussion, and then you're "outing" Sax for the ones he has admitted are weak, but happen to be available?
I have no dog in this fight. I'm vaguely interested in swords and combat. I'm intrigued by the amount of deference we (Americans anyhow) give to Asian Martial Arts while not giving European Martial Arts Much credit (I think it really comes down to inadvertent racists nobilizing the savage, but that's just me). Anyhow, I don't know Sax at all, but he's pwning the discussion from my chair.
-Sik
-
The point of those videos is to show that this wasn't a lumbering hunk of metal. It's quick, and it's agile, and your argument about it being unwieldly is BEYOND ludicrously misinformed, if not blatantly prejudiced. It doesn't take demonstrating techniques AGAINST a katana to show that.
This is a versatile tool that can take on the qualities of a two-handed sword, short spear, bill, pick, mace/hammer. Literally every part of this sword was a weapon and could be used in the attack, which is something the more specialized katana can't claim.
-
I truly could care less who owns the discussion.... Obviously there is bias on both sides of the argument..
I could probably find thousands of bits of information supporting both claims..
Longswords I've seen and handled were heavy.. They could not be wielded in such a fluid and circular way
as a Katana.. To me, they seem more like thin metal clubs with a pointed tip.. They don't seem especially sharp for having
double edges.. Not to say they weren't created with the same precision and workmanship as a Katana.. Of course they were! They were good for their uses, I'm sure..
Compared to a Katana, it is cumbersome, heavy, and unwieldy..
Using common sense while looking at the two can tell you that...
Also, sickboy, I'm on vacation with my family away from any information resources besides the internet...
Frankly, I'm in enough trouble as it is just being on here and not in bed with my wife....
-
I truly could care less who owns the discussion.... Obviously there is bias on both sides of the argument..
I could probably find thousands of bits of information supporting both claims..
Longswords I've seen and handled were heavy.. They could not be wielded in such a fluid and circular way
as a Katana.. To me, they seem more like thin metal clubs with a pointed tip.. They don't seem especially sharp for having
double edges.. Not to say they weren't created with the same precision and workmanship as a Katana.. Of course they were! They were good for their uses, I'm sure..
Compared to a Katana, it is cumbersome, heavy, and unwieldy..
Using common sense while looking at the two can tell you that...
Also, sickboy, I'm on vacation with my family away from any information resources besides the internet...
Frankly, I'm in enough trouble as it is just being on here and not in bed with my wife....
You accuse me of never seeing a real katana and are going by cheap imitations or stainless examples.
I can tell from your post RIGHT THERE that's all you've ever seen and it shows.
My steel practice sword has a 40" blade and 13" hilt. It's a blunted blade ~1/16" thick (it's designed for steel-on-steel drilling, we're not there to cut with it). Blade is about 2" wide at the hilt, tapered to a blunted point. It weighs THREE POUNDS. 3lbs. 3#. That's NO MORE than what a Katana would weigh. The point of balance is precisely 3" ahead of the guard. It's beautiful, perfectly balanced. If I'd had it made with a true cutting edge rather than as a practice blade it could have been even LIGHTER (I can't WAIT until I get around to having my cutter made. I'm gonna go all out, even a stitched leather wrap for the grip instead of glued on, and peened tang rather than the bolt :-P~ ~ ~ ).
Don't judge by those 5lb knockoffs and Kit Rae monstrosities.
-
cool fights with the wooden swords Sax. That samurai was bigger than the viking though :)
-
Also, sickboy, I'm on vacation with my family away from any information resources besides the internet...
Frankly, I'm in enough trouble as it is just being on here and not in bed with my wife....
There's no problem with not having access to materials, however you would do well to refrain from bagging on other sources if you don't have your own.
-Sik
-
If I may,I'd like to keep this going,the Katana vs European sword debate has been going on for years.Who would win is impossible to tell,too many variables,but to those who hold the Katana in it's vaulted place I'd like to say"Saxman is correct".What I mean is the Katana is limited,while you can thrust with it thats not it's proper use.It has a curved blade,that serves 2 purposes 1 to lengthen the cutting edge and 2 to add leverage to the slicing stroke.Now don't get me wrong, a well forged Katana is a work of art and almost mystical.
That said the European sword(s) were just as efficient as the Oriental sword(s) maybe the care taken in forging wasn't quite up to the Oriental standards but then again the design was such that it may not of been needed.The longsword,if I can use that term,was designed to cut and thrust and as such it was more versatile than the Katana and when used with sheild or dagger maybe more deadly than the Oriental sword(s).
ps: I know the longsword is a 2 hander it was just easier than saying European swords......
Plz continue gents.. :salute
-
First of all, to use information gathered from a severely flawed TV show is invalid.. The show is for entertainment purposes.. Much like the show Dogfights..
You think that show is viable as well?
Frankly, I'm on vacation at the moment and don't feel the time or need to cite information. All I know is the information I've read about and spoken to others
in the Kendo community, of which I am a part of as well as research I've done on my own regarding Medieval martial arts and weaponry..
Also, you posted a video of two gentlemen fight with nothing more than wooden analogues of a Katana and Longsword.. Neither are wearing traditional armor..
Neither seems properly schooled, especially the guy wielding the Bokken.. To compare something on this is as well as a TV show......well..... It's not right...
What other kinds of information to find accurate as far as TV and YouTube is concerned?
