Katana elitists are often just kids growing up with anime and computer game and have never even handled any kind of sword. Katanas do cut well like you said because their high carbon content makes the very rigid. The main thing about ANY sword is technique, good edge alignment and also maintaining your weapon so it's sharpened properly.
Katana can cut through a diamond! It never breaks!!!! It can withstand 10000000000000000000 degrees Celsius and -10000 degrees Celsius! It enver ever rusts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm sorry to say but if some one on horse back riding at you with a reinforced war hammer with 10 pounds at the end of it, your katana is not going to stop that. Doing some easy guessing your dealing with about 100 pounds of hammer swing coming at you and no mater were you hit this guy on a horse you cant stop him because your sword isn't long enough.
amerexile001, I have 15 years of swordsmanship experience and yes it requires more skill to parry heavy weapons or blows one-handed, but it is not really difficult. I teach weekly swordsmanship classes in London and we regularly spar one-handed weapons against two-handed. It's nothing unusual or spectacular.
The purpose why the Katanas or Talwars were made was beyond it’s cutting ability. They were made to kill humans. These were weapons of warfare with different styles of using them. Where I think the Talwar leads the katana is because of its single hand use where the free hand can be used to shield, etc. the other hand could also be used to fight with another sword or direct your horse, elephant, camel. So for me the Talwar is better.
Mispronouncing "kilic" Those "i" s are dotles turkish "i" 's that are pronounced like the "e" in "pointer". That "c" has a little mark under it and pronounced as "ch" in "reach". "Kilich" is just one of more than 40 traditional Turkish types of sword/sabers each of which has a distinct name. Pieces in Topkapi Palace Museum and Military History museum in Istanbul proove that they were made with very high quality steel and craftsmanship.
And yes, it's true! The katana is simply just another sword. Beautiful, with a cool history, but just a sharp piece of metal like any other blade. Not immaculate, and not garbage either. Simply because something isn't the best doesn't mean it can't be your favorite, though! That's what makes the world interesting. Personally, I respect just about every blade I see and appreciate learning something about them, especially their respective martial arts. Thanks for the informative videos!
I have a theory on the subject of curved swords being very good cutters. It revolves around the curve placing the center of gravity behind the blade in the cut, making it's mass act a bit like a stabilizer, giving a natural tendency for good edge alignment as long as you put energy into the cut.
It depends on what specific type of European sword you're considering. But generally speaking European swords have tough construction with spring steel blades, through-tempered like a leaf spring, therefore able to take a lot of shock and abuse and therefore good in defence for parrying, whilst also being pretty good at cutting, thrusting and having a balance that lends itself to complex fencing techniques. Tulwars are great cutters, but designed to be used with a shield for primary defence.
+scarfacemperor I'm not sure. I think it depends on how you measure it. For example, if everytime a teeth of the chainsaw hits the tree counts as a cut you might be able to use fewer cuts to take down a tree with a katana.
I remember reading that even in the Middle East of the Middle Ages, Indian swords were famed for their quality and were used as royal gifts. Damascus Steel originated in India if I'm not mistaken, though apparently popularized in the West through Damascene blacksmiths (thus the name). Also, it seems Mamluke warriors in the Middle Ages were trained to be able to apply precise cuts, such as cutting a guys whole ear off, during battle, which seems to indicate that quick precise sharp cuts was the prefered tactic, atleast among medieval Middle Eastern fighters (from reading David Nicolle's stuff).
Wootz is extremely high quality crucible steel that, while well imitated, has never been fully reproduced with modern science. Damascus, often confused with wootz, usually pertains to pattern welded steel. This is further muddled because many middle-eastern Damascus blades were made with two or more types of Wootz...usually varying mainly in carbon levels. Monosteel or extremely well layered pattern weld steel will generally be FAR harder to bend permanently than Kobuse style sandwiched katana blades that people are so obsessed with. Many don't realize that folded steel doesn't mean the blade is sandwiched/layered like a Kobuse type...it simply means the steel itself has been folded over and over to homogenize the steel and get rid of slag. Why is monosteel or pattern weld going to be better than a sword that has a harder steel on the outside than on the inside? because, like bronze swords with two or more alloys and differential tempering, they tend not to bend without permanently damaging the blade. It's also a little known fact that, if a kobuse type sword is chipped on the side, it's become virtually useless since that little chip in it's hardened exterior makes for a stress point that will easily cause the blade to break if struck in the right place.
3choBlaster Yes I am aware that these swords are descendant from the central Asiatic swords, but that doesn't mean Indian sword makers didn't make superior quality swords. I'm just repeating what I read, Mid-East rulers would often give and take Indian swords as gifts.
Vebinz, you misunderstand, Middle Eastern sword makers used Indian steel which was the best steel in the World, but it took Middle Eastern sword smiths to get the best out of it.
Damascus steel did not originate in India, this is just pure baseless achievement claiming. Even a cursory google search reveals this to be just a youtube comment lie. Secondly, Persian Shamshirs adopted from Trukic designs later replaced swords in India. Guess Indians got tired of their superior weapons and adopted Middle East designs?
Today a fellow in Cordoba, Argentina used a katana against two thieves who broke into his house. It's all over the news down there... they even released some pretty graphic photos. One of them has half his ear hanging off and quite a lovely look of astonishment on his face. They are lucky they weren't killed. Excellent video, by the way. Loved the whole series.
JD Tremblay The original term was Wapanese (wannabe Japanese). Weeboo, which didn't really have a clear meaning in the newspaper cartoon it came from, was used as a substitute (on 4chan) after the word "wapanese" was banned on the site. Wapanese is a clear insult, implying that the own culture is rejected, as it is the case with many katana fanatics. Weeboo on the other hand, as it has been in use for a fair amount of time and somewhat changed in meaning, might be misunderstood as a non offensive general term referring those that like anime and manga (but not 1980s ninja movies). It is even used by some younger anime and manga fans to refer to themselves ... ¬_¬; Older ones might use "otaku" for this purpose, although the japanese actually use it like "nerd" or "geek", and wouldn't see anything strange in referring to someone as a model-tain-otaku or longsword-otaku ... So I'd recommend to use "wapanese" or "wapanese weeboos", rather than only "weeboo" as there have been anime and manga much more realistic in regards to bladed weapons than Hollywood movies...
MarvelDcImage not only is that mentally challenged thinking that one cannot appreciate a katana without being a weaboo or wapanese or whatever else you want to call them but its down right ignorant in many ways. I appreciate the Katana for its look and its symbolistic history not for its cutting power but apparently that makes me a fanboy in your limited ability to perceive the world around you. Also before you say I am a weeboo or wapanese, I am part japanese. So kindly sit down and shut the fuck up about my culture, K?
As a former talwardhari (swordmaster), there are many variations of the talwar as well. Basic Light versions are for thrust and slice, while medium versions are for cutting, and large ones are for crushing and cutting.
