On the Katana and it's wielder.

[Arkzism]

To only qualify "Samurai" as "Dude in armour with the sharp sword" is to ignore a heap of their skill set. The Katana was developed from the longer tachi used in mounted combat, the tachi only used after the mounted Samurai had already stuck everything within range full of arrows, they were often mounted bodyguards, officers and warriors, not foot slogging infantry. Not to mention the willingness with which the Samurai could adapt to new weapons like the gun and cannon. The Katana is beloved as not only a weapon but the highest example of a craftsman's work, each unique, high-level sword could be considered a work of art in it's own right.

I'm not biased at all by the way, this has absolutely nothing to do with my possible samurai heritage, nothing at all.

the high craftsman work was to make up for inferior iron

 

[Arkzism]

Well from personal first had exp with using melee weapons, the katana is extremely overrated. Its power comes from its speed without question, with the premise of death by a thousand tiny cuts. The katana is a phenominal weapon to make cuts and gashes into soft material.

The problem with the Katana is how much percision is required to use it effectively. You basically have to make your first shot a kill shot for the most part, and it has to be in soft flesh, which honestly is not hard to accomplish if you slice through the throat or the lower abdomen below the ribcage. However as soon as you encounter something hard like bone you quickly see the failings of the katana.

Honestly it does not take much to bend, break or dull a katana. So you might be able to repel a few weapon on weapon strikes and perhaps lacerate an arm your not going to get much more than that out of it. You might get one kill out of it, but if your fighting multiple opponents your pretty well boned.

Heavier and thicker blades have a much better durability. A weapon such as a gladius/cestus operates on the same hiltless speed based design, but will likely be able to endure many more strikes, be it against a shield, a thick bone, or a miss that hits rock/concrete/wood and still be able to continue on, all the while still retaining the same sort of deadly speed the katana is known for.

Its a nice weapon for its purpose, and they certainly do look beautiful, but practical, no, not really. Deserving of its hype, absolutely not.

well said sir (or ma'am) honestly i do a bit of sword fighting my self sca etc,

and yeah the katana isnt designed to go through heavy thing, like ie a shield

 

[Torrasque]

Probably because the Katana took a very long time to make, was idolized as the super-badass weapon of choice by Samurai, Ninjas, etc., is all about skill instead of power, and can cut bullets. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIDWG9Zn8j8

I prefer the Zweihander or Claymore, but Katanas are still pretty cool.

 

[Lunar Shadow]

*shrug* It's seemingly elegant.

Granted I am not much of a sword fan. Gimme a good pole arm and mebbe a short sword/axe IF they get in side my guard. Usually short haft it by that point anyway and use it like a quarter staff with a blade. that and two handed axes. get those going at a decent speed and they fly.

 

[Nocta-Aeterna]

I agree with most of the previous posts, but just to reiterate:

1)Japanese swordsmith were very good craftsmen, but this was necessary to compensate for Japan's poor iron ore deposits. Most of these forging techniques were eventually also used in the swords of Medieval nobelmen in Europe, which had higher quality ore at it's disposal and in greater quantities.

2)The katana makes a good cutting and slashing weapon against unarmoured opponents, for duels and such, but makes a poor infantry weapon. We got spears and bows for that.

3)The sword's cutting edge is very hard but very brittle, meaning it will keep its edge well, but striking something with sufficient force will irreparably damage the blade.

Spoiler: The katana is very elegant with its soft and simple looking curve, but I myself would rather go for the arming sword. Its got a crossguard ánd I'll have a hand free for a buckler.

 

[WanderingFool]

It's Outaku culture which values the Katana so much, and due to the general influence of anything Japanese in Western nerd culture your going to naturally hear a lot about the Katana...

Pretty much what I was going to say. Another reason I could think of though is that its just the perfect design. It gives the look of being able to cut an enemy or object down in one slice. I honestly think European and Arabic swords are much more elegant and dependable, though.

 

[Thaluikhain]

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.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

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)

 

[GlorySeeker]

I agree. Id take a well crafted Longsword over a Katana by a master craftsman anyday. They are more versatile, and elegant In my opinion.

 

[fletch_talon]

Its an attractive weapon.
It has a lot of skill involved in its creation (they are well made despite the low quality steel that you mentioned)

But most of all I think its because its a weapon that values skill over strength. Now I'm not saying western blade required any less skill, but they also tested your strength against your opponent's. The katana wasn't made to parry/block, you really wanted to duck around your enemies blows and cut them.

This is an attractive prospect to "nerds" who as a rule have greater respect for skill and agility than strength which they typically lack.