I stopped paying attention to the tard.
typical person who cant see beyond his own nose.
-
They could not be wielded in such a fluid and circular way
as a Katana.. To me, they seem more like thin metal clubs with a pointed tip.. They don't seem especially sharp for having
double edges.. Not to say they weren't created with the same precision and workmanship as a Katana.. Of course they were! They were good for their uses, I'm sure..
Compared to a Katana, it is cumbersome, heavy, and unwieldy..
Using common sense while looking at the two can tell you that...
With the energy you can put behind a sword sharpness is irrelevant. A blunt edged sword will cut bone and flesh just as easily as a sharp edged sword. However against armor (especially metal armor) a thin, broad blunt edged european sword is far superior to the thick, but sharp Japanese swords.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFQ4aanmupU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vleC5-tvx4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIsec-MTGwU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v4j3mvrDyQ&NR=1
As for speed and maneuverability, here's one of the heaviest European swords, a Claymore: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDoJ6kZyKis
Longsword: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvYsjmdac00
Plate armor and two-handed great sword: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6IL2giKNN8
A veteran Viking or a European Knight would own a Samurai. The Japanese fighting arts were too ritualized to compete with the European renaissance fighting arts which were bred from actual combat and war with other cultures. That Japan still exists and is not part of a greater Korea is just a fluke of history.
-
With the energy you can put behind a sword sharpness is irrelevant. A blunt edged sword will cut bone and flesh just as easily as a sharp edged sword. However against armor (especially metal armor) a thin, broad blunt edged european sword is far superior to the thick, but sharp Japanese swords.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFQ4aanmupU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vleC5-tvx4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIsec-MTGwU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v4j3mvrDyQ&NR=1
As for speed and maneuverability, here's one of the heaviest European swords, a Claymore: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDoJ6kZyKis
Longsword: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvYsjmdac00
Plate armor and two-handed great sword: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6IL2giKNN8
A veteran Viking or a European Knight would own a Samurai. The Japanese fighting arts were too ritualized to compete with the European renaissance fighting arts which were bred from actual combat and war with other cultures. That Japan still exists and is not part of a greater Korea is just a fluke of history.
sharpness irrelevant?
ok I'm done, not gonna argue with stupid any more, dragging me down to there level and beating me with experience.
-
sharpness irrelevant?
Yes. All european war swords were blunt edged. Why do you think that was?
It's not like they couldn't sharpen a blade. :lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxYvwEnKRjA
-
If I may,I'd like to keep this going,the Katana vs European sword debate has been going on for years.Who would win is impossible to tell,too many variables,but to those who hold the Katana in it's vaulted place I'd like to say"Saxman is correct".What I mean is the Katana is limited,while you can thrust with it thats not it's proper use.It has a curved blade,that serves 2 purposes 1 to lengthen the cutting edge and 2 to add leverage to the slicing stroke.Now don't get me wrong, a well forged Katana is a work of art and almost mystical.
That said the European sword(s) were just as efficient as the Oriental sword(s) maybe the care taken in forging wasn't quite up to the Oriental standards but then again the design was such that it may not of been needed.The longsword,if I can use that term,was designed to cut and thrust and as such it was more versatile than the Katana and when used with sheild or dagger maybe more deadly than the Oriental sword(s).
ps: I know the longsword is a 2 hander it was just easier than saying European swords......
Plz continue gents.. :salute
A lot of attention is focused on steel in Japanese swords, but they ignore the fact that European swords use much of the same construction technique. The steel may not have been as high quality as the best of the Japanese swords, but people have been creating this mythical level of disparity between them based on poor reproductions of Western swords for decades. In fact the EXACT same myths have been applied to Muslim swords cutting through the swords of Crusaders! There's an OBSESSION with people making out Medieval Western Europe as this backwards and uncouth period in history when compared to the Middle East and East, when the reality is far more complex. There are known historical European swords that could rival some VERY good Japanese blades in quality, just as there were inevitably Japanese swords of poorer make than what was being made concurrently in Europe.
The longsword and katana were designed for two very different purposes. The katana was designed primarily for slicing cuts, which it did very well. The longsword wasn't as effective but wasn't useless for slicing, either--there's a TON of application of draw cuts in the Liechtenauer tradition. It wouldn't be in there if it wasn't sharp enough to execute them--but was designed primarily for cleaving. The longsword began to evolve when mail started to become more widespread, (in the early medieval period it was only worn by wealthier warriors, and began to become more common during the later part of the Crusades) so the increased size of the sword and the lengthening of the hilt to allow two hands for increased power definitely provided a capability of smashing through mail. At the same time, the tip began to taper more making it ideal for thrusting. The balance of the sword (and I mean the REAL ones, not the cheap knockoffs meant to hang on a wall. If you're paying under $400 be VERY careful at what you're looking at. My practice sword was over $600) was superb, generally balancing within 3-4" of the guard, making the sword's pivot point very close to the front hand. With the back hand at the pommel the sword is very quick and responsive to changes in direction (I personally prefer a somewhat longer handle with a scent-stopper pommel, allowing me a better grip with the rear hand and more leverage for this purpose).
