On the Katana and it's wielder.

[Nocta-Aeterna]

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.

I referred to humanity in general with "we".

 

[barbzilla]

Couple of things to point out;

1: While the Japanese in general didn't have armor, the Samurai wore plate armor. Thus they do have experience dealing with armored opponents (though they would be unlikely to use their katana against said opponent.

2: Granted they didn't have great ore deposits, the way the made katanas was vastly superior and the technique is still in use today.

3: Why they are used to represent a badass.... Okay I have nothing on this one, I tend to prefer a nice rapier.

 

[Spoonius]

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!

Agreed. The samurai were loyal, but just as brutal as anyone else. They weren't exactly humanitarians.

You just have to look at Japanese military history to know that they aren't the most civilised bunch.

 

[warprincenataku]

The katana is a well-balanced blade perfect for hand and a half wielding. It's blade has been folded hundred of time creating layer upon layer in its design. This makes it both strong, flexible and incredibly sharp. It swings fast and cuts through bone, skine, muscle and the like with great ease. You don't have to be a muscular power house to wield one and more focus is on finess than brute force.

That's why the katana is at the top of the stack of best combat weapons.

There are very few weapons I would pick to use against someone with a katana.

Having 12 years of training myself the only weapon I would pick against a katana is either a katana, ninjato, ditch axe or shuko. Possibly a gun, but I have little to no training with one. lol

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

3: Why they are used to represent a badass.... Okay I have nothing on this one, I tend to prefer a nice rapier.

Rapier? You mean that mincy little weapon mostly known as used by french "men" with silly looking twirled moustaches, long hair, wearing flamboyant clothes and wide-brimmed hats with two birds worth of fluffy feathers stuck to it?

I kid, I kid. The rapier is an elegant sword, but if you consider the stereotype I just presented, I think you'll understand that the common perception of the rapier and the people who used them doesn't exactly make people think "badass".

Anyhow, as to my own theory:

I think the katana might have this special status mainly because it is associated with a rather heavy warrior culture. After all, the japanese were quite good at glorifying martial skill (I mean if you compare current sports, you'll see that martial arts are still a really big thing even in japanese schools, while Europeans and Americans glorify things like Soccer, Ice-Hockey, American Football and Baseball). I.e fighting and warfare combined with a seriously bloody history probably makes the katana stand out in comparison to other swords.

 

[LaughingAtlas]

Honestly, I don't care much for blades. You have to keep them sharp and they have a dreadful habit of getting stuck in things, especially axes, it seems. I'm more of a blunt weapon person, if bare fists are forbidden/useless as they so often seem to be in games.

 

[not_the_dm]

I think that it is because it was a symbol of Japanese millitary culture for longer that longswords, broadswords or greatswords were in Europe. I may be wrong, and feel free to correct me if I am. Personally I've always been partial to the claidheamh mor used in conjunction with a targe and dirk.

Spoiler

I honestly don't know if I'd be able to weild a claidheamh da laimh. The blades were often over five feet in length.

 

[barbzilla]

Oh I never intended to imply that the rapier was a badass' weapon. For personal preference the rapier would be mine though. I believe that it may be due to the more exotic nature of the blade and its culture. The fact that the Japanese believed that the sword had a soul of its own and would place great value on a blade, so much in fact that it became the most valuable item in a samurai's possessions, worth more than entire villages.

 

[Jazzyjazz2323]

3: Why they are used to represent a badass.... Okay I have nothing on this one, I tend to prefer a nice rapier.

Rapier? You mean that mincy little weapon mostly known as used by french "men" with silly looking twirled moustaches, long hair, wearing flamboyant clothes and wide-brimmed hats with two birds worth of fluffy feathers stuck to it?

I kid, I kid. The rapier is an elegant sword, but if you consider the stereotype I just presented, I think you'll understand that the common perception of the rapier and the people who used them doesn't exactly make people think "badass".

