Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 15, 2009 22:45:12 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2009 22:45:12 GMT
I just thought I should share this. I don't have much ex with katanas so I won't take a stand on it...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 15, 2009 23:48:22 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2009 23:48:22 GMT
Just one man's opinion. He seems articulate and well educated. Checked out his website, didn't bother the sift through the verbosity to determine if he has any credentials to make these judgments.
|
|
Avery
Member
Manufacturer/Vendor
"It's alright little brother... There are more!!!
Posts: 1,826
|
Katana
Nov 15, 2009 23:58:51 GMT
Post by Avery on Nov 15, 2009 23:58:51 GMT
That guy's pretty funny, I've seen a few of his other videos that made me chuckle. As for his history lesson, well that has the potential to open a can of worms. At the bottom of the can there's also going to be a dead horse that is going to take a massive beating again.
|
|
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 0:13:24 GMT
Post by YlliwCir on Nov 16, 2009 0:13:24 GMT
Okay, I'm in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 0:20:09 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 0:20:09 GMT
This is opening a can of worms here...
Anyway I'll throw in my two cents though since I'm sick with a nasty head cold and I'm bored out of my mind.
I agree with some of this guy's points ie. swords don't cut through swords, rifle barrels etc. I also agree the nihonto wasn't the end-all of swords. They were traditionally not tempered after hardening. The cutting edge of a nihonto, while extremely hard and sharp, was in general more brittle and more prone to damage than the edge of a through hardened and tempered European, Chinese or other country's swords'. Nihonto were not made to cut through armor either. If a samurai fully armored and armed with katana were fighting another fully armored samurai with nihonto they'd literally be trying to cut one another's armor off each other. Cut for the lacing was what my sensei told me in the rare and nearly impossible case I was in that situation. Cut the lacing and start making gaps in the armor. That's where you can make a kill. Either that or cut hard to the wrist, forearm or hand as they were generally less armored and could possibly be cut or at least broken. You can also strike hard to the kabuto - if you ring the bell hard enough you might get some time to get in a killing thrust or cut. I also agree that the Europeans were constantly creating different designs - to match or beat armor as the armor continued to progress in protectiveness. Japan kinda screwed itself in that aspect of development when it closed its borders.... No new opponents with different armor, weapons etc to fight against meant no need for newer designs. True there are quite a few different geometries but in general the basic blade shape and sword design remained virtually unchanged. Same goes for the armor and a lot of that has to do with Japan's very strict adherence to tradition and culture. Nothing wrong with that but it didn't serve them well in the way of weapons improvement. Its also true that folding steel had been practiced long before the Japanese did it in other parts of the world - Northern Europe, Middle East Asia and China.
Now what I don't agree with is the overall tone of his video - basically he's saying the nihonto was an overrated weapon that was obsolete/poor compared to European weaponry - that a nihonto was just a shaped bar of iron with a handle, meant for hitting people. If you want to break it down into semantics wasn't that what all swords were?
Well are there European swords that thrust better than a nihonto? Absolutely. Are there European swords that are more flexible than a nihonto? Of course! Are there European swords that are tougher than a nihonto? Damned right there are! Is there a European sword designed to do exactly what the nihonto does that does the job better? No.
Does that make them better? No. I admit a nihonto's design is primarily for slashing with a few thrusting techniques... and that no JSA student in their right mind would grasp their nihonto by the blade and use the tsuka/tsuba as a hammer (want to lose some fingers?). Ok so JSA isn't as varied in their techniques as WMA. What I can say though was that the nihonto was designed as a good all around sword designed and perfectly suited for the scenarios its wielder would encounter. Its not inferior to other European swords that are designed to fill the same role the nihonto filled in feudal Japan. All those swords have their own shortcomings just as the nihonto does. What it was created to do the nihonto does beautifully. What it was not created to do - well there's a lot of bs that makes the general public believe it'll do. That's not the fault of the nihonto but rather the fault of those who spread the myths and hype.
In the end I believe that technologically the nihonto was a bit behind European swords but only due to a lack of interaction with outsiders and a lack of suitable raw resources (like iron ore). I also believe that the hype and myths and overall bs just needs to be gotten rid of - however sadly that will never really happen.
The guy in the video seems well educated and articulate enough... sadly he, just like everyone else in swords, is biased in the debate between nihonto and European swords.
Btw, I LOVE nihonto and nihonto knockoffs (katana made in countries other than Japan). I'm not blinded by that love of the nihonto and the history and culture behind it though that I believe all the bs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 0:47:13 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 0:47:13 GMT
No sword is superior. 'Nuff said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 0:58:20 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 0:58:20 GMT
No sword is superior. 'Nuff said. agreed. That being said, I agree 100% with everything the guy in the video said also.
|
|
Avery
Member
Manufacturer/Vendor
"It's alright little brother... There are more!!!