But it's a SERIOUS disservice to the sword to completely discount its versatility beyond the cut and thrust, which Anodizer is doing by balking at the videos I posted because they either used wasters and bokken, or were demonstrating against another longsword. I like to think of the longsword as the swiss army knife of the Medieval battlefield. Functionally, it's a two-handed sword. In a pinch, shorter examples (particularly the bastard sword of the later middle ages) could also be used with a shield. With the use of half-sword it becomes short thrusting spear/staff, with exceptional point control ideal for thrusting at gaps during fully armored combat (I've heard of VERY little, if any, utility of the katana in this regard). The guard is not just a means of protecting the hand, but is a fully functional weapon in its own right as a bill or hook, or even a form of pick (imagine punching someone in the temple or eye with the end of the guard!). The German school also uses the guard for traps of the blade, as well as in grappling (a MAJOR and often forgotten component of German martial arts is wrestling, and it figures VERY prominently into longsword, which you can see from the demonstrations in several of those videos). Then there's the pommel, which is an excellent weapon in its own right, turning the sword into a club or mace either using half-sword, or even gripping the whole sword by the blade (mordhau).
Any solid cut from any sword is going to give you a really bad day, so what difference does it make if you're cloven or sliced? The longsword is no less agile (which a certain poster would see if he bothered to take the videos seriously) and certainly more flexible. They're two different swords that do different things well, and it's enough of a difference in function that it's going to come down to how well the individual fighter can apply the full capabilities of his sword. The longswordsman would certainly need to beware of the quick slices of the katana, but his sword's cutting ability doesn't lag THAT far behind. The katana has to contend with the fact that he has NO way of knowing for sure from where or what part of the sword the attacks will come, as well as a slight advantage in reach to the longsword, and its superior thrusting ability. Oh, and for ink: a longsword thrust essentially ends in Langen Ort (long point) which isn't so easy to offset as you might think. Go too hard into the bind against Langen Ort and you're going to give yourself a lot of trouble.
-
Yes. All european war swords were blunt edged. Why do you think that was?
It's not like they couldn't sharpen a blade. :lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxYvwEnKRjA
Bad video. That's an arming sword, not broadsword. A broadsword is a VERY specific type of basket-hilt that appeared c. the 16th-17th centuries. And it perpetuates the same inaccurate and outdated notion that European swordsmanship was entirely brute strength, which your longsword videos (I especially liked this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvYsjmdac00) one) very nicely illustrates the OPPOSITE. Also, those swords WERE SHARP. As I said in my last post, there's a LOT of draw cuts especially in the German tradition (also applies to I.33) which would not have worked if these were blunt metal clubs.
-
Ink, I know you're an okay guy, but it is you and Anodizer who are arguing from a position of *profound* ignorance regarding this particular subject matter. It is not really you guys' fault, since between pop culture, the Renn Faire/SCA scene, and poor historians, there is a lot of BS floating around on this rather obscure subject.
Suffice to say, when I compared preserved/quality replica European cutting swords against their Japanese counterparts, the weights were similar, with the European swords actually being somewhat lighter in relation to their length. It is not surprising that swords designed for powerful cuts will have a similar mass, a cutting sword must have just enough blade to support cutting geometry, without adding undue mass. If you think about it, you will realize the idea that any culture was stupid enough to make inordinately heavy swords is absurd. Not only would excess weight decrease the sword's maneuverability, but velocity is a component in the force of your attacks. Too much weight would prevent the warrior from accelerating his sword effectively under realistic condition, actually reducing striking force.
Metallurgically speaking, European swords have a resilliency that most traditional Nihonto lack. If you have poor edge alignment while practicing tamashigiri, you can easily end with a bent sword. Some very old school dojos keep a device known as a "sword" straightener on the wall.... By comparison, from at least the Viking period onward, European swords can typically be flexed at least 30 degrees or so out of line and return to true. This allows these swords to be thinner in cross-section than is typical for a traditional Japanese sword.
How sharp were European swords? From studying the techniques of the European teachers of fence from the 14th-16th centuries, it is apparent that many of the techniques they taught for use against unarmored opposition were relatively quick, light strikes and slices that would require a decent edge. The idea that Europeans used a "blunt" sword because of armor is wrong. Sword-edge sharpness is irrelevant when attacking iron and steel armor, you are not going to cut it to any effective extent. (Full plate armor is such effective protection against sword strikes that re-enactors today engage in essentially full-contact sword fights wearing the stuff.) However not every opponent on the battlefield was armored head-to-toe, and against leather, cloth, flesh, and bone, edge sharpness is *not* irrelevant. The only sort of "edgeless" type of European sword I know of is a rare, specialized type called an estoc that was forced with a narrow, diamond cross-section and specifically used as a sort of short spear/leverage tool against fully armored opposition. But as I say, this type is rare, understandable considering you can execute the same types of techniques with a more standard longsword.
What is their cutting potential? The ARMA used to have a video of a member removing the head of a freshly-killed deer with a single, one-handed strike from an Oakeshott type XIV, a typical blade-form from around 1300, pictured below. The part that stuck in my mind was that it was actually a less than full force, "pulled" blow because the tester was being careful not to strike the floor! Preserved examples of this type of sword are typically around 28'' in the blade and weigh in between 2-2.5 lbs. It is something of a "compromise" design between cutting and thrusting, and the taper gives it a very pleasant balance.