Another fantastic video, did you know when examined under an electron microscope Japanese swords from the Kamakura Period to the Meiji Period show nanowires forming chains along the edge of the blade where the hardest steel is, this in theory would make it a good cutting material for the same reason the Indian swords were as Damascus steel shows nano wires and nano tubes when examined under an EM and (again in theory) make the blade easier to keep an edge. Commercially available Katana's made today are highly unlikely to have these are they largely aren't forged by the way of Bushido I do actually have a Taisho period navel katakana but the blade is slightly bent and I'm not eager to damage it to satisfy my curiosity, if somebody does attempt this please link me.
The most amazing thing to me about the katana is the fact that they were able to make a very good quality weapon out of mostly inferior metals. Their ability to fuse a small amount of rare steel to a body of common iron to create a hybrid blade. Of course there were many equally amazing metallurgic feats going on elsewhere. Damascus steel, Toledo steel and Ulfbert steel to name a few.
Kami Nana I have a crucible powder steel katana, very nice, most top quality knives are made with the new microfine powder steels en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucible_steel#Methods_of_crucible_steel_production
Tulwar is an amazing sword, and it's quite believable that they're the better cutter...but katanas are also awesome thrusting swords; that chisel shaped tip is great for poking the shit out of someone.
It's a very good tip for stabbing through dense fabric or other soft armor. So are the rounded/spatulate tips on old dark/viking-age swords. This is often overlooked in shallow "cut vs. thrust" discussions. Acute but edgeless tips are better at punching through metal but worse at stabbing through fabrics.
The katana is not really a stabbing weapon by technique its more used to make wide debilitating cuts rather than poking an opponent full of holes and watching them bleed to death. I compare the techniques like using a 12 gauge vs using a low caliber. You get a successful hit with a katana they are are quickly out of the fight but it comparatively takes a while to 'reload'. Unless you hit something vital a thrust is usually fairly shallow and although debilitating over time your opponent can keep going but you can also re-position more readily and 'get more shots off' .
@@joshridinger3407 that's not really all that accurate. Round/spatulate tips that are sharpened are capable of delivering thrusts through fabric and softer armour, and this can be enough to make them effective but are not, as a rule, better at it. Acute tips almost always provide less resistance in the thrust essentially regardless of the medium as there is simply less surface area on which energy can be lost as friction. Furthermore acute tips on swords didn't tend to be used to "punch through metal" as essentially any kind of significant steel or even iron plate in armour would be either exceedingly difficult or near impossible to penetrate (especially with enough depth to effectively wound or kill the opponent). Rather acute tips on rondel daggers and European swords were designed to burst open the rings of mail and create an opening in the armour to penetrate the softer target underneath. The evidence that acute thrusting points work potentially even more effectively on fabric is the continued use of dedicated thrusting blades such as rapiers and smallswords in military and civilian use when plate armour became less common. It doesn't take a particularly powerful thrust to run someone wearing just thick clothing or the like through with a rapier or smallsword, by all accounts it was not a particularly uncommon occurrence. The same does not appear to be true for migration era swords.
Katana is good for bigginers and also a looker I mean katana looks awesome infront of other sword the designed of katana is really modern and very beauty but talwar is more durable than katana talwar steel is much more thicker and can easily decapitet someone head but katana can't decapitet a head it can give a half cut due to light weight
The fact is, that every weapon ever fielded was designed for a specific purpose. That purpose was determined by the needs of the person making or wielding it, and reflects their life, the time and the specific use that they had decided that it needed to fulfill. Does that make one sword better than another.....maybe, at that time and in that place. But it isn't necessarily so 500 years after the fact, and halfway around the planet. All of these various sword have their advocates....but as someone else said the person on the receiving end wouldn't be able to tell (or care) whether it was a well made katana, a Damascus shamshir or a rusty panga beaten out of a truck spring.
Scep Tyk I actually know all I need to about this person....and I'm not likely to change my screen name to satisfy your opinion. And I'm pretty sure the moron here is you......
As a guy that ownes talwars, samsheers and Kilic (pala) ... Here are my ratings based on personal experience: Rank 1: Talwar Rank 2: Kilic Rank 3: Samsheer However, the Talwar and even Kilic takes a lot longer to learn. The learning curve is more acute. Using the Samsheer with its stiffer lozenge shape cross section is easier. Ease of use is a big factor!
@@charbakamunisrestha9557 urumi is the most useless of the useless. It's ineffective and highly dangerous to the user. I can very much agree with dand patta but What on earth is a Rajput scimitar?
Skallagrim recently tested decent quality katana. His impressions are that it cuts pretty well, but no where near his two handed Albion Knecht Kriegsmesser : )
+Robert Tauzer of course because he tested one katana and there is hundreds of different katanas ..like there is hundreds of different european swords. .JESUS CHRIST ...katanas have the same concept but they are not build in the same way ..they don't have the same balance and not the same density .
+Ckyntosh Density ...? You don't know what you talk about, do you? ; ) No katana will ever cut as good as kriegmesser, they lack mass, length, curvature and let's be honest, sheer steel quality of modern albion sword replicas. People let's try to be realistic and forget urban legends of 1000 times folded superkatanas. Technology and steel quality has move forward from 14th century.
+Robert Tauzer Why does steel quality even enter the discussion if we're talking about modern steel swords? Katana are made of modern steel these days, so why does it matter? His point was simply that katana vary in blade dimensions just as much as any European sword, so a dedicated cutting katana with a thin spine, curvature near the tip, properly formed kissaki, and correct shinogi will be a superior cutter. Katana are slashing weapons with a *very* secondary consideration for thrusting, while longswords are usually well balanced for both, but lean towards thrusting.
+DeathsHood Because superior steel quality of older blades is often an argument in katana fanboys. Btw, katana are among least "vary"ed swords on planet and no matter of her type, age or steel, katana cannot cut as kriegmesser, that blade is a whole different category. Perhaps some no dachi could. Perhaps.
+Robert Tauzer 1) Who cares? That had nothing to do with his comment, so it's essentially just a red-herring. 2) No, the katana is not the 'least varied' sword on the planet; not even close. Off the top of my head: four distinct kissaki styles with at lease three variations within each, three different primary curvatures, various curvature degrees, length between 28 and 36 inches, two shinogi types at least, and that isn't even factoring in distal and profile taper variants, or length and depth of bo-hi, OR hilt length, the list goes on. 3) The kriegsmesser is irrelevant. It's a heavy-duty chopping weapon, not a slashing weapon, so you're basically saying a longsword sucks since a falchion dismembers people easier. Actually try *researching* weapons before baselessly bashing on them. Objectivity is more valuable than opinion.
at the middle of the vid i was about to shout "the Kilij will surpass the katana" but watching the whole vid i relaxed a bit :) (great vids, i spent the whole day watching them and you sir have a new subscriber).