Anyhow, as to my own theory:

I think the katana might have this special status mainly because it is associated with a rather heavy warrior culture. After all, the japanese were quite good at glorifying martial skill (I mean if you compare current sports, you'll see that martial arts are still a really big thing even in japanese schools, while Europeans and Americans glorify things like Soccer, Ice-Hockey, American Football and Baseball). I.e fighting and warfare combined with a seriously bloody history probably makes the katana stand out in comparison to other swords.

That's funny lol,though my perception of a man wielding a saber is a 18th century calvaryman charging into battle dashing and elegant but brutal.

 

[Spoonius]

Heh, there sure are plenty of "experts" posting in this thread...

 

[Kukakkau]

Show me a nerd who can wield a claymore!

I'd say it's probably because the katana is far easier to handle than a huge european sword due to lesser weight and smaller form. I agree that in direct combat against a european broadsword the katana would most likely be fucked.

Claymore's actually tend to be pretty dam light for their size

And OT nerd > anime > japan > katana - that's pretty much the only links you have to make

 

[Dafttechno]

Samurai armor was made of iron plates or lacquered leather strips woven and bolted together. It was designed to afford the samurai a high level of protection while still being lightweight and flexible to give them as much mobility as possible. 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.

 

[Joshimodo]

I own a traditionally made Daishó (a Katana/Wakizashi pair), and they are beautiful things. Incredibly sharp, and nicely balanced. Unlike most swords, they feel like an extension to your arm, which is useful in combat.

I've also studied sword based martial arts, such as Kendo and Iaido.


However, the Katana is utterly useless against metal armour. Plate armour can actually fracture the blade due to having no give, but the bonus is the Katana is nimble enough to get between the plates. Chainmail will stop a Katana in any situation, though.



The mythology of the Katana is far more impressive than the Katana itself. Any well-built European blade can match it for killing prowess.

The users of the Katana treated them very well, as it was linked to the whole Bushido/Samurai code, honour and all that. Plus, the materials used to forge them were incredibly rare (hence the folded steel method), so thanks to the scarcity of quality metal and the length of time/amount of care taken to make them, they were treated with respect.

In comparison, European weapons for use by regular knights would be forged en masse. Aside from those used by Nobility or as gifts for important people, European swords were far less respected, thus they gained little mythos.


Short version: Stunningly elegant weapon, equal use to European blades (and inferior to Middle-Eastern ones), useless against metal armour, has more etiquette in regards to treating the blade outside of combat.

 

[not_the_dm]

The katana is a well-balanced blade perfect for hand and a half wielding. It's blade has been folded hundred of time creating layer upon layer in its design.

Hate to rain on your parade, but the blade of a katana was only folded 15 to 20 times. Mind you, that's still over 100 thousand layers.

 

[Jazzyjazz2323]

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.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

That's funny lol,though my perception of a man wielding a saber is a 18th century calvaryman charging into battle dashing and elegant but brutal.

Well sabres and rapiers aren't the same sword. Traditional sabres are usually curved and have broader blades, making them more efficient for slashing attacks like a cavalryman would be most likely to do. Rapiers instead have more elaborate handguards, as well as straight and long slender blades, and even though a lot of rapiers were edged on both sides, they were more adapted for thrusting attacks than slashes.

I.e sabres are the kind of weapon you'd associate with cavalrymen and navymen (although the shorter and broader cutlass would be more approriate for navymen and pirates alike), while the rapier is the type of weapon you see a lot in the movies about the three musketeers (and if you remember the movies, they tended to wear rather flamboyant and ridiculous looking outfits according to our modern standards, and will most likely be the most common perception of rapier-users, hence my theory )

 

[lewiswhitling]

The Japanese willingly isolated themselves from the rest of the world for politico-economic-cultural-religious reasons, so arguing that they weren't as aggressively imperialistic or expansive as other empires is a bit unfair

The Samurai and the Katana have proven to be incredibly superior to the technology of Western armies at the time - Samurai armour being of greater strength, durability, manouverability and overall design whilst the Katana was far better at cutting, slicing and stabbing than western Longswords, which were more like particularly sharp clubs in comparison (both deadly, obviously - but the Katana is superior if only because it is a lighter, faster, sharper, stronger weapon)

As for peoples' obsession with it - I dunno, it's Japanese so that's gotta count for something in their eyes.