(http://www.albion-swords.com/images/swords/albion/nextGen/sovereign/sovereign-1.jpg)
-
...from at least the Viking period onward, European swords can typically be flexed at least 30 degrees or so out of line and return to true. This allows these swords to be thinner in cross-section than is typical for a
No kidding on the flexing. My practice sword is like a spring if I strike the flat out near the tip. :D
The estoc is an interesting weapon, basically a longsword specialized for harnischfechten. Very rigid, very narrow blade. For those who can't picture it:
(http://www.aurorahistoryboutique.com/products/A000056_L.jpg)
Definitely limited in utility, and I'd prefer the versatility of having a good cutting edge, but a great example of form and function.
-
sharpness irrelevant?
ok I'm done, not gonna argue with stupid any more, dragging me down to there level and beating me with experience.
But Ink, you never did actually argue. You stated an unsupported opinion, then went all girlyman when the discussion moved forward without you. I mean, I didn't go back and re-check the thread, but you never actually advanced a real argument did you?
-Sik
-
The estoc is an interesting weapon, basically a longsword specialized for harnischfechten. Very rigid, very narrow blade. For those who can't picture it:
(http://www.aurorahistoryboutique.com/products/A000056_L.jpg)
Definitely limited in utility, and I'd prefer the versatility of having a good cutting edge, but a great example of form and function.
Very sexy, though!
-
Very sexy, though!
That's nice, but here's a real beauty.
(http://by-the-sword.com/acatalog/tink_2-hand_sharp.jpg)
-
Nice :)
Are you part of some sort of club or organization, like that ARMA you mentioned earlier? Or do you only collect swords and research European fighting styles?
-
Ink, I know you're an okay guy, but it is you and Anodizer who are arguing from a position of *profound* ignorance regarding this particular subject matter. It is not really you guys' fault, since between pop culture, the Renn Faire/SCA scene, and poor historians, there is a lot of BS floating around on this rather obscure subject.
Suffice to say, when I compared preserved/quality replica European cutting swords against their Japanese counterparts, the weights were similar, with the European swords actually being somewhat lighter in relation to their length. It is not surprising that swords designed for powerful cuts will have a similar mass, a cutting sword must have just enough blade to support cutting geometry, without adding undue mass. If you think about it, you will realize the idea that any culture was stupid enough to make inordinately heavy swords is absurd. Not only would excess weight decrease the sword's maneuverability, but velocity is a component in the force of your attacks. Too much weight would prevent the warrior from accelerating his sword effectively under realistic condition, actually reducing striking force.
Metallurgically speaking, European swords have a resilliency that most traditional Nihonto lack. If you have poor edge alignment while practicing tamashigiri, you can easily end with a bent sword. Some very old school dojos keep a device known as a "sword" straightener on the wall.... By comparison, from at least the Viking period onward, European swords can typically be flexed at least 30 degrees or so out of line and return to true. This allows these swords to be thinner in cross-section than is typical for a traditional Japanese sword.
How sharp were European swords? From studying the techniques of the European teachers of fence from the 14th-16th centuries, it is apparent that many of the techniques they taught for use against unarmored opposition were relatively quick, light strikes and slices that would require a decent edge. The idea that Europeans used a "blunt" sword because of armor is wrong. Sword-edge sharpness is irrelevant when attacking iron and steel armor, you are not going to cut it to any effective extent. (Full plate armor is such effective protection against sword strikes that re-enactors today engage in essentially full-contact sword fights wearing the stuff.) However not every opponent on the battlefield was armored head-to-toe, and against leather, cloth, flesh, and bone, edge sharpness is *not* irrelevant. The only sort of "edgeless" type of European sword I know of is a rare, specialized type called an estoc that was forced with a narrow, diamond cross-section and specifically used as a sort of short spear/leverage tool against fully armored opposition. But as I say, this type is rare, understandable considering you can execute the same types of techniques with a more standard longsword.
What is their cutting potential? The ARMA used to have a video of a member removing the head of a freshly-killed deer with a single, one-handed strike from an Oakeshott type XIV, a typical blade-form from around 1300, pictured below. The part that stuck in my mind was that it was actually a less than full force, "pulled" blow because the tester was being careful not to strike the floor! Preserved examples of this type of sword are typically around 28'' in the blade and weigh in between 2-2.5 lbs. It is something of a "compromise" design between cutting and thrusting, and the taper gives it a very pleasant balance.
(http://www.albion-swords.com/images/swords/albion/nextGen/sovereign/sovereign-1.jpg)
trust me I know about swords, it is a passion of mine.
I have studied sword making, and the history of them in all cultures. I love the sword whether it be a Katana, claymore, bastard, two hander, hand and half,cutlass, whatever I love them alllllllllllllllll, but the Katana is my Favorite.
I was gonna buy the Damascus Viking sword "Godfrey" held it in my hand, It was beautiful selling for $300, instead I picked the "miyamoto" Katana, it is just something about the Samurai and there history that I love. like I said I own the Katana by Paul Chen called the "tiger" do a search on it, it is absolutely amazing around 1800 layers, clay was used in the tempering proses, so the edge is extremely hard while the back is soft, the edge registers around 60 on the rockwell scale,while the back is about a 40. the Hamon line is awesome. real ray skin, double pinned Tsuka, iron tsuba sick...
But Ink, you never did actually argue. You stated an unsupported opinion, then went all girlyman when the discussion moved forward without you. I mean, I didn't go back and re-check the thread, but you never actually advanced a real argument did you?