Honorable scholagladiatoria, I am very interested in one of the most ancient swords in history, the Khopesh. They seem to have unique abilities in hooking other weapons, in addition too a mixture of the abilities of both curved and flat blades that integrate the pressure provided by the curve with the balance and thrusting ability of a straight blade. I am wondering if you would you be interested in doing a video on them. Sincerely: Loa Dan
A point to anyone who wants to take up the 'best cutting sword,' challenge. I'm not a sword expert, but I do know a great deal about honing and sharpening steel. So I'd like to throw something out there. If you want to compare the cutting potential of a sword's design, quality of manufacture, material quality, etc. then everything you test should be honed to the same standard with the same abrasive medium. This is easy. However if you want to compare historical capabilities this is where things become tricky. You're going to need to find natural abrasives that were available to the owners/manufacturers, and this can potentially make a substantial difference. Not all regions are equally blessed with an abundance of ultra-fine natural abrasives. Just something worth considering that deals with a subject I enjoy.
scholagladiatoria Well let me make it clear first that most of what I know about natural abrasives has to do with sharpening razors and certain tools (plane blades, cabinet scrapers, etc) so I'm not certain how far back the natural whetstones I know of were in use. Aside from some Japanese stones which go back some way. The oldest sources I've come across dealing with sharpening and abrasives are all about razor honing. There appears to be very limited information available on sharpening historical weapons, or what was used to do so. That said I'm fairly sure that garnet-based stones from Belgium/the Ardennes (known as coticle stones in modern times) awere used historically. The regions reputation for such things dates back to Roman times. Ultra-fine natural abrasives which have been used in whetstones (or which occured within them rather) could include things like novacuilite and garnet. However while an area might contain a desirable abrasive it needs to occur in a reasonably high concentration within a subtance that makes a suitable binder such as slate. The density of the abrasive within the binder will lead to faster or slower cutting. The size can contribute to the fineness of the edge. Though some minerals in a pure form might be suitable for burnishing like beryl or biggs-jasper for example. Moreover some free abrasives like carbon black or chalk could be used to polish. In relatively modern terms (though some were used historically) I know stones suitable for fine honing and polishing have been found in France, Germany, Wales, Scotland, Belgium, Turkey, India, China, Japan, and in some areas in North America like Arkansas. Not all of these are equally effective. However you will also need more agressive, faster-cutting abrasives to get your edge to a point where it will benefit from honing in the first place. Some of these (I believe sandstone was used historically) are very common, but only at the 'course,' end of the scale. For example I can personally only think of two mid-range natural whetstones from Europe.
russian or slavic warrior swords are mainly influenced by the turks and mongols . the eastern swords. shasquas,shamshir,kilij,talwar pulwar are all eastern ...
5 років тому+1
shashquaa is caucasian, not russian. It literally means long knife. There is an illustration of Leon 2 of Abkhazia with a thin curved blade. Probably got its design from his Khazar allies.
EmperorNarcissus You're full of crap. The best cutting weapon in the world is the quarterstaff! Nothing on Earth cuts better than a quarterstaff. A stick or a tree branch comes in at a close second. But who cares about second place, am I right?
In my opinion, when it comes to raw, unadulterated cutting power... I'd say the Kilij is one of the best. A deep curve and a weighed tip makes it into a giant meat cleaver.
to be fair though the Japanese didn't have as many encounters with foreigners over time as other nations did so i think if they were more battle hardened against different types of blades maybe. As far as I know (i may be wrong) but the general idea is that they didn't really use shields too much so maybe if you put a few archers, heavily armored infantry and some shields the katana would maybe havea hard time. What some people i know get wrong is that its not a chopping weapon. You slice at an angle with it. Its great in a 1v1 situation but outside that it struggles even against the naginata. My reason for liking single edged blades over double edged ones is just that i think they look better, they are more stylish in my opinion. I'll stop this comment now xD.
You're not wrong. Japanese shields were rectangular wooden planks used to shield foot archers and gunners from incoming fire. So it's more a form of quick field fortification. In terms of 1 on 1 contest, the Katana works well as long as the opponent is unarmored; then again, any sword that won't come apart in your hand will work well if the opponent is unarmored. This is why for most of Japanese history, when battles were still fought between armies of troops that wore armor, Katana was just a backup weapon a warrior fell back to when his primary weapon was destroyed or lost.
Remember too that the katana was a shortened tachi. The sword originated from being used on horseback to cut down infantry who also used no-dachi or odachi (longer tachi) to defend on foot against horsemen. Once most of the battles stopped taking place from horseback and lent more towards foot engagements (due to the locations that the battles were as well as anti-cavalry fortifications), those very same tachi swords were cut down and resharpened into katana which could be work blade side up in the obi for combat on foot. The katana was never designed from scratch to be the weapon that it was ultimately used for. Iron was very hard to come by in Japan, and in fact is of very very very poor quality, most of it being black iron sands or meteor fragments. This was why the iron had to be worked/folded into steel to forge the weapons. . . so it was far more economical to cut down the swords that already existed.
As someone who has studied kendo and kenjutsu for years, as well as some Chinese and Indian weaponry. I agree with just about everything you've said. The Katana does not have supernatural properties; it is just a sharp piece of metal. Is it the best sword ever made as some say, no, it is no better or worse as any other weapon. I am very effective with a Katana in an O-Yorio, but the Long Sword and Plate feel unnatural, and a shield is unbearable. But, that is due to a lack of training not its inferiority. I’m unsure who you have been talking to but they do not seem to understand much about Japanese swords or swordsmanship. There were hundreds schools dedicated to different styles, separated by regions, clans, villages, ect. Many began fading after the Tokugawa Shogunate unified Japan and most vanished after World War II. The interest in the Samurai and subsequently Budo is relatively new, even in Japan. The reason why many think all Japanese swordsmanship is the same has to do with the growth in Kendo, and stage fencing (movies), being all people are exposed to. So while I was expecting some rant about the superiority of Western swords and fencing I am happy to have been wrong. Could you post something on books on Euro swordsmanship and schools or societies in the US. I’m particularly interested in the mace.
What is really interesting (and rather odd) when you think about it, is that the first of the really great "samurai movies" - certainly at least the first to be seen much outside Japan - were ones by Kurosawa such as "The Seven Samurai". In that movie, katanas were generally relatively minor weapons compared to spears, naginata, longer swords and bows and matchlock firearms. This was also true in Kurosawa's other pre-Tokugawa era samurai movies. The "all Japanese swordsmanship is one style of katana fighting" really appears in movies like Kill Bill ... which I believe was made by that great great Japanese director, Quentin Tarantino...
Yes a variety of weapons and tactics where used in combat because many of those who fought where peasant conscripts. Books, TV, Movies, ect have all help foster a culture of ignorance about combat in general, not just swordsmanship. In conversations I’ve had with many people, they think movies fights and combats scene are real, which is pathetic.
ol' Man I remember when my little brother said that the goal of sword-fighting was to hit the swords into each other (while trying to kill the other person). He's 16. People who think hitting your opponents sword will help in most fights watch too many movies.
