|
Post by howler on Sept 9, 2018 3:43:56 GMT
IMHO, a lot depends on whether the European walks into a "sucker nukitsuke" to begin with. Then you have to consider that the samurai might come from a ryu where counters to being poked at with "yari-like-objects" are taught, as well as shinogi/mune based parries and blocks. The indications on my own collection, along with Nakamura's comment (in Spirit of the Sword) about the amount of blades he'd seen messed-up from sparring practice suggests that such counters were better-known than most of the current literature indicates. If the fencer had previously faced heavier single edged blades, he might be expecting a saber attack, which samurai styles emphatically aren't. One last point, having seen and handled historical smallswords at Gun Shows, the samurai might shear the other guy's blade at the cost of a chip or ding in his. My point (p.i.), is that the samurai might not be at as big a disadvantage as some might assume. I also feel that if the European attempts a prise de fer of any description, he's toast. A number of tests have shown it is highly highly unlikely that one sword can cut through the blade of another. The only way that might happen is if the small sword is braced at two points so it cant roll with the strike, if its user had a firm grip while the tip was embedded in wood for example. Even then the blade breaking from a sword cut is not a likely outcome. I agree, unless we are talking the almost useless court/dress sword that was more an article of clothing/fashion than function. Your probably not cutting a quality (on the heavier side, historically) small sword in half, even if it's clamped down (though some of those "Mountain sword" Nodachi would be interesting).
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 9, 2018 3:47:48 GMT
I'd bet on the smallsword with no armor in play. I don't think a katana is suited to defend againt its quick disengages and feints. Besides, despite their size, small swords are viscous swords. They'll rip through you like you're a sheet of paper with those stiff triangular blades. One thing I'd like to see is a the (one hand) smallsword paired with an offhand dagger, as you can have a weapon in each hand vs the (mainly) two handed katana. This would, it seems to me, tilt the odds decidedly.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 9, 2018 3:53:57 GMT
As far as sword vs sword goes I'd have to go with the small sword. Lighter, faster and longer with an emphasis on thrusting definitely would give the advantage to the small sword user. Theres a reason why a whole continent transitioned from broader cut and thrust swords to smaller thinner thrust oriented swords and it wasnt all about being fashionable or with the times, lol. Problem with the Samurai is they kinda stuck themselves in a rut regarding weapon and military evolution. Sure you could argue that such a rut allowed them to perfect the art of their swordsmanship but still theres a reason the rest of the world moved on from their medieval weaponry and transitioned to newer and more evolved weapon types. I mean in regards to Japan think if say the British Isles rather than evolving with the rest of Europe up to the 19th century, stayed locked in their 14th century way of life and warfare. It'd be pretty odd seeing full plated knights charging into battle with arming swords and lances against a unit of French Dragoons with rifles and sabers. Even though its been romanticized in Japanese culture and films, the best thing the Emperor did was modernise Japan and get rid of the Samurai. I agree. The Japanese perfected the art of war against other Japanese due to their isolationist mentallity, while the Europeans perfected the art of war against pretty much anybody they could find. This can clearly be seen in the development differences in arms and armor over a 4 or 500 year period in which the Japanese stagnated, the Europeans innovated. But in a duel scenario? Hard to say. I think it would still come down to which fighter was smarter or more experienced rather than a simple mechanical weapon vs. weapon comparison. Yes, the small sword is tops when it comes to thrusting vs. the kat, but Samurai were known for lighting quick strikes that usually left an arm laying on the ground. When the katana strikes, it strikes hard and devastating. It would be an interesting match-up. I might even pay money to see that.... No doubt ONE HELL of an interesting contest. The incapacitation nature of the katana make it hard for me to pick the smallsword without that offhand dagger. If the katana gets inside that point...lost limbs and chunks of flesh.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 9, 2018 3:58:32 GMT
I personally think the katana wielder has a higher chance of winning. Yes the small sword is a little longer, but the length difference is not big enough to make a huge impact. If it was a rapier then there would be no question (Katana would lose) but with small sword, no. The katanas cutting ability makes it more versatile compared to the small sword which can only thrust. These are my concerns as well. That katana can snipe body parts. One hit and it's curtains to the smallsword dude.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 9, 2018 4:11:00 GMT
