On the Katana and it's wielder.

[Scow2]

... I believe the answer has been discovered. While the Katana, over time, has had its abilities overstated as it became obsolete (IT CAN CUT THROUGH ANYTHING!!111!!) in the west, Western weapons have been slandered, and now people believe such bullshit such as "European swords are heavy!" The heaviest warsword used in Europe was the German Zwiehander, at 8 lbs. The Scottish Claymore weighed between 5, and 6.5 lbs.

No arming sword (1 handed sword) weighed more than 3 lbs, and no Longsword (Hand-and-a-Half, not 1-handed) weighed more than 4.5.

Actually... it would take too long to debunk all the historical myths, and this site is much better for explaining: http://www.thearma.org/

But, still. The reason the Katana is more popular than the Broadsword is because it wasn't gradually rendered obsolete by changing battlefields. It was removed quickly, and thus never lost the appeal. On the other hand, the pretentious wimps who made the joke of a sport known as "Fencing" decided that Everything Before the Foil, Epee, and Sabre had to be inferior because they were rendered obsolete over time due to changing battlefields, and were complete idiots about it. They were so insecure about the size of their swords, they started making up slanderous bullshit about the weapons that came before them.

And yes, the Rapier was superior to the Katana against unarmed foes. If one proficient with a Rapier were to fight an Unarmored Samurai in a duel, the Samurai would find himself run through before he realized he was within the weapon's reach.

So, which would get more respect? A weapon and combat style that has had been buried in fetid piles of slanderous lies over the past 300 years, or a blade and warrior that has been celebrated as an icon of craftsmanship and culture over that amount of time?

 

[trophykiller]

I find it annoying how so many say the samuri were better trained than knights. To become a knight you had to A) do something ridiculously heroic that in the modern day would gain you more medals than you could shake a stick at, or B) train from ten years old in brutal, expensive training that often left the student with broken bones. In order to become a squire, which is the point at which you begin the real training, and begin working with weapons that can and will kill and/or dismember you if you make one false move.

Samuri: also train early on in many cases, but didn't fight half as often as knights, acting more like elite bodyguards than actual warriors. So samuri are like boba fett, in a way, standing in the back trying to look dangerous, whereas the knight was like chuck norris: rushing to the front lines to defend his country and able to wield any weapon he came across like a pro.

Just had to point that out, samuri are great warriors, just not as good as a true knight.

 

[Treblaine]

You cite cutting power as a factor & then say the curves distract you. The curves dictate the blades ability to cut effectively.

It's not the existence nor absence of a curve itself, it's the aesthetics of the curve, the type of curves. I just find it looks too wavy and naturalistic. Katana just looks like it's from the future, even though the design is hundreds of years old. It looks like a refined killing machine for a person who has trained their mind body and their very soul to kill effortlessly.

I have no idea which intrinsically cuts better but have you ever the phrase "it's not the arrow, it's the Indian"? At the time the western world really became familiar with Japanese weapons the samurai were the most pre-eminent sword fighters in the world, that (artistically speaking) infuses the weapon with a reputation. It's as much the swordsman that comes with the Katana that makes it so sought after.

A western style cavalry sabre - to me - leaves the impression of a guy with a huge moustache yelling CHHHAAAAAARGGE while impotently waving the sabre over their head.

When someone twirls a Colt Single Action Army revolver you get the impression of speed, and effortless accuracy... might not be the case but those that have wielded it before in fiction and non-fiction have left that reputation.

Consider the Japanese samurai films like Yojimbo and the Seven Samurai that have imbued the sword with a great potency. And when we are talking about art, there is that wider cultural impression that counts with not only the audience but the characters within the work. In Pulp Fiction when Butch is selecting weapons to face down some armed rapists nothing seems to instil more confidence in him than a samurai sword, more so than even a chainsaw.

Oh so it had nothing to do with Quentin Tarintinos adoration of Katana?

read the last paragraph again... the part where I mention pulp fiction.

 

[Simriel]

You cite cutting power as a factor & then say the curves distract you. The curves dictate the blades ability to cut effectively.

It's not the existence nor absence of a curve itself, it's the aesthetics of the curve, the type of curves. I just find it looks too wavy and naturalistic. Katana just looks like it's from the future, even though the design is hundreds of years old. It looks like a refined killing machine for a person who has trained their mind body and their very soul to kill effortlessly.

I have no idea which intrinsically cuts better but have you ever the phrase "it's not the arrow, it's the Indian"? At the time the western world really became familiar with Japanese weapons the samurai were the most pre-eminent sword fighters in the world, that (artistically speaking) infuses the weapon with a reputation. It's as much the swordsman that comes with the Katana that makes it so sought after.