A KATANA CAN CUT THROUGH A FUCKING MOUNTAIN. NIPPON STEEL FOLDED ONE BILLION TIMES CAN SEVER HYDROGEN ATOMS FROM OXYGEN ATOMS AND THEN SLICE THROUGH A TANK.
Katana's on average weight less than longswords..... only 1.1 kg's. Last time I checked 1.1 kg's is not heavy. Hell even longswords where usually a maximum of 1.8 kg's. I can't see how it's awkward hit things with the pointy and sharp end. Your only valid point is they may take some maintenance but that is any sword really and comparatively katana have harder edges so they should take less maintenance than the average longsword.
Rafaello Fareday A rapier would be a HORRIBLE weapon against a zombie. The only way to kill a zombie is to destroy the brain, which means that the thing that rapiers are so good at, poking holes into someone's body, would be useless unless you were able to thrust with enough force to pierce through the skull or got through the eye socket or something. Plus, in general piercing weapons are not as good against zombies because they tend to come in large groups so your weapon getting stuck in one would almost certainly get you killed. Bladed weapons in general are not as good, because you can't make them bleed out, you NEED to get past bone before you do anything, and since less force is delivered to an enemy in a cut (since some of the force of a blow is reduced by the drag of going into flesh) a non-killing blow isn't going to knock them away from you. Because of all that, the best weapon against a zombie...is probably a baseball bat. Or, if you wanted something more weapon-y, an axe would be perfectly accetable, or as you say a Halberd would be a good weapon. Any sort of sword would be bad unless it was an excellent cleaver and you were skilled enough that you always made a decapitation and never risked hitting too high or too low and getting stuck in a collarbone or skull. Seriously due to the biomechanics of zombies and how they differ from living people, a baseball bat would be better than pretty much any sword or bladed weapon. Just crack open the skull and continue on to the next one.
I think the Katana is a beautiful sword but personally I am more of a fan of the Naginata, and the chinese Dao and Jian. Also I am fascinated by the Katar, but I don't see any videos about it! If even someone like you who has a keen interest in eastern indian weapons doesn't have videos with the Katar it must mean they are extremely hard to find...
Why would you, it's just a push dagger used for fashion and self defense. There's nothing special about them, there's no mystical martial art to using them (or at least nothing that is particularly practical).
Um papo sério e abrangente sobre a katana e outras espadas. Acho que a maior diferença do corte da katana para o corte das restantes espadas são as técnicas, os japoneses desenvolveram um método de meditação junto ao corte. Agora o vídeo já chama a realidade, que venham os testes !!!
yeah saif just means sword it could apply to any different sword but originally that sword was of arabic origin arabs were most famous for forging those swords but ofcourse some countries who had ties with them were inspired by the fatal design so they made like it but the only ones who got it 100% accurate were the ottomans and to be frank it kinda still tops the katana when it comes to: slashing and cutting and sharpness...it tops the long sword when it comes to:weight effectiveness and type of metal....and tops both swords for the design allows fatal stab wounds and fatal slashes...when it comes to stabbing with it the curved tip is made especially for when pulling the sword out after stabbing the enemy to rip the flesh so that it never heals also the metal they used was hard and light allowing them to slash and cut deeper alot faster
Blocking and parrying are the same thing. No problem blocking any kind of two-handed sword blow with a one-handed sword. Parrying a halberd or poleaxe with a one-handed sword is difficult, but longswords and katanas are not hard to block at all, as they are only a little heavier than a one-handed sword.
No one sword is better than the other, they were all designed for different things. It's just our personal preferences that make us say that one is better than the other. I personally like longsword, whereas my brother in law likes katanas, and my brother prefers likes bidenhanders, or greatswords. I am personally fed up with the internet, and with tons of anime fanboys saying that the katana is the perfect weapon.
Some other video mentions, and though I am a katana fan, I must agree, that the "best" sword was the gladius. Simply because it conquered the greatest empire for the longest time.
blochtar Well, in this case I think logistics and organization were more important than individual weapon. As for Gladius, I guess it is not the most favorite weapon in the gladiatorial match.
Yes there is. 1845 pattern wilkonson blade infantry officers sabres and similar sabre types. Hit the sweet spot for cut and trusting capability. Slight curve drop points. Good weight,length and stiffness before they gave up on cutting altogether to focus thrust and by then the sword was pretty much on the out with the last military swords been issued to cavalry in ww1 which was more like a short lance than a sword. It stands to reason it was the final evoloution for cut and thrust swords before they became obsolete.
The Tulwar It's not an 'Indian' sword and was implemented by the Mughal Empire. Almost all sabre types derived from the Turco-Mongol Sabre Shamshir, Tulwar, Kilij, Karabela you name it. That includes European sabres, mainly the Cossack swords, Polish Hussar swords (and later French and British light cavalry swords). The Turco-Mongol Sabre was initially introduced by Turkic/Mongolic nomads that were proficient in mounted warfare and let's be honest, a curved sword is what you would prefer on a horse. You also forget to mention that swinging a curved blade from horseback is when you draw out its fullest potential. When nomads used to charge and raid with their light cavalry a curved blade prevented them from breaking their wrists, because the curve allows for the smooth transition when on horseback.
Talwars existed in India before the Mughals. The Shsmshir was a Mughal sword while the Rajputs used both the Khanda and the Talwar. However, it's definitely true that the Talwar blade is inspired from the Turkic and Persian swords.
Can I try? 1) Sell Katana on Ebay to an idiot for 3x the price. 2) Buy Roman Legionnaire kit of any period/Medieval armour and sword. 3) Spend the leftover on whores.
I prefer the disc guard it will stop a blade sliding down towards your hand even on the sides like a Longsword wont without a nail, but I dont have to worry about it hitting my wrist while maneuvering the blade.
You know, as a martial arts teacher myself, often kids come to me and ask: "which fighting style is better?" and I say: "the one that fits you". Here I say: the best sword is the one you can feel better in your hands and use better for that particular task. Cause a sword is a tool, nothing more, nothing less. For example, I fell in love with the nagamaki, even if I've never been a katana guy (I practice kung fu, not japanese martial arts) because the technique to use it is almost the same of the kung fu short pole, that is the kung fu weapon i like the most, making it very natural to me to use in a fight.
These kinds of commentary are also misleading. That makes a small modicum of sense for hand to hand, though not much, but it makes no sense for armed combat, which is heavily dependant on a number of variables presented by circumstance. Since weapons are very often a lethal method of self defense, the level of practicality vastly supercedes comfort. If allowed time to prepare, say like a duel, your polearm, a short naginata as you said, would tear me to pieces if i showed up with a dagger. If a situation arises unexpectedly, and there is a gun equidistant from a naginata, yourself and your attacker, I'm fairly certain you'll be reaching for the gun.
I like to think of it this way: Katanas are great swords because the Samurai who wielded them were great warriors. As Balin said in The Hobbit "Swords are named for the great deeds they do in war." Swords truly do get their reputation for the warriors who used them. Consider this, how popular would the Katana be if the Samurai were not the awe inspiring warriors they were?