-Sik
:rofl :rofl :rofl girlyman, :rofl :rofl :rofl
gotta love the security of the intardnet.
-
I'm learning longsword and have recently started I.33 as well with a local group here in St. Louis. Our main resource is Ringeck's manuscript, ~50 years after Lichtenaur so he follows very closely in that tradition. Our instructor actually moved out of town literally the week after I joined so we've been working with him long distance using film of our practice and sparring sessions and occasional sessions in-person when he makes it back in.
-
That is fine Ink, it was unsubstantiated and easily disprovable statements about superiority/inferiority that moved me to post. Like I say, it is an obscure subject, with lots of wrong ideas about.
Take for instance, the hammering together and folding of pieces of metal to make a sword. It was done at an early stage of steel-making in all cultures. It is, however, a process made necessary by a lack of furnaces hot enough to make large, homogeneous billets of steel from which to forge swords. So the various small bits of steel/steely iron that could be produced had to be forge-welded together and folded until the layering is fine enough that the metal is for all intents and purposes homogeneous in quality. It is a complex, almost mystical process, requiring great skill, and a great amount of time, and a true artist as the craftsman.
It is also unnecessary if your iron-working technology *has* progressed to the point where you can easily produce single pieces of steel large enough to make as sword from, as was the case the in Europe as early as the 14th century. A sword made from a single homogeneous piece of steel at least as strong, quality control is more precise, and is far, far cheaper to make. This last point might interest you Ink, you lean libertarian politically IIRC. You see, some historians cite the relative abundance of iron resources and the relative cheapness of edge weapons as a reason that European commoners were harder to effectively disarm than their Oriental counterparts, a circumstance which arguably led to the various traditions that ultimately gave rise to Classic Liberal notion of the right to keep and bear arms.
A more practical moral to this story might be that for a "use" sword, cutter or practice weapon, you will get just as much performance out of well-made weapon of simple steel as an outrageously expensive "Damascus" type or what have you.
trust me I know about swords, it is a passion of mine.
I have studied sword making, and the history of them in all cultures. I love the sword whether it be a Katana, claymore, bastard, two hander, hand and half,cutlass, whatever I love them alllllllllllllllll, but the Katana is my Favorite.
I was gonna buy the Damascus Viking sword "Godfrey" held it in my hand, It was beautiful selling for $300, instead I picked the "miyamoto" Katana, it is just something about the Samurai and there history that I love. like I said I own the Katana by Paul Chen called the "tiger" do a search on it, it is absolutely amazing around 1800 layers, clay was used in the tempering proses, so the edge is extremely hard while the back is soft, the edge registers around 60 on the rockwell scale,while the back is about a 40. the Hamon line is awesome. real ray skin, double pinned Tsuka, iron tsuba sick...
-
That is fine Ink, it was unsubstantiated and easily disprovable statements about superiority/inferiority that moved me to post. Like I say, it is an obscure subject, with lots of wrong ideas about.
Take for instance, the hammering together and folding of pieces of metal to make a sword. It was done at an early stage of steel-making in all cultures. It is, however, a process made necessary by a lack of furnaces hot enough to make large, homogeneous billets of steel from which to forge swords. So the various small bits of steel/steely iron that could be produced had to be forge-welded together and folded until the layering is fine enough that the metal is for all intents and purposes homogeneous in quality. It is a complex, almost mystical process, requiring great skill, and a great amount of time, and a true artist as the craftsman.
It is also unnecessary if your iron-working technology *has* progressed to the point where you can easily produce single pieces of steel large enough to make as sword from, as was the case the in Europe as early as the 14th century. A sword made from a single homogeneous piece of steel at least as strong, quality control is more precise, and is far, far cheaper to make. This last point might interest you Ink, you lean libertarian politically IIRC. You see, some historians cite the relative abundance of iron resources and the relative cheapness of edge weapons as a reason that European commoners were harder to effectively disarm than their Oriental counterparts, a circumstance which arguably led to the various traditions that ultimately gave rise to Classic Liberal notion of the right to keep and bear arms.
A more practical moral to this story might be that for a "use" sword, cutter or practice weapon, you will get just as much performance out of well-made weapon of simple steel as an outrageously expensive "Damascus" type or what have you.
you are correct, but the Hammering of the steel, the folding was to get impurities out of the iron, the sword I have was made of ASSAB-K120C powder steel, supposedly some of the highest quality steel out there, so yes the folding is only for aesthetics and man do they work :aok
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/closeupsword-1.jpg)
check this out samurai vs Knight
http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm
,
very good points. and yes I read the whole thing :lol
-
Yup Ink, that's written by the shortish guy with the bastard sword I posted videos of. Good writeup.
-
Clements can really fill up the pages when he gets the wind in his sails. :D
BTW, I dug up this article on Toshishiro Obata's "world record" helmet cut as an illustration of what a sword is likely to do, or rather, not do, to armor. The setup was an *authentic* kabuto setting on top of a stump being struck as forcibly as possible by an extremely powerful, expert swordsman, and the result was this....