I personally think the katana wielder has a higher chance of winning. Yes the small sword is a little longer, but the length difference is not big enough to make a huge impact. If it was a rapier then there would be no question (Katana would lose) but with small sword, no. The katanas cutting ability makes it more versatile compared to the small sword which can only thrust. I definitely agree if you mean the heavier Renaissance rapier. Part of my original post was meant to imply that the smallswords I'd seen were crummy. IMHO, If the Spanish of Cortez and Pizarro's time had decided they wanted Japan, there'd be a lot of people in the Far East rolling their sushi in tortillas today. Yes, the heavy rapier/offhand dagger was the apex of duel. I know a lot of confusion comes about because (some) historians labeled ridiculous court/dress swords (little, dinky, non functional) as smallsword. It actually made sense, because why would you carry a large, cumbersome hunk of spiked steel you knew you did not need when attending a ballroom gala full of dufus snobs wearing mascara and wigs, as duels were no longer done in ages? Deadly smallsword literally became a vestigial tail known as the court/dress sword.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 9, 2018 4:17:45 GMT
Going back to “Swordsmen of the British Empire” when a sword bearing English sailor tangled with a katana wheeling Japanese the Brit generally lost. That frequently applied to a pistol carrying sailor, but the pistol evened the odds somewhat. Granted the sailor wasn’t armed with a short sword nor was familiar with its use. From other accounts in the book sailors with their cutlasses were a formidable opponent. I don’t know if the Japanese were samurais or just katana wheeling Japanese with some experience. I point this out to that the katana against western swords weren’t as one sided as some people believe from what I’ve read here. Thinking on it I don’t remember small swords being mention in any combat experience in the book, but I may have overlooked something. I would imagine a Japanese individual wielding a katana to probably be more competent in his weapon vs your average English sailor serving in the British empire. Was the sailor shanghaied? Was he drunk? Was he drunk because he was shanghaied? Am I drinking as I type these words? Yes to that last question. Gulp.
|
|
|
Post by treeslicer on Sept 9, 2018 4:35:33 GMT
I personally think the katana wielder has a higher chance of winning. Yes the small sword is a little longer, but the length difference is not big enough to make a huge impact. If it was a rapier then there would be no question (Katana would lose) but with small sword, no. The katanas cutting ability makes it more versatile compared to the small sword which can only thrust. These are my concerns as well. That katana can snipe body parts. One hit and it's curtains to the smallsword dude. The mid-18th. Century smallswords I've personally seen were all of the "fashion statement" variety, which is what I felt Andi was referring to. If the katana dude takes a whack at the juncture of the blade and the cute little gilded silver or brass guard, it's flipping all over. Slashing at the opponent's hands is a valid period technique. No matter what your sensei told you, good sportsmanship in that sense was not a samurai virtue. Why do you think the original tameshigiri diagram includes an enumerated cut to the crotch?
Note that I considered nukitsuke to be a great hazard to the smallsword guy. When contemplating an attack, you don't tell somebody, "My name is Inigo Montoya", etc., you stand there like a harmless doofus, sword sheathed, thumbs in your obi, silently measuring maai, just like Hayashizaki Jinsuke Shigenobu must have done the first time anybody pulled that trick.
|
|
|
Post by nddave on Sept 9, 2018 4:40:49 GMT
I personally think the katana wielder has a higher chance of winning. Yes the small sword is a little longer, but the length difference is not big enough to make a huge impact. If it was a rapier then there would be no question (Katana would lose) but with small sword, no. The katanas cutting ability makes it more versatile compared to the small sword which can only thrust. These are my concerns as well. That katana can snipe body parts. One hit and it's curtains to the smallsword dude. Yea but one well placed thrust to any major organ or artery and its curtains for the Samurai too. Remember this isn't feudal Japan this is post Edo Japan, how much armor would this street walking Samurai be wearing and how easy would it be for a deadly thrusting sword like a smallsword to fo through a silk or cotton kimono? Add an edge to the smallsword and thats even more risk to the Samurai. The katana may be the more substantial cutter but it doesn't mean the smallsword was a slouch in cuttinf prowess either. As we've seen from various demonstrations and videos, both cut tatami mats in half. Also a big factor thats missed I feel is the benefit of protection and defensiveness of the smallsword hilt over the open and less protecting tsuba of the katana. Add in the parry dagger and that samurai is going to have a hard time getting inside the guard of the fencer.
|
|
|
Post by nddave on Sept 9, 2018 4:57:31 GMT
Just to put some perspective on this visually, heres what each combatant would be equipped with, The Samurai, The fencer,
|
|
|
Post by mattjohn98 on Sept 9, 2018 5:58:29 GMT
Yes, but not all small swords can cut, some small swords had no edge at all. Yes, the small sword has better hand protection, but the katana will have more leverage in a bind because of the two handed grip.
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Sept 9, 2018 7:00:39 GMT
I thought of a smallsword with triangular blade, stiff but also light and fast.