Katana are mystified because of cultural hype and novelty by foreigners. Must like the katana is nothing supernatural or exceptionally special, samurai were simply warriors like many others.
Uncle Sheogorath i'll tell you this. in Korea katanas are just meh swords. guys from next door. long swordsor a claymore: HOLY SHIT WTF IS THIS !! THIS IS AWESOME! i think it was the hype, not the warriors, samurais are hyped also.
lamia197 Agreed. Katana's became a symbol of being a member of the samurai social class during the peaceful Edo period. Earlier when the Samurai were actually fighting wars regularly, the order of importance of weapons went Bow (Yumi), Spear (Yari), Sword. And like European knights, they preferred to fight from horseback, where the sword is the least useful of these weapons.
WrappedInGray I agree with you. Although im not so sure about Yumi. Koreans being people who exell at bows. Yumi just looks too long and uncomfortable. Then again i dont know much about the yumi and how it did in wars between japanese people.
Uncle Sheogorath Katanas are great swords cuz of Hollywood. Samurai were weak warriors. The only time they ever really moved on past their little island which no one wanted was when they invaded China with guns. I'm pretty sure the reason why Japanese warriors gave that significance to their swords was cuz good steel was rare so that's like a big possession. But if you measure the Japanese to historical empires...extremely weak civilization...until Sony was opened. But that's more cuz USA send all the taxpayers money their way feeling sorry for the nuking! :P
Shamshir is a Persian/Iranian word generally meaning sword. I don't know why and how it has come to be known as a specific design of sword but it certainty isn't Arabic. Arabic word for sword, again in general is Saif and knowing their language a little and how sophisticated it is, they probably have specific names for different types of swords.
I don't think the mother tongues "native" meaning of a word is so important in this context. I mean there are many examples, either in weaponry or anywere else. The "Seax" in it's language also only means sword, knife or sometimes even scissors. You might also compare with the literal meaning of "great sword". Many weapons names natively didn't mean what they meant to mean after the use of the weapons became popular. Would you argue the same way about the "Playstation"?
Alioth Ancalagon I'm not saying it's important in the sense that every sword enthusiast should get familiar with the whole roots and language of the swords they are using or that imported words to other languages should have exactly the same meaning they had in their native language. I had two points here. one, my own surprise as to how this particular type of shamshir has become to be known as the Shamshir. second, just to point out his mistake at the end. some people appreciate to be informed of their mistakes and some don't. I think he is one of those who do.
Katana is a Japanese word for a single edge curved sword, so technically speaking Szabla or Scimitar would be a katana. I think it just has to do the fact that people don't speak Persian, Japanese, etc.. in Europe. . Katana (as the word is understood today) is also is not a single type of a sword. Katana developed throughout ages depending on need. The really last major change was when samurai became the bureaucratic class during Tokugawa Shogunate. From that period (about 17th Century) Katana became a DUELING weapon and NOT weapon of war. Hence one can't compare Katana to a Long Sword, a far more apt comparison would be Katana vs Repair or Small sword.
Kaizoku Hyo considering how much Iranians, Turks and Arabs interacted with each other, both in peace and hostility i be surprised if they weren't aware of the innovation of their neighbor like better steel or design, or if all of these swords were not common in the whole region. They definitely are similar and probably all were moving toward one perfected design.
No one sword is going to be good at everything, the very qualities that makes a blade good at thrusting detract from its cutting ability etc. However, the Katana design remained virtually unchanged since the 11th century, so must have something going for it. The katana does have an effective thrush 'Tsuki' I don't think the more curved blades would. I was lucky enough to cut with Viking pattern welded sword once, it was surprisingly effective.
I don't think it's fair to judge a sword's cutting ability without greatly accounting for the technique used for that particular weapon. Just like we don't judge a hammer on how well it can be used as a baseball bat, the traditional techniques used to cut these two different types are accordingly very different.
I agree. The sword is at the end of the day a tool. The man behind the tool makes it complete and the way he wields it or the school of thought or doctrine surrounding the use of the tool is just as important if not more. If we talk about modern times then the British, The French, The Germans all used bolt action rifles. But the British alone have the reputation of sustained rapid fire. This can only partly be explained because of the design of the rifle. For the complete explanation we must also look at the techniques drilled into the soldiers.
scholagladiatoria, what do you think of the cutting quality of yatagan? Did you mean that when you said "version of Turkish semsir/kilic"? Doo you think that "curved forward" quality of kopis-falcata-yatagan family of swords gives them a better cutting quality than curved backward scimitar-tulwar-katana? Any empirical, statistical information available? Many thanks
I hate it when people bring up the argument 'Katanas where obviously good as japan werent conquered.' Japan where good in warfare due to being proficient at using the bow. In melee fights they relied on spears. The samurai had no chance of beating a knight if he had only a katana. This isnt because its worse than other swords but its inneffective against armour. The katana would however be proficient at dealing with unarmoured opponants. Another point is Japan had shitty steel often named 'Pig-iron' and thats why they had to fold it so much to make it functional but even so its worse than what the europeans where using. This made katanas less effective but was less of a factor for arrows and spearheads as the steel quality wasn't as important as it would be with as sword that is almost entirely metal. Also another thing i would like to mention is that the japanese were not the first to fold steel. Europeans where doing this before they where able to create more advanced steel. Summary, Japanese have excelent archers and spearmen, but shitty swordsmen and metal. Japanese werent the first to fold steel.
Katanas are great cutters, but so are every curved sword. Actually, even straight blades like the type XIIIa and claymores are great cutters. But the best cutting sword is a greatsword. The sharp edge with the massive weight means unchallenged power. You're not going to carry around a greatsword in your civilian life, though, and they're considerably slower and clumsier than other swords.
+Rafaello Fareday Greatswords typically only weigh around 6-8 pounds, so there still quite light. And balance is important is well. You're right that you wouldn't carry one in civilian life though.
+ConnorJaneu Of course they're light enough to be usable, but his point was that a greatsword is heavier than a different kind of sword. And in comparison with such other swords (especially one handet swords) even 4 pounds is quite massive. "Good" balance however can make a farely heavy sword feel light and nimble.