(http://www.shinkendo.com/images/helmvid.jpg)
(http://www.shinkendo.com/images/helmvid2.jpg)
(http://www.shinkendo.com/images/helmet.jpg)
...a gash, that while *record-setting* at 13 centimeters, would likely not have even penetrated deeply enough to cut through the padding of the helmet and into the warrior's head. Armor works.
you are correct, but the Hammering of the steel, the folding was to get impurities out of the iron, the sword I have was made of ASSAB-K120C powder steel, supposedly some of the highest quality steel out there, so yes the folding is only for aesthetics and man do they work :aok
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/closeupsword-1.jpg)
check this out samurai vs Knight
http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm
,
very good points. and yes I read the whole thing :lol
-
A LOT of people forget the armor wasn't just being worn over their clothes. I don't know about in Japan, but at least in Europe soldiers wore a good deal of padding under their armor. The typical gambeson worn under mail was made of something like 50 layers of linen, occasionally with a leather outer shell and lining. This was NECESSARY, because while the armor could stop the cut that energy still has to go SOMEWHERE, and blunt-force trauma could be just as lethal as being cloven in two (whether stopped by armor or not, the sword STILL puts a lot of energy into a very focused point on impact which isn't good for your organs). They also wore an arming cap beneath their helm, and some helms themselves were heavily padded with linings of linen stuffed with straw.
That's one of the things I loved about Kingdom of Heaven. It's one of the first movies I've seen where they made a REAL effort at accuracy in Western Medieval European equipment and fighting styles (I LOVED the half-sword and hilt strikes they had Balian doing with his proto-longsword).
-
A LOT of people forget the armor wasn't just being worn over their clothes. I don't know about in Japan, but at least in Europe soldiers wore a good deal of padding under their armor. The typical gambeson worn under mail was made of something like 50 layers of linen, occasionally with a leather outer shell and lining. This was NECESSARY, because while the armor could stop the cut that energy still has to go SOMEWHERE, and blunt-force trauma could be just as lethal as being cloven in two (whether stopped by armor or not, the sword STILL puts a lot of energy into a very focused point on impact which isn't good for your organs). They also wore an arming cap beneath their helm, and some helms themselves were heavily padded with linings of linen stuffed with straw.
That's one of the things I loved about Kingdom of Heaven. It's one of the first movies I've seen where they made a REAL effort at accuracy in Western Medieval European equipment and fighting styles (I LOVED the half-sword and hilt strikes they had Balian doing with his proto-longsword).
great movie
-
gotta love the security of the intardnet.
What? You don't think I'd say that if you were standing here? You clearly don't know me, I've gotten my bellybutton kicked for less :)
But thank you for bringing something to the discussion, this is turning into a very informative thread.
-Sik
-
Ink,you need to check out the Japanese national museum,they have priceless Katana's on exhibit
I've been a sword fancier for many years,Paul chen's pieces are nice low cost swords.Before you go off about the cost check out what "real" katana's cost,near impossible to find for under $5000.
My brother inlaw was living in japan for a few years and I'd asked him if he would find me a "real" katana,which he did for a measly $10,000USD.... :O Nedless to say I declined.Besides my wife wont let me play with sharp things anymore. :o
This debate will undoubtedly go on for years again I say apples and oranges,swords evolved to meet the needs of the regions they were used in.Myself I see the beauty in all swords,the craftmanship on some examples are simply beyond comprehension.Both European and Oriental blacksmiths had their secrets and applied them as best as they could,given the technology available to them.
BTW that's a real beauty Sax and Ink the Hamon on the tiger is a wonderful example.
:salute
-
This debate will undoubtedly go on for years again I say apples and oranges,swords evolved to meet the needs of the regions they were used in.
This thread has been more a series of corrections of gross errors about the nature of European swords and their performance relative Japanese ones than a "debate"...the truth is, these swords were made to cut, thrust, and be handy, and any swordmaker from anywhere that was worth his salt made one that would do these jobs well. The truth is that a sword-fight would be decided by relative training, attitude, physical talent, and who had the bad luck to slip in the mud at an inopportune moment-too many variables to figure. With warriors armed with such similar technology, statements about who would win made with 100% certainty are absurd.
-
Katana won't cut through metal, and a hosepipe can smash your skull. What perhaps needs to be looked into more is the nature of the warriors, and how they would fight.
-
Katana won't cut through metal, and a hosepipe can smash your skull. What perhaps needs to be looked into more is the nature of the warriors, and how they would fight.
That's why I've been emphasizing the versatility of the longsword, which used the hilts offensively nearly as much as it did the blade. It's a beautiful thing to watch someone who REALLY knows the longsword close in and start adding hilt-strikes and grappling to the cuts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6Pnw-9A8qQ (keep in mind that's not full speed, the pauses are for demonstration purposes)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXbZqKnwDbQ&feature=related (THIS rocks)
-
nice move, looks like quite a heavy set lad he is throwing too.
-
Alles fechten kompt vom ringen.
-
nice move, looks like quite a heavy set lad he is throwing too.
There's quite a few throws and disarms in the Liechtenaur tradition that make use of the sword itself.
-
What? You don't think I'd say that if you were standing here? You clearly don't know me, I've gotten my bellybutton kicked for less :)
But thank you for bringing something to the discussion, this is turning into a very informative thread.
-Sik
nope you wouldn't.
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/Picture040-1.jpg)
extremely sharp
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/Picture036_xvid_0003.jpg)(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/Picture036_xvid_0004.jpg)(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/Picture036_xvid_0005.jpg)(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/Picture036_xvid_0006.jpg)(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/Picture036_xvid_0007.jpg)(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/Picture036_xvid_0009.jpg)(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/Picture036_xvid_0011.jpg)
close up of the blade. don't mind the white specks its from the paper.