Posts: 1,826
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 1:06:59 GMT
Post by Avery on Nov 16, 2009 1:06:59 GMT
Ok. so I figure I'll play the part of the Northern Euro advocate here, and others can advocate their particular area. No sword is superior. 'Nuff said. Depends on relativity. Longswords are superior in thrusting through armour than a Katana. Katana are superior at slicing than a Rapier. Rapiers are the best at thrusting, but not so good at slicing. Depending on the area of testing, there are superior and inferior blades. But I agree there is no "end all be all" sword. Human evolution constantly searched for better weapons, and swords fell to the wayside with the use of blackpowder. And no sword is greater than the killing power of a 22 rifle with a twenty round magazine at ten yards. But I digress. Lamentaion of steel was a discovery credited to the Nothern tribes of Europe well before the advent of the Katana. And one of the points of the video was to show how european blades constantly evolved while the Katana never really did. Don't misunderstand, I'm aware of the subtle differences made over the centuries with the Katana, but as a whole, no major change 'till new steels came along. Bear in mind, I'm playing devils advocate here a bit. Edit: spelling
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 1:22:17 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 1:22:17 GMT
I definitely agree to that. Even among European swords, it depends what you are looking for. If you are looking for a good cutting sword, then rapiers are not the thing for you... if you are looking for a quick stabbing sword not intended for armored combat, the opposite is true. It also comes down to the swordsman's style. Personally, I like straight edge, one hand arming swords, bastard swords, and messers, which can be used with a shield or alone with both hands, having a tremendous partiality to the arming sword 'n' shield style. Others prefer longer, two-handed swords that aren't used with a shield, yet others prefer rapiers and main gauche. For everyone of these groups the arming sword, the two-hander, and the rapier respectively are the superior sword, but it doesn't mean any of these is superior objectively.
|
|
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 1:48:18 GMT
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Nov 16, 2009 1:48:18 GMT
appearently the katana didn't need to change much once it got to a certain point. the Japanese have proven plenty of times the are into adapting to new situations. Japan was very isolated thus little to no outside influence meant the same old thing was good enough. Europe was obviously another story entirely.
I have seen a lot of that guy's videos and love most of them. he does occasionally say some things that are probably dead wrong but for the most part I think he's got a pretty good opinion on the stuff he talks about.
|
|
Avery
Member
Manufacturer/Vendor
"It's alright little brother... There are more!!!
Posts: 1,826
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 1:57:45 GMT
Post by Avery on Nov 16, 2009 1:57:45 GMT
appearently the katana didn't need to change much once it got to a certain point. the Japanese have proven plenty of times the are into adapting to new situations. Japan was very isolated thus little to no outside influence meant the same old thing was good enough. Europe was obviously another story entirely. I have seen a lot of that guy's videos and love most of them. he does occasionally say some things that are probably dead wrong but for the most part I think he's got a pretty good opinion on the stuff he talks about. I particularly like his videos where he discusses drawing a sword from the dominant side of the body. That one made me laugh while reinforcing why it is a good idea to not "cross draw" a sword. That principle is hard to explain, but I just show that one to folks and they get it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 12:50:05 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 12:50:05 GMT
He has a few problems with dates and time scale. The katana as we know it wasn't produced until the dead end of the 14th century; before that we had tachi and uchigatana; the latter of which couldn't be any older than the late 8th century.
M.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 12:53:25 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 12:53:25 GMT
Parts of what he says are right parts of it are not, overall it isn't a bad way to introduce people to the katana.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 15:09:48 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 15:09:48 GMT
I pretty much ditto Bloodwraith, some of it accurate, some of it not. He apears articulate and educated, but his tone carries an obvious bias. The katana does have a lot of hype with it though, that over the last few years of studying JSA and learning about swords, I now see through. It goes back to what I said about the katana in some other thread. For the resources they had on hand, and the technology level of "that" country, the nihonta was an amazing weapon. It makes you wonder what they might have come up with and done, if they were influenced by other cultures and threats, and started to get access to other steels.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 16:26:51 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 16:26:51 GMT
Actually, a good idea what the katana may have evolved into can be seen by looking at the changes in the Chinese dao blades which like the katana were originally drawn from the turko-mongol saber. Though in Japan that particular weapon came through the Chinese filter first. Just my $0.02
And, although I make many jokes about being in the "I hate the katana fan club" the nihonto is a fine weapon for what it was designed for. I just don't like all the hype.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 19:18:46 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 19:18:46 GMT
I just remembered - I'd seen an example of the best all around sword ever! Well not in person but well I just wanted to throw it out there: Best all around sword: Light Saber!!!! ;p lol!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 19:40:59 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 19:40:59 GMT
If you look at the development of japanese arms and armour you'll see a constant evolvement for the better. When guns came in use you can see new lamination techniques and shapes of armour as an example. The katana is really a bad example as it was considered more than a sword. You'll still see a development through the ages.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 20:34:19 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 20:34:19 GMT
The point isn't that Japan had no evolution in it's warfare but that it had very little when compared to any given European country.
|
|
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 20:46:16 GMT
Post by randomnobody on Nov 16, 2009 20:46:16 GMT
Europe is much bigger than Japan. It's only natural to find greater vatiations anong, well, practically everything.
How many oakeshott types are there, again? I seem to want to think there were quite nearly as many evolutions of the Japanese sword, if maybe on a slightly more subtle scale...
Not that it matters. Japan was a late entry to the world of armed warfare for one or another reason and had a comparatively short period of said warfare. Little change is to be expected, but look at what did change.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 16, 2009 22:00:03 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 22:00:03 GMT
weapons always change with the conditions of the time if they didnt we all would still be fighting with bronze kopish swords. that being said i think every weapon reaches its pinnacle the katana reached its point. If i recall it started out alot like a chinese sword and it evolved with the different armor periods. just like how the weapons and armor of today are evolving to meet demands
|
|