I think that when we talk about sword cutting power in general, will get to historical swords specifically in a bit, we have to consider two things: design, and materials. Design wise, I think the Katana is in general (and I can't stress that enough, in general) is a superior design for cutting and in general - or anything close enough, honestly, in terms of design the one you showed and a Katana, when striped down to their functional design elements, ain't that much different design wise, so I would lump anything together there. It is curved enough to have all the benefits of being a curved blade, which we are both are, while being "straight enough" that it might not really have any draw backs, for instance it is still a decent thrusting weapon. But I think it really shines in its ability to be easily draw in an aggressive manner (which can also be used defensively as a strong parry followed by an attack while your opponent still recovers from the blow to his weapon), which a more curved sword wouldn't have, and which is generally slower to do with a straight sword of similar size. Otherwise, I think it comes down to personal preference and what you are more skilled with, really, hence why I say it is generally a better design - IF you manage to master its use better than you get used to other swords, then you would manage to benefit. In the end of the day all decently designed cutting swords (to separate it from swords specifically meant for thrusting primarily or only, which served a different purpose anyway) are trying to do the same very objective and specific thing, so it is no wonder over time the designs arrive at not too divergent optimal solutions. So if we were talking about swords made with modern materials and blacksmithing machinery, I think a Katana inspired design would be the best at cutting as a whole. Now thinking about materials, I was watching this documentaries about the viking ulfberht swords, which were probably made from metal imported from the middle east, if not made there. It was a stainless steel of very high quality, significantly better than the steel varieties available elsewhere at the same time. Obviously, that material or a similar one was likely used to make the local's weapons too. It doesn't take much to put one and one together, you take middle eastern curved designs with all the cutting advantages a curved sword has + people who are as dedicated and skilled at it as everyone else who practices with their weapons + a blade that is made of way superior material, and you have the best cutting weapons (or at least the best cutting weapons in actual practice). So I think there is very strong argument to support you final conclusion about the best historical swords, not only by what people reported, but also by the nature of the swords and their use.
@@ScorchedEarthTactician "opinions of a person with an education, who I pretend to be young so I can sound condescending" isn't the smart insult your peanut of a brain thinks it is. It just tells on you, really.
Katanas were inferior metal but they made the metal seem pretty good by forging skills, whereas middle eastern and Indian swords used wootz which is much more superior
Alright :) The katana debate is getting interesting! :D Now, why not tackle the point* that started this whole debate? The katana pierce potential? (From the orginal video that provoked your series?) Wouldn't the stiffness/thickness be an advantage here too?
There is no best sword. Each sword type and style exists for reasons specific to the place and time of origin. How would one objectively measure which cuts better? Antique swords are too valuable to be used and need resharpening. Modern production swords use modern alloys and are all essentially the same regardless of what stylized shape they are in to appeal to buyers. If one style/shape sword was to be truly better than any other then I think the whole world would have been using identical swords. Also, antique katana swords arent 60 Rockwell, more like 48 to 52. The steel also is far from being of good quality. The forging methods and steel production of Japanese swords is equivalent to late iron age China, around Han. By the time Japanese swords were exposed to the rest of the world they were 1000 years out of date and valued not for how good they were but for the simple fact of being made in long forgotten way. Everything else since then is just pop culture myth and Japanese national pride that still to this day tries to sever its cultural ties with China and Korea.
If you going into a battle ..Talwar would be your best option, it was simply designed in such a way that it causes maximum cutting power per swing.. If your in a street fight....... :) The Katana would be your best option !
I love the backhanded compliment in there. "Any idiot can pick up a katana and cut something, but with a longsword, if you aren't highly skilled, you won't do very well with it."
why are u mis-quoting this man? he said, "...anybody can ...." he did not say any idiot....it wasn't a back handed compliment it was his assessment based upon his experience and expertise....to me he seemed objective
blklion25 Yes - what he's saying is that the katana is more forgiving of cuts which are slightly off-plane. It's also true that the katana, being stiff, will cut no matter how far along the edge you make contact. With laterally springy longswords, it's very important to hit at or very near the centre of percussion - which is the point where the waves of springiness along the length of the blade cancel each other out. This also generally known as the sweet spot. ( www.exploratorium.edu/baseball/sweetspot.html ) There is some recent research disputing this, but it's not yet gained much traction.
ultimately the moral of the story is that the sword is only as good as the one wielding it....nuff said- no need to bicker over somethng that, in the grand scheme of things, matter very very little.
Don't think it was a backhand compliment, as statement of fact. Put it this way, anybody can pick up a Rapier and stab with it. It is very natural to do so and you WILL poke a hole in whatever you hit. Katana is a very well designed cutting blade that is VERY sharp. It takes no real effort to make a successful cut. Now to use a sword WELL (be it Rapier or Katana) that's something different.
Eric Beall Well I can tell you from personal experience that to cut takes no real effort. Hell you can swing it like a baseball bat and being a hard sword and a very sharp one, it cuts very easily and well. Long sword is more difficult, again from personal experience, because it does bend. Notice Eric. I am NOT saying that Katana takes no skill, just that basic cut is easy. Put it another way, any idiot can pick up a baseball bat and hit a ball, right? Now to hit a ball well while going 100MPH? That takes a "bit" more effort.
Of my sword collection I find my Kat to be the fourth best cutter behind my Kukri, British 1796 Light Cavalry Sabre and Burmese Dha. All three have hatchet tips, which seems to give them the edge.
Another one like the Kopis is the Falcata. I have never actually used one so I can't say it's really better or worse than anything, or that it's truly my/a favorite, BUT...it's basically a favorite of mine. I mean, I have read a bit that says it/that type of blade is fantastic at cutting.
I have a katana and a one handed sabre, I think the katana is much better, I can swing it faster since im using both arms while the saber seems slow and less powerful.
Good work Matt, I have to mention that. I just watched all 7 parts of this debate before writing this comment and since you said you're not that much of an expert for katanas I wanted to share some of my knowledge here, because I am worried that some important things might stay unconsidered otherwise. But what really bugs me are some comments I read under the videos. So first: Yes, I do love katanas. But I am not a fanatic. I know what I am at with my favourite type of swords and to be honest, I do accept every flaw it has, since it adds to the own character a sword type has in my opinion. And I do love the design of european longswords aswell! *KNIGHTS VS SAMURAI* e.g. longswords vs katanas YES, a knight WOULD have better chances against a samurai in a duel - at least in my opinion. But not really because of the european plate armour or the misconception about katanas being shorter than longswords. There were successful katanas especially designed/smithed to cut or rather pierce through armour (japanese samurai armour was not that bad compared to the european plate armour, really). Also katanas normally were not as short as we imagine them nowadays, they were almost about the same length as a good longsword (thus making them slightly heavier I guess...). But to be honest the term "katana" formed fairly late in the samurai era and swords given that term were already not designed for the battlefield but for displaying in public, becoming more of an piece of art than an efficient weapon (the original term for a battleproof katana was "tachi"). But we don't want to put up our fancy knight against some decadent wannabe warrior, right? So I assume a samurai from the prime of his era would be a more fitting opponent. Still the samurai has harsh times against a knight. The reason for this, in my opinion, is the material used to make the swords. Folding steel was a necessity to make japanese low quality tamahagane useable (it was just unclean, duh), while differential hardening was a clever addition to make best use of the quality steel given. So what am I telling you with this? Simply that Japanese had inferior material for their swords throughout the samurai era. And on a side note: If both sides would have fought against each other in their prime you wouldn't believe the Japanese hadn't improved to compete with their opponents, right? Good fight, sir knight. Given the technology today and the high quality carbonsteels available katans would perform equally well compared to longswords, I believe. (Overall I mean, given characteristic differences, of course.) You don't even have to differentially harden your katana traditionally. A through hardened katana would be more durable nowadays actually. It would only become slightly faster dull. The whole "Which sword is superior?" argument is nonsensical in my eyes... from BOTH sides. There really is no magic behind katanas and they were NOT made especially good in the past. But calling the katana "inferior" or "not good at anything" based on misconceptions or "anti katana cultist" biases is just as ignorant. Therefore I thank Matt for giving a pretty clean, neutral and rational comparison/statement. About the kenjutsu arts everything I know was said by Matt and I don't have to add anything, so that's it. My "two cents". Have a good day, all.
