Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 2:01:55 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 2:01:55 GMT
I like most of that guys videos. I'll admit he hasn't thought deeply enough about some of his sword-related points (just look at his pommel video, good grief) but he's a smart and funny guy and knows what he's talking about more often than not. /quote] I saw that pommel video, and I was appalled... www.youtube.com/user/lindybeige#p/u/23/Szn6AHiQqtoDear lord! How can we take anything he says seriously after that? i am not sure if all he is saying is correct, but I do agree, earlier swords (lakonika, maheria, gladii, and even dark ages swords) all had a very small pommel or a pommel made out of wood. I am not sure if he is overall right, but I can see his point, if you only focus on older swords, the results are consistent to prove his point. Also, a pommel, even in medieval swords, should not completely counterweight the blade... that's why PoB is somewhere in the blade, not at the pommel. (this is my theory, which I don't really have any proof for) From some of his other videos, I have found out that he is an archeologist and an evolution psychologist, so he has some pretty good info, he isn't just fantasizing and other than that, he is also a late Roman/Dark Ages re-enactor, so I guess he does focus on the pre-medieval period, which is why some of his statements are a little outrageous, but what I mean is you shouldn't just label him as a person fantasizing about stuff he doesn't really know about...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 2:53:30 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 2:53:30 GMT
I was going to say some stuff in his defense but George pretty much pointed out everything I was going to say so I'll be brief.
What he says about pommels actually has a lot of truth to it. It may sound very off to us but that is because we largely focus on later period swords. Balance is a good bit more important than he seems to imply but it is also often immensely overrated. I think he is overreacting to the fascination many people seem have with balance and such.
I wouldn't be put off by his somewhat abrasive demeanor, he has some good points to make. He also doesn't seem like someone who buys into hype, be it regarding katanas or balance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 2:55:36 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 2:55:36 GMT
My issues: 1: Sure, a point heavy sword will chop a lot heavier. But if that's true, why not have blade that are *super* point heavy? Obviously, there is a point where it's not advantageous. A point heavy sword deals more powerful blows, but it's harder to move. The pommel can help you move the sword faster 2: His "wrist only" blows - they might work for a downward blow because of the gravity helping pull the blade down, but the point is invalid for horisontal blow. Again, a pommel helps you move the blade *faster* - and speed = kinetic energy. 3: The "moving the blade out of the way" - the points of contact will be a far greater factor than the pommel - if you have a light sword, but you're on your forte against his heavy sword's foible, you are going to be shoving his blade aside due to leaver action. 4: "very late middle ages" - erm... steel pommels started apearing in what, 900-1000 AD? Earlier? So, I agree with him that they aren't necessary to act as a counterweight, but it often is an important function. That being said: I really, really would like to know if his theory on scimitars is sound: www.youtube.com/user/lindybeige#p/u/72/SWvsHorqldM
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 3:11:00 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 3:11:00 GMT
I agree that theirs a lot of hype with the katana, and no sword is perfect. Now you might get lucky and cut through the occasional red hot over worked gun barrel not likely! But there are some vids on youtube of katana cutting bullets a 50 cal even but why not use the katana for what its good at cut the machine gunner into!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 3:19:22 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 3:19:22 GMT
Swords are much like women. There are white women, black women and asian women, curvy women and flat women, meek women and wild women -- but I like them all equally because they're women There are curved swords and straight swords, short swords and long swords, broad swords and thin swords -- I like them all because they're swords. M.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 3:50:37 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 3:50:37 GMT
Ancalagon,
You do have some good points. I don't think they really disqualify what he is saying though. They are criticisms, but they don't disprove his entire video.
1. Yes you can have a sword that is too blade heavy but you can also have a sword that is too hilt heavy. I think the best would obviously be something in between. But none the less, I'm sure there are historical examples that demonstrate both extremes. I don't agree when he says pommels are not used for counterbalance AT ALL but I DO think it's very true that the pommel's role as a counterweight is overrated. That is where I think he has some justification for what he is saying.
2. very similar to one
3. If the sword is in motion, then having less pommel weight and more blade weight will help a sword keep it's course. How important that is may very considerably.
If the sword is easier for you to move then it will also be easier for the other guy to move. Proportionately less mass in blade= less resistance no matter who is trying to move it. I believe Angus trim actually said this regarding his LPM model swords.
Balance alone will have less effect on you're blades movement then it's overall mass distribution. A sword with a lower center of mass but the same point of balance will be easier to block or perry. It will also however be easier to wield.
4. Yes steel pommels were the norm by the viking age. But that's just my point, we here focus on late period swords. And I don't mean renaissance. Swords have been around for thousands and thousands of years. In the whole scheme of things the viking age is "late". Up till then most swords had "pommels" but not in the way we think of it. By 900AD swords were in the last thousand years of their functional use.