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/Picture037-1.jpg)(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/Picture038-1.jpg)
Ink,you need to check out the Japanese national museum,they have priceless Katana's on exhibit
I've been a sword fancier for many years,Paul chen's pieces are nice low cost swords.Before you go off about the cost check out what "real" katana's cost,near impossible to find for under $5000.
My brother inlaw was living in japan for a few years and I'd asked him if he would find me a "real" katana,which he did for a measly $10,000USD.... :O Nedless to say I declined.Besides my wife wont let me play with sharp things anymore. :o
This debate will undoubtedly go on for years again I say apples and oranges,swords evolved to meet the needs of the regions they were used in.Myself I see the beauty in all swords,the craftmanship on some examples are simply beyond comprehension.Both European and Oriental blacksmiths had their secrets and applied them as best as they could,given the technology available to them.
BTW that's a real beauty Sax and Ink the Hamon on the tiger is a wonderful example.
:salute
the first pic I posted was not of mine, these are. trust me this Katana is as "real" as it gets, I have held what you refer to as "real",(recently sold a WW2 "real" one) there was one I wanted to pick that had been used by a Samurai, with the body count on the tang,( they would test out there swords on cadavers, or convicted prisoners and then engrave on tang how many bodies it went through) :cry $14,000
the newer Katana's (if made by a master) are better then the Originals, there is a guy in the states that makes his own Katana's, his cable ones are sick, before he sells them he holds up a length of 1/4 steel cable and cuts it in half. I looked for were he talks about cutting the cable but could not find it.
http://www.dragonflyforge.com/category/articles/
Battle axe is High carbon steel, guaranteed for life, to never break. plus I have a smaller one with the same size head for throwing.
found this, cant sleep, very cool had goosebumps watching it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwQqtf86qOc
-
ok ink wins, seeing as he actualy looks like a war hungry viking and if the katana fails he can chop your shoulders off with the axe.
-
Ink I'd contacted Dragonfly several years ago looking for a somewhat less expensive blade.
His work is incredible and he was willing to make a proper lenght blade for me,but as I've said the wife wont let me play with sharp things so I settle for taking my Epee out and pretend I'm Errol Flynn... :rofl
I know Chen's blades are real and for awhile he was making some interesting blades outta old train rails,his sweedish powdered steel blades are among my favs.
My old Master had a "real" presentation blade that he allowed me to hold,now that was a real Katana... over $30,000 ,If I could only remember the era I'd tell you.
-
Why would anyone be afraid of a man who has to tattoo a beard on?
J/K :D
-
nope you wouldn't.
No offense, but you're not going to cut me or otherwise assault me for saying that you're acting girly. But I guess that's what you meant by the security of the internet, you can imply that you would, and it makes you very tough indeed lol. Anyhow, you're not as intimidating as you think you are.
-Sik
-
No offense, but you're not going to cut me or otherwise assault me for saying that you're acting girly. But I guess that's what you meant by the security of the internet, you can imply that you would, and it makes you very tough indeed lol. Anyhow, you're not as intimidating as you think you are.
-Sik
did I ever say I would cut you :rofl or assault you? like I said intardnet is wonderful for people who want to live a life that is not there own, they can say whatever they want with no repercussions, they can pretend to be who ever they want and no ones the wiser, if you were to stand before me, I guarantee you would not talk smack.
last thing I got to say to you.
-
did I ever say I would cut you :rofl or assault you? like I said intardnet is wonderful for people who want to live a life that is not there own, they can say whatever they want with no repercussions, they can pretend to be who ever they want and no ones the wiser, if you were to stand before me, I guarantee you would not talk smack.
last thing I got to say to you.
Yes, I clearly think that the implication was there. If you want to deny that was your intent, feel free. But the fact remains, in real life I wouldn't hesitate, face to face to say anything that I've said in this thread. I'm an open and honest guy here, and several people on this board have met me in person and (I imagine) would agree with my view.
Anyhow, good luck trying to intimidate future posters.
-Sik
-
woah come on, aint we all going a little mental about this? Someone called out ink for not knowing his stuff...he was just showing that he actualy knows something or... at the very least is a considerable danger to pieces of paper everywhere. I doubt he truly wanted to intimidate anyone, but he sure scares the hell out of me.
-
woah come on, aint we all going a little mental about this? Someone called out ink for not knowing his stuff...he was just showing that he actualy knows something or... at the very least is a considerable danger to pieces of paper everywhere. I doubt he truly wanted to intimidate anyone, but he sure scares the hell out of me.
I'm tellin ya that paper had nothing on me :rofl
here is a video of a Katana cutting metal, I know someone said "it couldn't"
Mind ya I do not agree with what they are doing, but it does cut the barrel, I am not saying that it proves the Samurai would win, but just showing a Katana will cut metal. they have destructive test videos on a crap load of swords.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHm_pJceN5Q
now someone also said that "viking swords where not sharp" watch this vid, to be honest it seems sharper than my Katana,
this is truly a beautiful Viking sword.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzPxPAsuZN8
-
Hows the weather in Valhalla Ink? :lol
-
Hows the weather in Valhalla Ink? :lol
seeings how I am alive and kicking, couldn't tell ya :rolleyes:
-
Nice.