Stup1d0zz ***Given the technology today and the high quality carbonsteels available katans would perform equally well compared to longswords, I believe. (Overall I mean, given characteristic differences, of course.)*** But this is a silly thing to believe. A classic longsword is optimized to do a different job: a k'a doesn't have the point designed to punch through mail, it isn't designed for half swording to attack the joints of plate, etc. In fact, the k'a is nothing like a longsword and isn't mean for the same job - it's actually a two handed sabre. And if you make a k'a out of modern steel... well, then you have an overweight sabre with very poor reach, because of the two handed grip. Of course you modify that - taking advantage of the better steel to have a lighter longer blade that can be used one handed and so side-on and faster. It's still not as good as a real sabre because it lacks a false edge and hand protection, so you add those.... and what you have now is simply a sabre, with no trace of k'a at all. ..This is because the k'a is a brilliant special purpose design for making the best sabre possible from the world's worst iron ore. Given good ore, you'd simply make a sabre. What's really amusing is the number of weaboes who don't seem to have watched The Seven Samurai. There's very telling scene when one of the heroes plants half a dozen k'a in the ground because he knows they were going to break in combat. K'a were hardened wrought iron, not spring steel, so they bent and took a permanent set (or snapped) relatively easily.
TheGreatAmphibian I neither see a problem with the form nor the fact that it's meant to be weld two-handed. One might say I am only a fan of the aesthetic design of the katan and wouldn't be far from truth. But I doubt that it's needed to sacriifice some characteristics of the katana or to adapt characteristics of the longsword to make it on-par with it in overall performance. You don't need to make a katana "halfswordable" to make it a good concussive weapon, since the katana already has a thick blade which would also perform well in smashing when made out of high-tech steel. It still won't beat the longsword when it comes to smacking your opponent to a pulp, but you at least don't need to change the grip completely to do so. When it comes to the hand protection, even though I never really felt that uncomfortable about this point, mainly because I practice kenjutsu and the way you (and more important: your opponent) handle your sword never made me question the lack of safety of the hand guard., you can search for russo-japanese katanas/sabres. They are a pretty good example of what you just mentioned in your comment. My point though, is, that instead of adapting the performance of regular sabres or even the performance of the longsword, you could also build on the characteristics of the katana and extend their use from there. Just my opinion. But when it comes to "weeabos", I fortunately never came across this species of the internet under my comments. Even though I may be a defender of the katana I acknowledge most, if not all, flaws this beautiful weapon has. Something about ralism it seems repells those pests.
*I neither see a problem with the form nor the fact that it's meant to be weld two-handed.* Yes, but so what? That you're too silly to understand that a relatively blunt point won't pierce as well as a sharper one doesn't alter reality, it just means intelligent people will laugh at you. Ditto for the fact that you're too silly to realize that the same length sword wielded sabre fashion will have a longer effective reach than in any two handed grip. (Which is something you could confirm for yourself in just seconds using a broomhandle.) *My point though, is, that instead of adapting the performance of regular sabres or even the performance of the longsword, you could also build on the characteristics of the katana and extend their use from there.* Once again, this is stupid. *Because in every respect that the katana is different to a class combat sabre the difference exists because of the inferior steel the Japanese had to use.* Once you get rid of factors that compensate for the awful iron ore, you have a weapon exactly like a sabre - because that was the weapon a katana was trying to be. (Or you could call it a backsword.) If you think that there was a feature of the k'a that would prove advantageous to keep once you're making it out of decent steel, could you explain what feature is and why? Eg "I like swords with poor hand protection because I want to lose a finger so I can go home 4F!" Or "Swords with overly thick slow moving blades are great because I don't want to hurt anyone." Or "I want my sword to have a foot less reach than the other guy's because I've been feeling really depress lately.." Or "The backcut is unsporting, dammit, I'd rather lose than emply it!" Or "Fullering is the work of the devil - it says so in Bleach! Or Poekemon - one of the Holy Texts, anyway!" The problem is that you literally understand nothing of what a sword is. It's not a collection of cool styling traits as you martial arts movie freaks think but simply a type of lever. It has very definite characteristics that set its ability to thrust and to cut, and you don't understand what any of them are - least of all the really important ones like centre of percussion. The k'a is simply a crippled version of a sabre, said crippling being the result of a design that strengthens a sword made from poor steel.
..You really can list everyone of the k'as deficencies - all the result of poor steel, not stupidity by the smiths or users - and tick them off. Once you've removed them all, what you have is 1796 sabre. It weighs 800g but has more reach than a 1.5 kg k'a, and the 800g includes hand protection the k'a lacks. It's a tougher sword because it is made out of spring steel instead of wrought iron. And it has so much cutting power than any increase would be pointless - in combat it split heads vertically, removed limbs etc - it has so much cutting power that adding more would be pointless, because human bodies just big enough to justify it! It's faster than the ka - this inevitable for a longer, lighter, one-handed sword - and has more reach. It can feint in ways the k'a can't and it back-cut, which alone is a very powerful fight winner. There are videos of the C-grade Coldsteel version cutting animal carcasses in half; go and watch them and stop wasting people's time.
Is a Kukri a knife or a sword in your books. Either way for cutting it gets my vote. If I had one I would make a video demonstrating its abilities. I have only used it on plant life much in the fashion most people use machetes but it was a remarkable tool for that use.
Great comparison video!!! BTW 4:14, its a Pulwar and not a Tulwar. Tulwar is a long(a little longer than Pulwar), tapering curved sword, they have a D-shaped hand-guard, and Pulwar does'nt have a D-shaped hand-guard. Pulwars were generally used by guards in those days where as Tulwars were used by kings, army generals, and soldiers.
Musashi Miyamoto basically said the katana is a secondary weapon not to be relied upon in his memoirs, and that if you have any other weapon available, to use that instead. He said it was good at slicing as long as it was 'glided' over the target, or else it will soon break. Put a katana up against a European longsword and the katana is going to break. Not to mention samurais wielding katanas would be useless against European armoured combatants due to their use as a slashing weapon (which is useless against plate armour - you need a straight blade for precision thrusts, or better a blunt force weapon to hit the armour with). Plate armour was not heavy (more evenly distributed weight than a modern soldier's gear) and not restrictive of movement (greater range of movement than the human body, you can climb ladders and do cartwheels in it), meaning knights were not the slow clumsy fools people love to think of them as. A knight with a longsword would have been just as fast as any samurai. And given a katana is designed for cutting motion, not stabbing, the samurai is going to get smashed quite easily. So to all the anime fans who think the katana is legendary, or that the samurai is so much more skilled than a knight, suck on that for a while.