Show me a nerd who can wield a claymore!

I'd say it's probably because the katana is far easier to handle than a huge european sword due to lesser weight and smaller form. I agree that in direct combat against a european broadsword the katana would most likely be fucked.

I prefer the stle and practicle-ness of a sickle sword (khopesh) or a a kilij.

The samurai were known for their combat prowes mainly from one on one combat, with some being able to catch arrows mid flight. So the power of the sword came from the warrior not the weapon.

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.

Beaten to it, they are damn fine blades but are built for a specific type of combat, they are good at it but not much else.

If a knight were to fight a samurai, both unarmoured the samurai would likly win, if the knight was wearing armour and/or had a shield the samurai would more than likley be fucked.

Erm, medieval men at arms could be just as proficient with a long sword as a samuri would be with a katana. Both swords weighed about the same, and they both were balanced to a point where they were just a "fast" as each other.

There really are some massive misconceptions in this thread about martial arts in general. The fact is that the basic principles are universal, from the unarmed side of it (throwing, unarmed fighting) to armed combat (with different swords being best used in different situations). Western martial arts has suffered from a massive sidelining due to the introduction of firearms, as as such has been relagated to a highly unrealistic and recreational "fencing" activity over the past several centuries.

But in the days when people (ANYWHERE in the world) relied on their swords to survive in day to day life, and in battles, believe me, they were all trained to be the creme of the fighting crop.

 

[Something Amyss]

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.

The idea that the power of a katana comes from its speed is ridiculous. That's as much a hollywood/anime trope as the "KATANAZ CAN CUT THRU TANKZ!" hype.

And lulz to the guy who mentioned expereince with the SCA. That's like saying you're a historian because you've been to ren fairs.

 

[Zacharine]

A katana is a decent sword, made for a very specific style of fighting.

It is also utterly useless against a decent piece of ringmail - a slashing sword against metal armor made to stop slashing weapons equals zero effect. Despite the common misconceptions, the katana is not some kind of ultimate lightsaberesque sword that cuts trough anything without problems.

It is overrated in general - many people have zero idea how a medieval arming sword or Zweihander can be used to cut an equal swath of fluiding destruction.

Katana is not inherently a superior weapon. It is simply often associated with samurai who had studied and practized with it for their entire lives and were thus masters of using it, along with the somewhat alien mindset they had about life and death and battle. European expert swordsmen were equally good with their weapons, but are more often forgotten because they are more mundane to our westerner sensibilities.

Summa summarum: Katana was a decent sword: good for it's geographical location and the fighting philosophy employed by the people using it. But that is it - it is just a sword of a particular fighting style, which has been equalled and in some cases surpassed elsewhere in the world.

 

[Jazzyjazz2323]

That's funny lol,though my perception of a man wielding a saber is a 18th century calvaryman charging into battle dashing and elegant but brutal.

Well sabres and rapiers aren't the same sword. Traditional sabres are usually curved and have broader blades, making them more efficient for slashing attacks like a cavalryman would be most likely to do. Rapiers instead have more elaborate handguards, as well as straight and long slender blades, and even though a lot of rapiers were edged on both sides, they were more adapted for thrusting attacks than slashes.

I.e sabres are the kind of weapon you'd associate with cavalrymen and navymen (although the shorter and broader cutlass would be more approriate for navymen and pirates alike), while the rapier is the type of weapon you see a lot in the movies about the three musketeers (and if you remember the movies, they tended to wear rather flamboyant and ridiculous looking outfits according to our modern standards, and will most likely be the most common perception of rapier-users, hence my theory )

Oh wow I feel like a moron...just noticed you said rapier not saber.Whoopsie daisy.
But yes most rapier wielding men I would perceive as men of let's say flimsy constitutions.