A western style cavalry sabre - to me - leaves the impression of a guy with a huge moustache yelling CHHHAAAAAARGGE while impotently waving the sabre over their head.

When someone twirls a Colt Single Action Army revolver you get the impression of speed, and effortless accuracy... might not be the case but those that have wielded it before in fiction and non-fiction have left that reputation.

Consider the Japanese samurai films like Yojimbo and the Seven Samurai that have imbued the sword with a great potency. And when we are talking about art, there is that wider cultural impression that counts with not only the audience but the characters within the work. In Pulp Fiction when Butch is selecting weapons to face down some armed rapists nothing seems to instil more confidence in him than a samurai sword, more so than even a chainsaw.

Oh so it had nothing to do with Quentin Tarintinos adoration of Katana?

read the last paragraph again... the part where I mention pulp fiction.

I understand, but I say it has nothing to do with audience or character, simply Tarintinos own love of Katana and Japan in general.

 

[Treblaine]

You cite cutting power as a factor & then say the curves distract you. The curves dictate the blades ability to cut effectively.

It's not the existence nor absence of a curve itself, it's the aesthetics of the curve, the type of curves. I just find it looks too wavy and naturalistic. Katana just looks like it's from the future, even though the design is hundreds of years old. It looks like a refined killing machine for a person who has trained their mind body and their very soul to kill effortlessly.

I have no idea which intrinsically cuts better but have you ever the phrase "it's not the arrow, it's the Indian"? At the time the western world really became familiar with Japanese weapons the samurai were the most pre-eminent sword fighters in the world, that (artistically speaking) infuses the weapon with a reputation. It's as much the swordsman that comes with the Katana that makes it so sought after.

A western style cavalry sabre - to me - leaves the impression of a guy with a huge moustache yelling CHHHAAAAAARGGE while impotently waving the sabre over their head.

When someone twirls a Colt Single Action Army revolver you get the impression of speed, and effortless accuracy... might not be the case but those that have wielded it before in fiction and non-fiction have left that reputation.

Consider the Japanese samurai films like Yojimbo and the Seven Samurai that have imbued the sword with a great potency. And when we are talking about art, there is that wider cultural impression that counts with not only the audience but the characters within the work. In Pulp Fiction when Butch is selecting weapons to face down some armed rapists nothing seems to instil more confidence in him than a samurai sword, more so than even a chainsaw.

Oh so it had nothing to do with Quentin Tarintinos adoration of Katana?

read the last paragraph again... the part where I mention pulp fiction.

I understand, but I say it has nothing to do with audience or character, simply Tarintinos own love of Katana and Japan in general.

I don't think he is the only one who shares a similar fascination.

Importantly the CHARACTER in his film, Butch, was suitably impressed and emboldened once wielding the weapon. And the audience understood that. More for that kind of sword than for any other sword he may have picked up.

 

[Marmooset]

Simple enough:

Spoiler: Toshiro Mifune

 

[Zeetchmen]

I have a personal hatred for katanas for the nerds at Deadliest Warrior went for the Samurai after portaying the Viking in such a dim light.

 

[Grand_Arcana]

I have a personal hatred for katanas for the nerds at Deadliest Warrior went for the Samurai after portaying the Viking in such a dim light.

Well, that Samurai got f-ed up by a Spartan in the season finale, if that makes you feel better.

OT:

I'm appalled by the huge amount of mis-information and ignorance in this thread concerning swords and weaponry. Just got the thearma.org and tell us what you've learned.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

I have a personal hatred for katanas for the nerds at Deadliest Warrior went for the Samurai after portaying the Viking in such a dim light.

Yeah I love me some Samurai and Katana, but the Vikings were a curb stomping, sword swinging bunch of dudes that meant business. To downplay their effectiveness as warriors is pretty god damned ignorant.


For the most part these arguments are moot. The presence of high capacity, high power and accurate firearms has rendered the sword to the realms of personal martial arts training and thus obsolete on the battlefield. His little brother, the dagger, however is still alive and kicking.

The Marine K-bar
F&S Knife

And whatever general purpose/issue knife you get in a military setting.

That said, the symbolic power of the sword is still powerful and used on many crests, emblems and military tabs such as the 2nd Commando Regiment (Aus), The Army Rangers (US), the S.A.S. (UK, AUS, NZ) and Commando Corps (Netherlands). As long as one is realistic as to their applications, the sword will be with us for a long time.