 

[Ampersand]

I've studied and practiced a lot of fighting styles from all over the world, and in my opinion there aren't a lot of weapons more elegant or more powerful then a katana, and the martial arts associated with it are nothing short of beautiful. It's also alot more versatile then any western weapon I've experienced, you can use it against 1 opponent or a hundred, armored or unarmored, fast strong whatever.
Most importantly (if you know what you're doing) it can be so precise you don't even need to kill.

 

[Smooth Operator]

It's cool and used so often because it is different, from a different culture(to most people still mysterious and unknown), that is also why people like to have random stuff written on their skin but only in Chinese/Japanese symbols.
So that is what sparks the initial interest from the dull things we all know too well, and going overboard with all sorts of sci-fi ideas is just the logic next step in the escapism.

 

[Exocet]

My theory is that the katana never evolved because Japanese warfare basically didn't either.Same tactics,and weak armor meant there was no reason to change the design of weapons.But when an outsider comes along and sees a katana,he sees a mythical weapon so perfect it never had to change,always cutting through soldiers with ease.

Now compare that to European warfare,constantly changing.Every time new advances in armor technology,or a better tactic comes along,the weapons change to better adapt.These constant changes meant that no weapon had ever time to gain that legendary status,except maybe the english longbow,but it's nowhere near the katana's fame.
Had the Japanese gotten full plated armor like late 16th century European knights,you would have seen the katana vanish to make room for rapiers and bills.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

2)The katana makes a good cutting and slashing weapon against unarmoured opponents, for duels and such, but makes a poor infantry weapon. We got spears and bows for that.

Which the japanese used in warfare. Spears and polearms like the yari and the naginata, as well as bows (both from horseback and from the ground).

It's just that the samurai didn't go anywhere without their katana and wakizashi, but in infantry combat they used polearms suited for it.

 

[Ickorus]

I've never understood it either, I just figured it's because all the animes (being japanese in nature) tend to use the Katana and it has seeped over from anime culture into general culture.

Personally I think the hand-and-a-half sword (longsword) is the best sword out there, probably the most versatile of all the swords.

 

[Captain Ninja]

the blade as a cool design for 1 thing, but i believe the main reason that the Katana is so commonly used is becasue of the original users of the blade, samurai being seen as honorable duty bound warriors, not saying that knights and warriors from other cultures where not honorable but its mostly associated with samurai and i think a lot of people like this and that's why we see it so much.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

My theory is that the katana never evolved because Japanese warfare basically didn't either.Same tactics,and weak armor meant there was no reason to change the design of weapons.But when an outsider comes along and sees a katana,he sees a mythical weapon so perfect it never had to change,always cutting through soldiers with ease.

Now compare that to European warfare,constantly changing.Every time new advances in armor technology,or a better tactic comes along,the weapons change to better adapt.These constant changes meant that no weapon had ever time to gain that legendary status,except maybe the english longbow,but it's nowhere near the katana's fame.
Had the Japanese gotten full plated armor like late 16th century European knights,you would have seen the katana vanish to make room for rapiers and bills.

Err, I have to put your knowledge of Japanese warfare history into serious question if you claim that japanese warfare tactics "didn't evolve". Also infantry didn't run around with katana swords slashing eachother. As I've said in a previous post, the primary weapons came to be bows and spears, while the katana was more as a symbol of the samurai class and a kind of side-arm on the battlefield.

The only thing that didn't evolve too much was the armour worn by japanese soldiers, and this because Japan didn't have as much in the way of iron ore to mass produce metal armour like the europeans did. Also the japanese were extremely quick to adopt the use of arqebuses and cannons.

So really, what are you talking about when you say that the japanese way of warfare "basically didn't evolve at all"?

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

However I would like to point out that these arguments are pointless. Most armies consisted of peasants wielding spears. (At least this was the case in Europe).

Same thing in japan. The brunt of any army consisted mostly of Ashigaru (conscripted peasants) wielding yari's or naginatas, and they weren't permitted to carry katanas at all. A relatively small portion of japanese armies actually consisted of samurai.

 

[Lonely Swordsman]

The katana is not a weapon of war, it's a weapon of ceremony.
Samurai would carry them into battle to show their knightly status, but any soldier with half a brain would chose a polearm or bow and arrow over it in actual battle.

The only thing it was used for was in the practice of Iaito, meaning duels between samurai, unarmored and exclusively armed with katana.

Katana and katana fencing styles are all designed and based around opponents also wielding katana. Outside of that, they're almost worthless unless you're impossibly good with them AND your enemy is not armored.

 

[Mandalore_15]

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.

during a time when europe still used iron. it may be weak steel, but it WAS steel.

and in europe, knights were usually drunken, rude and often dishonourable (noble knights are fairy tales), while the samurai had a dash more morals (not very much, but just a bit).

Erm, everything I've read about the feudal system in Japan and Samurai tended to suggest that they were monumental dicks... so really I think this comparison is pretty unfounded. The majority of both were complete turds!