This guy obviously has a different background than most of us sword nuts. The way in which he uses terms we are familiar with is going to very somewhat. He is more into history then swords. If you take that into account then I think there is some definite value in much of what he has to say.
|
|
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 5:46:29 GMT
Post by genocideseth on Nov 19, 2009 5:46:29 GMT
I agree that theirs a lot of hype with the katana, and no sword is perfect. Now you might get lucky and cut through the occasional red hot over worked gun barrel not likely! But there are some vids on youtube of katana cutting bullets a 50 cal even but why not use the katana for what its good at cut the machine gunner into! Holy crap! I thought I was looking at my own post and thought "I don't remember any of this" questioning if my account was hacked. But then I remembered I have a different Avatar now. ;D Not to mention the obviously different user name. Phew, that gave me a scare.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 6:39:55 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 6:39:55 GMT
I tend to view the Katana as a specialized tool and I belive that any tool should take into account the environment it's used in. I would definitely consider the rapier a better thruster than a type X, but if the environment calls for opponents with chain mail, no way in hell I'm gonna take a rapier. The same goes for the Katana. I believe it was a sword that fits with it's environment very well, no more. I believe that of any sword. On a seperate note, it is critical to realize that there were bad and good smiths anywhere weapons were made, so some weapons, regardless of the design, will turn out fantastically well. Just as a any number of weapons may have the best design possible, but if made by a crappy smith, will turn out as a crappy weapon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 16:19:32 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 16:19:32 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. Disagree. You must then compare what is comparable. That is Japan and Europe from 800 to 1600 ad, and then again from 1868. In Edo there was little development because of the Tokugawa peace, and therefore no need for it. The last big battle of old Japan is the battle of Sekigahara in 1600, and the Satsuma rebellion in 1877 marks the new time. The katana has to be seen as a cultural relic from before Tokugawa in my opinion. After Tokugawa carrying the katana became the privilege of the samurai class and is more a sign of class than a weapon of war. What makes the katana unique is exactly that it's a cultural relic. And that's part of my fascination with it. In conjunction with this, I had another thought about it relating to this discussion. Actually more of the warriors who used the sword rather then the sword itself. If you consider that a lot of europe changed what swords were commonly being used, because of smithing and armor etc, then that leads to warriors who are constantly changing weapons. This will lead to less expertise with any one particular weapon. Then consider the Japanese warrior, that continued to use and train with the same weapon style for several hundred years, generations learning and passing on what they learned.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 21:24:33 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 21:24:33 GMT
I agree that theirs a lot of hype with the katana, and no sword is perfect. Now you might get lucky and cut through the occasional red hot over worked gun barrel not likely! But there are some vids on youtube of katana cutting bullets a 50 cal even but why not use the katana for what its good at cut the machine gunner into! well, if musket balls could go through armor, and German and British steel plate armor in the 1500's and 1600's, I think we can all agree, is stronger than your average Japanese steel. won't the bullet just blow the crap out of the blade, all this supposing that you can get your blade in front of the bullet before the bullet goes through your heart?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 21:32:29 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 21:32:29 GMT
I tend to view the Katana as a specialized tool and I belive that any tool should take into account the environment it's used in. I would definitely consider the rapier a better thruster than a type X, but if the environment calls for opponents with chain mail, no way in hell I'm gonna take a rapier. The same goes for the Katana. I believe it was a sword that fits with it's environment very well, no more. I believe that of any sword. On a seperate note, it is critical to realize that there were bad and good smiths anywhere weapons were made, so some weapons, regardless of the design, will turn out fantastically well. Just as a any number of weapons may have the best design possible, but if made by a crappy smith, will turn out as a crappy weapon. I am not too schooled in this, but if rapier-type blades were used with plate, why wouldn't you use it on chain-mail?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 21:43:27 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 21:43:27 GMT
Ah, good ole katana hype...its funny but I never fully fed into that. It is a good weapon, perfectly lethal no matter whose hands it is in, but I never felt it was the best sword. Such a moniker is subjective and no two people on opposing sides of the fence are destined to agree wholeheartedly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 22:10:53 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 22:10:53 GMT
Ok, about cutting bullets, guns, and whatnot- Bullets: Musket bullets were made out of soft lead, and currently bullets are being made from copper. A good quality katana CAN cut through a bullet.
But... what good is it? no human has the ability required to make such movements, and without hitting the bullet 10000% spot-on in the ultimate perfect angel, the sword will meet it's end. "Can cut bullets" is purely technical, given only the perfect conditions, not possible to practical use.
