Katana vs Viking sword. (In terms of craft.)

I also think the katana, because even after the blade has been forged, folded, sharpened, and polished, the craftsman still has to create a perfectly shaped tsuka and saya. Afterwards, he has to hand-wrap the ito, of which there are varied methods, some being complicated (he also has to make sure the ito is alternating when wrapping it). The kurigata and koiguchi of the saya are a bit of extra work and skill, and the tsuba can also be a work of art in itself, requiring skill to produce. Then the habaki must fit properly and be perfectly aligned, as well as the seppa. There are many separate parts of a katana, and a lot of skill is required to make them and make sure they fit the katana perfectly and securely.

I don't know much about a viking sword though.

Part of the problem of a question like this is assuming the people who reply will have an equal familiarity with the high-end craft examples of both types of swords. See above replies, with reasons such as "viking blades weren't seen as art" or "The many steps they go through (to make a katana)" or "There are many separate parts of a katana" or "I don't know much about a viking sword, though." "I assume there's more labor time in a katana."

Please.






When you take into account pattern welding and multi-part pommels and hilts and inlays, and the more complex shaping of a double-edge sword vs a single edge sword before heat treatment, then the two types are probably quite comparable in terms of skill required to create, PROVIDED WE ARE EXAMINING SIMILAR LEVELS OF EMBELLISHMENT. It is the final fit and finish of a sword that always demands the most time and skill out of the entire process. If you are going into this assuming a simple example of one type and an elaborate example of the other type, you are going to have a very very biased response, with poor reasoning. Also, the categories themselves are incredibly broad. Are we discussing Edo-period peacetime katana fittings with guady and elaborate hand-carvings in shakudo, or wartime swords with simple wraps and plain iron tsubas? The sword of a viking king or a plain blade for a man-at-arms with more norman design elements?


Meh. I've seen authentic examples of both sword types that left me slack-jawed and gasping, so I don't think I'll be leaving favor to one or the other.

No I think the difference here is more or less the culture, myths, and assumption surrounding the weapon smith. It is a fact that a master at anything in Japan is held in such high regard, and the training to become one is so long and, one can only assume, hard that in the end, anything that master produce is consider a mastercraft items. So really, it's the time they put into purely learning the art and crafting a weapon. Now I know that becoming a master at making any melee weapons will take time, but the fact is that because of the Japanese culture and its influence, it will seem that a katana made from a master smith (One of those that go for sooooooo much money) will be seen as being more exquisite, requiring more skills.
So in the end, while both the masterful viking sword and the katana can be beautifully created and decorated, the Japanese culture and myths behind the smith will make the katana seem like it will take more skills to create. I'm not trying to say that a viking sword smith or any European sword smith can easily master their art, but the Japanese emphasis on mastering their arts brings the katana up in an air of hype. (look at Albion for example. They make some unbelievably beautiful sword. A katana comparable to an Albion in term of skills created by a master Japanese smiths could be sold for so much more, just because it is a katana created by a master Japanese smith)

Ok, stop comparing custom forged with production, (Albion V Art Katana) between the two there is no winner or loser, it takes just as long to make a pattern welded Viking Blade as it does to out fit it, IE. hilt/pommel and so forth, read H.R. Ellis Davidson's "The Sword In Anglo Saxon England" Tells you Exactly how many Hours for forging and outfitting. 2500 Hr's for the compleat sword and fittings!!!!

The Making of a Edo period Art Katana is about the same......

So there!!! SanMarc......

the thing is, we could compare the two but we would have to go for a koto tachi if we wanted to bearound the same time. personally i couldn't choose between the two since both are very advanced for their time and about the look of the sword, both can be very pretty because THERE WAS ceremony swords in both cultures and when we think about beauty and details you will usually see them there. thats it for me, my answer would be a tie.

I don't really know a lot of High end custom Viking sword maker so I used Albion as a generic example but just from looking at high end nihonto, and correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think think many swords can come up to that price range
And for what it's worth, I know the katana did evolve from a line of different bladed weapon but when it did become the standard of arms for samurai, it is, in my opinion, an innovation for its time. I think myths about the invention of the katana wouldn't exist if it's not something completely different from swords before.

I have to say both are equally great. I'm mainly a nihonto collector, but viking swords are my favorite western swords. So I really can't decide between these two at personal level.

I have huge respect for everyone making swords, and great swords have been made throughout earth in all times since the sword was evolved.

In both cultures to my understanding some swords have been heirlooms to several generations. Which shows the great respect both cultures had regarding swords. Swordsmiths and swords of varying quality can of course be seen in both cultures.