I don't think there would be much binding. That's something the fencer will avoid because he loses his reach advantage. In close range the katana has all advantages here I think. But can the threat of a punctured chest, head or limb keep the samurai away from closing in? The fencer needs space for attack and retreat, lunge etc.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 9, 2018 9:07:36 GMT
These are my concerns as well. That katana can snipe body parts. One hit and it's curtains to the smallsword dude. Yea but one well placed thrust to any major organ or artery and its curtains for the Samurai too. Remember this isn't feudal Japan this is post Edo Japan, how much armor would this street walking Samurai be wearing and how easy would it be for a deadly thrusting sword like a smallsword to fo through a silk or cotton kimono? Add an edge to the smallsword and thats even more risk to the Samurai. The katana may be the more substantial cutter but it doesn't mean the smallsword was a slouch in cuttinf prowess either. As we've seen from various demonstrations and videos, both cut tatami mats in half. Also a big factor thats missed I feel is the benefit of protection and defensiveness of the smallsword hilt over the open and less protecting tsuba of the katana. Add in the parry dagger and that samurai is going to have a hard time getting inside the guard of the fencer. No doubt a quick thrust to the face, heart, neck etcetera would be a quick game over. And a spike driven into hands, fingers, arms, etc...could render the katana wielder too enfeebled to continue.
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Sept 9, 2018 12:26:33 GMT
The Samurai were also taught to thrust, and to defend against it. The Katana is a superior cutter, but that does not mean it can't thrust as well. The small sword was made to thrust, and if we are talking about the same sword design that I think we are, then it's basically a three sided long spike with only the first 5 or 6 inches of the blade sharpened. While the small sword can cut, it's not at all designed to do so, and that would put it at a disadvantage.
Everybody is bringing up very well thought out and logical points about which contestant would win. I am enjoying reading this thread. But I fear the only way to settle this is my experimentation....so does anybody know any Samurai we can call?
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Sept 9, 2018 12:39:22 GMT
I probably depleted them all in my last few threads...
You can thrust with a katana but usually only at a shorter distance, two handed use, no lunges. And I don't wanna get a cut from a smallsword tip.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2018 13:19:24 GMT
.....I'm thinking any weapon AND wearing heavy leather gloves vs. small sword/rapier/thin thrusting blade....the heavy leather gloves wins! As in Rob Roy style, just grab the blade while wearing the leather gloves with one hand and use you other hand holding the weapon against your opponent.
.....in fact, I wonder the outcome of just heavy leather gloves vs small sword/rapier. Those heavy leather gloves can be deadly. Haha!.....eh.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Sept 9, 2018 15:29:18 GMT
Going back to “Swordsmen of the British Empire” when a sword bearing English sailor tangled with a katana wheeling Japanese the Brit generally lost. That frequently applied to a pistol carrying sailor, but the pistol evened the odds somewhat. Granted the sailor wasn’t armed with a short sword nor was familiar with its use. From other accounts in the book sailors with their cutlasses were a formidable opponent. I don’t know if the Japanese were samurais or just katana wheeling Japanese with some experience. I point this out to that the katana against western swords weren’t as one sided as some people believe from what I’ve read here. Thinking on it I don’t remember small swords being mention in any combat experience in the book, but I may have overlooked something. I would imagine a Japanese individual wielding a katana to probably be more competent in his weapon vs your average English sailor serving in the British empire. Was the sailor shanghaied? Was he drunk? Was he drunk because he was shanghaied? Am I drinking as I type these words? Yes to that last question. Gulp. I have no information regarding those encounters, only that a katana did a job on the sailors. As for the sailor’s ability, judging from the success they had along the Indian coast when fighting smugglers and slave runners, I would say that they could hold their own. A duel, to me, implies two contestants facing each other under known rules, and both knowing what to expect with no surprises regarding the encounter, more or less like a boxing match. In that case I have no idea who would win, about 50/50 in my opinion. I strongly suspect the fights the sailors had in Japan resembled more of a bar room brawl, possibly a street ambush while on liberty, and to a large extent the one that could draw the fastest or the firstest was the winner. It's very possible the Japanese waited until a sailor(s) exited a bar. I only threw that in because I got the impression that several people thought because of Japan’s isolationist attitude they were incapable of competing with occidentals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2018 17:20:04 GMT