About cutting machine gun barrels...... Now that's bullsemprini. Doesn't matter how work-worn the barrel was, if it was red or even white-hot, and whatever- A katana, (or any other sword, for the matter) can NOT cut a machine gun barrel. I suggest all of you to watch the "cutting a sword" segmant in the "mega movie myths" from season 4, and the "myths revisited" that comes after it. They test about every variation of sword VS sword, sword VS machine gun barrel, etc. I love mythbusters, they help me prove so many points.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 22:13:23 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 22:13:23 GMT
I tend to view the Katana as a specialized tool and I belive that any tool should take into account the environment it's used in. I would definitely consider the rapier a better thruster than a type X, but if the environment calls for opponents with chain mail, no way in hell I'm gonna take a rapier. The same goes for the Katana. I believe it was a sword that fits with it's environment very well, no more. I believe that of any sword. On a seperate note, it is critical to realize that there were bad and good smiths anywhere weapons were made, so some weapons, regardless of the design, will turn out fantastically well. Just as a any number of weapons may have the best design possible, but if made by a crappy smith, will turn out as a crappy weapon. I am not too schooled in this, but if rapier-type blades were used with plate, why wouldn't you use it on chain-mail? Rapier was never used against armor, it's a civilian weapon. Actually no sword is really effective against plate. Some like estoc are better but warhammers are tools for that job.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 22:15:08 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 22:15:08 GMT
I agree that theirs a lot of hype with the katana, and no sword is perfect. Now you might get lucky and cut through the occasional red hot over worked gun barrel not likely! But there are some vids on youtube of katana cutting bullets a 50 cal even but why not use the katana for what its good at cut the machine gunner into! well, if musket balls could go through armor, and German and British steel plate armor in the 1500's and 1600's, I think we can all agree, is stronger than your average Japanese steel. won't the bullet just blow the crap out of the blade, all this supposing that you can get your blade in front of the bullet before the bullet goes through your heart? Cutting a flying bullet is possible, I've seen it on this forum and I think it was done with both katana and maybe even a Gen2 euro type sword.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 22:29:46 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 22:29:46 GMT
As for Lindy Beige's scimitar video. He's retelling an anecdote, whether that tale had any historical basis is unknown to us, but he is very into history so I'll trust that it does have a historical source.
As for using a scimitar that way, I'll reiterate what I said in another thread... Chinese Dao forms are full of such movements. Now, the Dao was derived from the Turko-Mongol saber which being a main weapon style of both the Mongols and Turkmen-Huns could have been responsible for the scimitar, Kilij, tulwar, and other single edged curved blades from those regions. (Actually, the Kilij may have given rise to the Mongol saber but history is uncertain at that point) Therefore, it would make sense to have similar usage among those blade types. Since we know what Lindy Beige describes in his scimitar video is consistent with the usage of a related blade type it makes sense that it also could be consistent with the scimitar.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 19, 2009 23:10:59 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2009 23:10:59 GMT
A good quality katana CAN cut through a bullet. But... what good is it? no human has the ability required to make such movements, and without hitting the bullet 10000% spot-on in the ultimate perfect angle, the sword will meet it's end. "Can cut bullets" is purely technical, given only the perfect conditions, not possible to practical use. Spot-on. Cutting a bullet will just give you two deadly wounds instead of one. The hardened blade is a bit harder than the soft bullet, so it's not that surprising that it's possible for a High carbon steel blade to cut through it. ShooterMike even did it: /index.cgi?board=swordreviews&action=display&thread=1893&page=1#32667 and that wasn't with a katana. Oh, wait, he DID do it with a katana, too: /index.cgi?board=swordreviews&action=display&thread=1955&page=1#33582 Hmmm. -------> Ok, that was a bit loaded. If you look closely you'll see that the .45 ACP bullets did almost no damage in both cases. The second test was way more intense. But it does go to show the difference between "possible to do" and "having any realistic application" You can cut a bullet with a blade, but you can also really jack up your blade if it's not done perfectly. It doesn't really mean a whole lot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 20, 2009 2:38:36 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2009 2:38:36 GMT
Don't worry Seth I'm not that much of a hacker your profile's safe . Although it is possible for a Katana to cut a bullet (shot at a perfect angle at a unmovable blade) thanks for the link Pika007, there's no way it would happen under normal conditions. I just thought it was cool, gun beats sword in a real fight bottom line. I agree with Pika007 a sword won't cut a gun barrel not even if it was red hot it's been proven a myth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 20, 2009 3:34:27 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2009 3:34:27 GMT
As for Lindy Beige's scimitar video. He's retelling an anecdote, whether that tale had any historical basis is unknown to us, but he is very into history so I'll trust that it does have a historical source. As for using a scimitar that way, I'll reiterate what I said in another thread... Chinese Dao forms are full of such movements. Now, the Dao was derived from the Turko-Mongol saber which being a main weapon style of both the Mongols and Turkmen-Huns could have been responsible for the scimitar, Kilij, tulwar, and other single edged curved blades from those regions. (Actually, the Kilij may have given rise to the Mongol saber but history is uncertain at that point) Therefore, it would make sense to have similar usage among those blade types. Since we know what Lindy Beige describes in his scimitar video is consistent with the usage of a related blade type it makes sense that it also could be consistent with the scimitar. Thank you for the dao information, it does add credence to the tale! karma+1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Katana
Nov 20, 2009 4:14:08 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2009 4:14:08 GMT
The katana did progress and it did change, that is why we have so many geometries, the evolution from chokuto to tachi to katana took a long time. Actually you can cut through a gun barrel...if it is made of cheese . I don't think the lightsabre would be that great and I know how they are made and the physics of them (according to star wars books) and I think they would be utter shite. Balance is one of the most important aspects of a sword and mass distribution is a part of balance. Without balance you don't have a sword you have a crowbar.
|
|