And creating a pattern welded viking sword is a very complex process, equally complicated than creating traditionally made Japanese sword. Here are couple of pictures to those that are not familiar about pattern welding in swords (sorry about the poor image quality).



And no vikings were not the first to use combining several rods & elements, this was already done by their predecessors during Migration era and Celts. True pattern welding becomes evident in the 3rd century. Late pattern welding was more than likely just decorative aspect. While in the beginning it served an useful advancement.

How long it took to make a Japanese sword? I have brief chapter on one of my books (which is compiled from older Japanese works) regarding the cost of tachi in Nara period (710-794), while this is unfortunately bit before actual viking age, it can still give some comparison to migration/viking age. (I'm offering the probable outcome, as translation regards as men it took)

From Engishiki XVII., Takumi chapter For good workers one tachi required 33 days, 18 from ironworkers, 9 from silversmiths, 2 from leather workers, 6 from lacquerers and 8 from ordinary laboureres. Of ordinary and middleclass smiths it took 31 from regular workers and 9,5 from ordinary labourers. If poor workers 57,5 were required.

Vol. XXXIV. Woodwork department, gold mounted tachi took Famous workers 23 days, middle-class 26, low-class28. Torizukuri no tachi took high-class 20, middle-class 23, lower-class 26. Five inches Tosu (I have no idea what this is, but some small smithable object:)) Good workman can make 4 in a day, middle class worker 3 and poor only 2.

Vol. XLIX. Tachi used for Oharai two seasons, eight swords, two gold mounted and six Torikubi. I suppose it took 250 worker days to complete this order. 26 days for each kinzukuri and 23 for each Torikubi - which indicates that middle-class workers filled this order of 8 swords. (although the combined days are just 190, so there must be some holidays, or time that another worker cannot yet start his work as other is still working on it).

It's noted in explanation that total duration of the work varies, and length of the day during seasons is one important factor. And that tachi were finished up to c. current fine nagura stone, as that was the practice in the old days. Fine polishing is much later thing.

At the time of Yutoku Tokugawa Yoshimune 1677-1751 summoned many swordsmiths to the palace and ordered them to make a sword each. It required more than twenty days to finish a sword down to ara togi. This is related by Tsunahiro Rojin. It is said that they began to work at yotsudoki (10.00) and finished at yatsudoki (14.00), and that is in agreement with the Engishiki timetable.

So it according to The Sword and Same, it might have taken approximately from 80 to 240 hours (if assuming that 4 hour work schedule yotsudoki-yatsudoki) to make a one sword back in ancient Japan. Of course there have been highly ornamental ones which must have taken more time to complete. And I believe that these times start from making tamahagane and ending in finished product.

For example I've read an estimate that Tsuna Sukehiro (1636-1682) made around 1600 swords during his career, Fujishiro lists that he died at the age of 46. So that was about 4-5 swords per every month during his swordsmith career depending how old he started. He received title Echizen no Kami at the age of 20 or 21. And he was popular smith, so most likely his swords were of good quality. We are talking about bare blades here, just so nobody mistakes them as fully mounted swords.

Now I might approach with caution of that estimate that Anglo-Saxon sword took 2500 hours, as even with working 8 hours a day on a single sword and it's fittings, it would have taken 313 days, so almost a year. Which is not very feasible.

Of course highly ornamental swords take more time to complete than plain ones. Here is one great example Sutton Hoo sword by Patrick Barta, which according to review took Patrick 600 hours to make: www.myarmoury.com/review_tmpl_suthoo.html

One important factor in both European and Japanese swords in period is demand. During periods of war and conflicts swordsmiths probably churned out pretty hefty number of swords monthly. When during periods of peace that number was lower.

And finally the price vs. price comparison. Well authentic viking swords are pretty expensive, as are older period nihonto. As if comparison is made, it should be made with closest possible thing, even though I generally dislike comparing antique swords/types.

Like I said in the beginning, I equally appreciate both sword types.

PS. I cannot comment on Patrick Barta with full knowledge, but I believe he can use both. For a very accurate reproduction like the Sutton Hoo above as traditional as possible, and for some of his more affordable works some shortcuts.

At least Finnish archeologist Mikko Moilanen has made many viking period swords which include iron inlay blade inscriptions using only traditional methods by means of experimental archeology. I'm hoping to get in touch with him someday and get a glimpse of his knowledge in the field.

Ian Peirces book Swords of the Viking Age has some information about traditional techniques. Likewise Oakeshott's Archeology of Weapons. Other than those most of my resources are in Finnish and few in number. But I'm aware of couple German texts and many Norwegian ones, unfortunately I haven't been able to see those.

Jeff Helmes would be a good person to ask -