 

[ccggenius12]

All this talk also raises another question that perplexes me and this is the seemingly lack of the Arabic swordsman in all recent geek culture.I find this somewhat confusing and odd,mainly because I believe the arabic swordsmen of the mid millennium had amazing skills with their given weapons and those weaposn were crafted with also great skill.So I wonder why they don't have the mythos like the other swordsmen to stand up in geek culture.

Harrison Ford killed the geek culture of Arabic weapons because he had the trots.

Quite simply, the katana is rapier. (Just throwing that Horrible pun out there. Someone had to do it.) Personally I'd take a claymore, just need to remember which side faces out. (yeah, I'm done now. Just noticed a lack of humor in this thread, regardless of quality. So I'm filling it.)

I was lead to believe that the only thing that really distinguished the average knight from the average footsoldier was that he possessed superior equipment. Yes, one could become a knight through apprenticeship, but one could also become a knight by killing another knight and taking his stuff. The whole honor thing only applied to those who were also nobility, given that they needed to pledge to the king and church in order to keep their status.
Conversely, to be a samurai, you had to, well, BE a samurai.

Given that there were laws prohibiting non-samurai from possessing katana, it gets favorable lighting in culture because the only people who used them were skilled in the use of them.

I look forward to any corrections and humor directed toward me.

 

[Arkzism]

plus you can block with a long sword and not have to worry about anything. but why would you want to... you also have shield which in itself can be used as a weapon...

If you are playing D&D. Actual longswords were two-handed. Using two hands meant they could be somewhat heavier, so they were a few inches longer than one handed swords. Hence the name. Mind you, German longswords were heavier than English anyways, IIRC.

About katanas...they were designed to be good at what they were intended to do, built using methods and materials of the time. All these things have now changed.

well actually i prefer the english long sword, and honestly i prefer a hand and a half

 

[Arkzism]

actually that is a lie. the long sword can be a very graceful yet powerful weapon. two edges plus teh abiltiy to thrust, held be a guy wearing a custom built armour, and knights could do quite a bit in full plate. the long sword granted wasnt made purely for slashing it was very utilitarian and in the proper hands could work just as well as any katana

plus you can block with a long sword and not have to worry about anything. but why would you want to... you also have shield which in itself can be used as a weapon...

You do thrusts with a katana as well. I don't know where you've gotten the idea that katanas aren't used for thrusting.

You can block with a katana as well, and YES you can block with it WITHOUT breaking the sword. It's just that you don't parry with the edge but rather the sides of the blade.

Also a longsword would have it's edge ruined if you used it to block with.

As for your other points, yes shields are useful defensive weapons. But if you hold a shield then you have to use the sword with one hand. This will reduce control of the weapon, as opposed to the katana wielder who is trained to use both hands, giving superior control.

Do note that if you will try to rebuke by lecturing me, do take note that I have a few years of actual training with these weapons. (I never was much into martial arts focussed on hand to hand combat so swords, polearms and chain weapons seemed a lot more interesting)

im not trying to lecture you im just tired of people saying the katana is so much superior to the longsword. and yes you do lose control using the word one handed but honestly i wouldn't give up my shield its like a movable job... though to be perfectly honest i would take a spear over a sword any day and i know katanas can thrust but they are designed more for slashing...

probably repeating my self but ive always found the katana to be vastly over rated

 

[jackknife402]

Not to mention that most weapons of the day given to the common foot soldier were not swords, but clubs, axes, spears, etc.: A sword was merely a sidearm at the time, especially a short-arm sword.

Katanas are thought to be elegant and majestic. However I myself would rather use the balance of a gladius. A blade that was known to be so well balanced that it could decapitate a man in a single, one armed strike.

Which most people seem to forget how hard it is to actually do, either severing the majority of the neck or cutting down to the spine is the sort of damage most blades would deal, and not a complete decapitation.

Course a katana is a 2-handed sword, so it's understandable there's enough force behind it. However, nothing will match the gladius for it's grace and power.

 

[McNinja]

So throughout modern day "nerd" fiction and what no,almost always someone has a katana of some sort and they're always held up to be the epitome of badass.I have always been confused by this and I've always wondered why the Japanese blade has been seen as a more popular weapon than those of the western and middle-eastern variety.I've never understood peoples fascination with the katana or it's wielder.To me they've always seemed weak,both warrior and weapon,from an empire that never accomplished much in comparison to it's neighbors.
The fighting style also seems highly overrated and people seem to overlook the martial prowess of the middle-eastern and western swordsmen in regards to skill when compared to their Japanese counterparts.Every time a movie,comic book or game mentions master swordsmanship it always goes directly to the Samurai or wielders of the katana.I've always held that the swordsmanship of the western world especially that of knights to be the better form but I'm still perplexed by it's second place status when it comes to weapons in the "nerd"fiction universe.
So basically I would like to get the Escapist views on this weapon and what they think about it's place in the modern day realms of fiction in opposition to it's western and middle-eastern counterparts.