-
both those swords are stupidly sharp. The Viking sword piercing a plastic bottle without moving it in a thrust was impressive.
-
both those swords are stupidly sharp. The Viking sword piercing a plastic bottle without moving it in a thrust was impressive.
"scary sharp" is the way I describe it
thats the worst I have done with my blade,(water bottles) but that viking sword seems to really slice through them so sweetly.
I did 6 in a row and it looked like a razor cut them, oh wait it was :aok
I keep laughing over the " Viking swords were not even sharp..." or some such nonsense :rofl
the Paul Chen viking was very nice also, Damascus blade, done differently then the Samurai, it is made with 512 layers of alternating soft and hard steels, its not folded. but when they do fold the 512 layer Damascus that is when you get the most beautiful patterned blades.
except for the fact that this guy uses Bronze for fittings, very sweet blade
http://www.powning.com/jake/commish/progress1.shtml
-
What's wrong with bronze fittings? First, it's absolutely historical, especially for a wealthier man (cheaper swords would have used iron fittings, or even layers of bone or horn). Second, it makes for a beautiful sword.
(http://www.powning.com/jake/images/patternwlded12.jpg)
And believe me, this is GORGEOUS.
Also, saying that the katana could "cut metal" from that video is still partly exaggeration. Sure, it penetrated a few inches on the first cut, but the second cut had no deeper penetration than the axe. The first cut probably found a weak point on the barrel that the axe could have exploited just as well, and both cuts caused significant damage to the edge of the blade. The katana's mythical metal-cutting capabilities are just that: mythical. Try doing that on a piece of good steel plate armor.
-
Look, I don't really have the bandwidth at the house to fool with Youtube so I'm kinda working blind here....
If this is the famous "machine gun barrel" cutting video from WWII, that was a Japanese propaganda film. The MG barrel in this case was actually painted wood.
If by "barrel" you mean a storage drum, those things are pretty thin and and not treated for resistance to sword attack.
-
It was a storage drum.
The Mythbusters pretty decisively disproved the machine gun barrel thing. Even if the barrel was hot from firing it would have taken force WELL beyond the maximum human capabilities to have cut the barrel, it wouldn't have been a complete slice through, and would have destroyed the sword in the process.
-
What's wrong with bronze fittings? First, it's absolutely historical, especially for a wealthier man (cheaper swords would have used iron fittings, or even layers of bone or horn). Second, it makes for a beautiful sword.
(http://www.powning.com/jake/images/patternwlded12.jpg)
And believe me, this is GORGEOUS.
Also, saying that the katana could "cut metal" from that video is still partly exaggeration. Sure, it penetrated a few inches on the first cut, but the second cut had no deeper penetration than the axe. The first cut probably found a weak point on the barrel that the axe could have exploited just as well, and both cuts caused significant damage to the edge of the blade. The katana's mythical metal-cutting capabilities are just that: mythical. Try doing that on a piece of good steel plate armor.
I absolutely agree, that is awesome.
although I like the Damascus fittings much more.
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/SH1010.jpg)
Look, I don't really have the bandwidth at the house to fool with Youtube so I'm kinda working blind here....
If this is the famous "machine gun barrel" cutting video from WWII, that was a Japanese propaganda film. The MG barrel in this case was actually painted wood.
If by "barrel" you mean a storage drum, those things are pretty thin and and not treated for resistance to sword attack.
no its a barrel, 55 drum. not something I would try to cut with a sword, but it does show the ability to take a hard hit and not bend or break.
-
excuse me but i might ad that northmen were sailors also
-
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/SH1010.jpg)
no its a barrel, 55 drum. not something I would try to cut with a sword, but it does show the ability to take a hard hit and not bend or break.
The lack of spring I was referring to in typical authentically-made Nihonto was in the lateral plane, i.e, it would come up if you struck a target with very poor edge alignment or your sword was struck forcibly about the flat. Obviously a sword needs to be able to strike something with the *edge* without bending or breaking to be called a "sword". :)
-
here is a video of a Katana cutting metal, I know someone said "it couldn't"
Mind ya I do not agree with what they are doing, but it does cut the barrel, I am not saying that it proves the Samurai would win, but just showing a Katana will cut metal. they have destructive test videos on a crap load of swords.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHm_pJceN5Q
It cut the barrel edge, not the surface. It takes very little to stop a slashing weapon, regardless of how sharp it is. A chain mail is practically impervious to slashes and so is plate. Even hardened leather armor is a serious obstacle.
Samurai themselves did not use the katana as their primary weapon as it is not very effective on a battle field - for that they had the naginata, later replaced by the Yari (spear). I suspect the switch to the Yari was its better ability to pierce armor, while the naginata is basically a slashing blade on a stick. For chopping peasants or dueling another Samurai wearing pajamas the katana is an excellent choise. This is the exact equivalent of medieval knights who carried their arming sword with them at all times, but preferred other weapons on the battlefield as primaries.
By the way, in the movie, the axe the guy is using in comparison with the katana is a regular wood axe. It has little to do with the fighting/battle/war axe - these has a flat and relatively thin blade which could be sharpened like a sword's. Because of the large surface behind the sharp edge, it could sustain much harder strikes then a sword without shattering. Essentially a very wide blade, unlike the broad wedge-shape cross-section of the wood axe that also makes it very heavy and bad for combat.