www.thearma.org/essays/katanavs.htm#.W5VPB2hKi3AAlthough attempted in this thread, no real qualification of the European sword was defined. Further, one has to better consider actuality if playing fantasy games. As soon as one considers a secondary weapon, the game immediately revises. www.thearma.org/essays/The_Sword_in_Duel.html#.W5VQjWhKi3AHope and McBane just two of many dealing with smallsword vs broadsword, so fantasy about a katana duel might seem quite similar. A katana thrusting in one hand while flailing with a wakizashi little different than howler's cream in his jeans off hand dagger and rapier or smallsword. stoccata.org/about/styles/scottish-smallsword/Still, we didn't bother to better describe the original precept aside from a dress sword vs a battle sword and supposing a trefoil blade. Colichemarde aside (yet what some best dressed "nobles" wore), the range of trefoil blades ranges from dainty court swords and epee d ville swords to sizable sidearms. Soooo, yes, there were occasions when blows broke blades but purely out of bounds in this fantasy football because we are considering what "could" happen. Isn't going to happen trumps what might happen, simply out of subjective ego stroking and this mental masturbation. Here, with a 36" trefoil bladed smallsword I have a couple of broken "dress" smallsword blades as well. No knowing exactly how that happened. www.thearma.org/essays/The_Sword_in_Duel.html#.W5VXOmhKi3B
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 9, 2018 19:09:05 GMT
www.thearma.org/essays/katanavs.htm#.W5VPB2hKi3AAlthough attempted in this thread, no real qualification of the European sword was defined. Further, one has to better consider actuality if playing fantasy games. As soon as one considers a secondary weapon, the game immediately revises. www.thearma.org/essays/The_Sword_in_Duel.html#.W5VQjWhKi3AHope and McBane just two of many dealing with smallsword vs broadsword, so fantasy about a katana duel might seem quite similar. A katana thrusting in one hand while flailing with a wakizashi little different than howler's cream in his jeans off hand dagger and rapier or smallsword. stoccata.org/about/styles/scottish-smallsword/Still, we didn't bother to better describe the original precept aside from a dress sword vs a battle sword and supposing a trefoil blade. Colichemarde aside (yet what some best dressed "nobles" wore), the range of trefoil blades ranges from dainty court swords and epee d ville swords to sizable sidearms. Soooo, yes, there were occasions when blows broke blades but purely out of bounds in this fantasy football because we are considering what "could" happen. Isn't going to happen trumps what might happen, simply out of subjective ego stroking and this mental masturbation. Here, with a 36" trefoil bladed smallsword I have a couple of broken "dress" smallsword blades as well. No knowing exactly how that happened. www.thearma.org/essays/The_Sword_in_Duel.html#.W5VXOmhKi3B Your (I assume) not somehow equating duel wielding (flailing, so I assume you think not so effective) a Kat & Wak to that of a rapier/main gauche, are you, as I understood that rapier/offhand dagger were historically documented, used often & effective. I cannot speak for duel wielding katana/wak (or kat/kat, or wak/wak...how I'd attempt such a feat) so much except it wasn't so common, katana mainly being a forward weighted two hander. Of course, this is as you said and are quite correct mainly just (cleaning my jeans) mental masturbation, as getting two skilled cats to fight to potential demise with sharp pointy stuff don't fly for obvious reasons. As you said, we do need to specify exactly what is to be placed against what, but without these hypotheticals happening in real life, it's all just discussion.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Sept 9, 2018 19:29:40 GMT
I would imagine a Japanese individual wielding a katana to probably be more competent in his weapon vs your average English sailor serving in the British empire. Was the sailor shanghaied? Was he drunk? Was he drunk because he was shanghaied? Am I drinking as I type these words? Yes to that last question. Gulp. I have no information regarding those encounters, only that a katana did a job on the sailors. As for the sailor’s ability, judging from the success they had along the Indian coast when fighting smugglers and slave runners, I would say that they could hold their own. A duel, to me, implies two contestants facing each other under known rules, and both knowing what to expect with no surprises regarding the encounter, more or less like a boxing match. In that case I have no idea who would win, about 50/50 in my opinion. I strongly suspect the fights the sailors had in Japan resembled more of a bar room brawl, possibly a street ambush while on liberty, and to a large extent the one that could draw the fastest or the firstest was the winner. It's very possible the Japanese waited until a sailor(s) exited a bar. I only threw that in because I got the impression that several people thought because of Japan’s isolationist attitude they were incapable of competing with occidentals. My thinking was that it would be rather uncommon for someone to be walking around with a katana, even in Japan, so that person would have more skill. Maybe I just have a psychological fear of samurai coming at me screaming with katana in hand. Or was in John Belushi from Saturday Night Live?
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Sept 9, 2018 19:30:19 GMT
Thanks for the reads Edelweiss. The last looks the most interesting but will have to wait until later.
|
|