Sorry if this is incoherent in anyway I have not had much sleep.

Actually, Samurai were some of the most highly trained and disciplined warriors in the world. Sure, there were others in the world, but Samurai were essentially the epitome of being a warrior. Whereas in the middle-east and Europe there were dedicated soldiers, the vast majority of them lived normal lives outside of being a warrior. The knights of the middle ages were dedicated to war, not to the degree of killing yourself if you failed. The Samurai lived and breathed with the weapons, and their warfare. Katanas were not made for stabbing, they were made for cutting and slicing, they didn't have to have the same integrity that their European or Middle-Eastern counterparts did, simply because there was no armor to stab through, or at least any reason to stab through it. Western weapons were made with brute force in mind (the middle east was sort of both, hence the name middle-east); Eastern weapons, especially the Katana, was made with the wielder in mind. A wielder who could out-maneuver any opponent (with the exception of ninjas), and outclassed everyone else in skill. A Knight might have the upper hand in terms of weapons and armor, but good luck attempting to hit the Samurai (see the edit).

However, nowdays people just regard Samurai warriors as cool dudes with sweet swords instead of highly trained, and highly skilled warriors with expertly crafted swords who were more dedicated to the art of war than those people will be to anything, ever.

The katana is an overrated weapon in fiction. It may have been very well-constructed and great for its specific uses, but it wasn't a wonder-sword, and it was made using notably weak Japanese steel - this is why it had to be well-constructed.

Weak steel is still steel, although comparing the two - European weapons and Japanese weapons - is moot because they weren't anywhere near each other. Ever. Read the above for more information.

EDIT: Just for everyone's information, screw Deadliest Warrior. That show is not science in any way, nor is it a good source for anything.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

Because its Japanese and if its Japanese then its automatically better duh

Thats pretty much the reason its gotten so popular, but some people seem to forget that its not perfect, and that it isnt a do everything sword, as many people have pointed out, put a samurai in fight with a knight in plate armour and the Knight will fuck his shit up.
I like Scimitars myself

 

[McNinja]

Because its Japanese and if its Japanese then its automatically better duh

Thats pretty much the reason its gotten so popular, but some people seem to forget that its not perfect, and that it isnt a do everything sword, as many people have pointed out, put a samurai in fight with a knight in plate armour and the Knight will fuck his shit up.
I like Scimitars myself

I'm more intesrested in ancient Greek/Roman weapons. In terms of Samurai vs. Knight (and not to derail the thread, but...) the knight clearly has the advantage in terms of weapons and armor. There's not really a question about it. In terms of skill, however, the knights of the middle ages were clumsy compared to the skill of the Samurai.

There's a difference between simply using your blade to fight with, and sleeping with one under your pillow because you can't have the big one with you all of the time.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

Because its Japanese and if its Japanese then its automatically better duh

Thats pretty much the reason its gotten so popular, but some people seem to forget that its not perfect, and that it isnt a do everything sword, as many people have pointed out, put a samurai in fight with a knight in plate armour and the Knight will fuck his shit up.
I like Scimitars myself

I'm more intesrested in ancient Greek/Roman weapons. In terms of Samurai vs. Knight (and not to derail the thread, but...) the knight clearly has the advantage in terms of weapons and armor. There's not really a question about it. In terms of skill, however, the knights of the middle ages were clumsy compared to the skill of the Samurai.

There's a difference between simply using your blade to fight with, and sleeping with one under your pillow because you can't have the big one with you all of the time.

Im pretty sure Knights were very well trained with what they had, it would take years of practice to be effective in heavy plate armour, and their sword fighting wasnt actually that bad

 

[Dafttechno]

In an episode of Deadliest Warrior (I'm referring only to a practical demonstration, not getting into other aspects of the show), they tested a Spartan spear against antique, authentic samurai armor that was over 200 years old. The armor stopped the spear cold, bending the spear tip and only chipping a patch smaller than an inch square off the armor.

And do you remember how old the spear was?

I went back to check the episode (had it on my DVR). They didn't say specifically, but the spear looked to be a modern replica (wood shaft, iron spear head).