Like you said, though, Samurai didn't rely primarily on the sword...it was bow and yari/spear that were used first. I wonder how a knight would have fared against a historically accurate Samurai using these weapons, instead. Curious about their bows draw strength and what kind of arrows/arrowheads they used, though. There was also the kanabou...
Kami Nana Probably not much better than they would with their katanas, plate is very resistant to arrows and the Japanese yumis typically didn't get up to the same draw weights as some examples of the English/Welsh longbow and Idon't think that the Japanese equivalent of a bodkin arrow head was any better than the European's. Against mail it's debatable but probably equally ineffective since it seems that a properly riveted set of mail is quite arrow proof, at least to the point where the arrow isn't able to penetrate through past the gambeson/padded jack worn underneath the mail. It would be interesting to see how well a Japanese yari would fair against European plate, something tells me that it would probably wouldn't punch through the plates themselves but maybe through the mail, maybe. In the end a fully armored samurai just isn't much of a match against a fully armored European knight because Japanese weapons just don't seem to be optimized for use against a heavily armored opponent, at least not one that's encased head to toe in steel. Even the latest models of Japanese armor never developed the same coverage as even early models of European plate.
did you think that katanas cut throug japanese armour? samurai when fighting armoured opponents looked for the unprotected spots the same way a knight went for the parts not covered by plate.
Riceball01 There is no doubt in my mind that Japanese arrowheads were far inferior to those made in Europe (more specifically England and Wales), and even that they would be useless against plate armour. It's pretty common knowledge that Japanese steel was poor compared to European steel, and there are records that suggest English arrows at Poitiers simply crumpled on French plate.
***** Japanese armor is made of wood, silk, cloth and leather, you don't need a 'weak spot' if your blade is sharp enough to cut through leather and wood (although you might blunt/bend it if you don't watch out).
i would have to agree with what he said was best for cutting i can see how a blade of that design could cut very well but it all really comes down to skill at cutting and sharpness of the blade
The most detailed experiments with swords as weapons where carried out by the British War Office prior to World War that concluded that double edge sword with a point used for thrusting was the best.
I doubt someone will really test this. A well made Turkish kilij is very hard to come by unless you are willing to have blacksmith make it for you. The most affordable I've seen are $1,200 and I have never seen them tested (besides deadliest warrior). I would love to see it tho.
I think they definitely have more power in the bind (the presence of both hands and the distance between them give good leverage) but I'm not sure in translates in better impact
scholagladiatoria Sources supporting your reasoning for why european traders, throughout history, determined that middle-eastern weapons are more proficient at cutting than the katana. If you've read this in a book, or a collection of books, it would be interesting to know where. I wouldn't mind reading such a book myself. Also, you state that you feel they aren't the best cutting swords. Is this because you have experienced better cutting ability/ technique with other swords?
I was talking about blocking...not parrying. Blocking a two-handed sword when it is swung side-to-side may be easy (with one weapon), but not overhead strikes.
every sword has its pros and cons. overall middle eastern and Turkish swords are the best since they are curved, very well sharpened, uses the best steel. And the design that makes it the best combat weapon, especially in the sword category. they are the strongest weapon and the most versatile. The curve is the main feature that makes it the best, because it gives the sword a faster speed when swinging and makes it cut and slice through better. middle eastern or Arabian swords as well as Turkish sword usually has a bit of weight on top of the sword, to give it my power on impact, and to give the user a better swing coupled with the curve. another weapon that uses similar feature is some old Indian sword. they are great weapons for slicing but the middle eastern and Turks sword is still superior as it has the length advantage the perfect curve that has been perfected over the long years of weaponry.
I would thing just because of body mechanics, a one-handed sword would give, assuming equal blade length, a range advantage. I too love middle and near-eastern blades and am privileged to own an old Wootz khanjar which is every bit as sharp as the day it was made likely around 300 years ago.
more curved edge automaticly means beter cuting BUT more angled edge means center of weight is accualy out side of sword and that makes it tricky to master and handle BUT more important with edge curwed like that u cant stab,or not very efectivly any way katana could do stab thrust and cut
benfrombelow The Ulfberht is a sword, that is so pure, no other sword had that little amount of slag until the Industrial revolution. This meant it was a pure 100% steel sword that could flex like no other sword. It is also a short sword, but is capable of cutting through a human with one hand whereas a katana needs two hands to do such. It is fast, it is sharp, it is incredibly durable, it can pierce chainmail and it was a sword that was 1,000 years more advanced than any other sword.
Lord Baldur I agree with you that the ulfberht was an advanced sword for its time and place, and offered a significant advantage, but I assume you've seen the documentary which presents some pretty good evidence that the steel used in the ulfbehrts was produced in Iran. The Persian people and other central Asians were using the same steel at that time. Are you certain that the ulfbehrt was a better cutter than theirs?
Liked that video, also I am not so happy with your few on such a legendary weapon in general... But probably you read my other comments... so please keep them coming...
If we're real here, an obsidian knife would cut better than any piece of steal made. Obsidian is like glass or flint though, so it's impossible to keep an edge for a long time.
Katana elitists are often just kids growing up with anime and computer game and have never even handled any kind of sword. Katanas do cut well like you said because their high carbon content makes the very rigid. The main thing about ANY sword is technique, good edge alignment and also maintaining your weapon so it's sharpened properly.
Katana can cut through a diamond! It never breaks!!!! It can withstand 10000000000000000000 degrees Celsius and -10000 degrees Celsius! It enver ever rusts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Konrad Wallenrod I know it was for laughs but the physics side of my brain just melted.
I'm sorry to say but if some one on horse back riding at you with a reinforced war hammer with 10 pounds at the end of it, your katana is not going to stop that. Doing some easy guessing your dealing with about 100 pounds of hammer swing coming at you and no mater were you hit this guy on a horse you cant stop him because your sword isn't long enough.
*****
let it melt! Give in to stupidity!
Konrad Wallenrod I'm actually am on the verge of doing just that.
INDIAN TULWAR LOOKS BEAST AND USED BY BEASTS IN HISTORY.
amerexile001, I have 15 years of swordsmanship experience and yes it requires more skill to parry heavy weapons or blows one-handed, but it is not really difficult. I teach weekly swordsmanship classes in London and we regularly spar one-handed weapons against two-handed. It's nothing unusual or spectacular.
The best cutting blades are the ones with "vorpal" in the prefix. :D
The purpose why the Katanas or Talwars were made was beyond it’s cutting ability. They were made to kill humans. These were weapons of warfare with different styles of using them. Where I think the Talwar leads the katana is because of its single hand use where the free hand can be used to shield, etc. the other hand could also be used to fight with another sword or direct your horse, elephant, camel. So for me the Talwar is better.
Mispronouncing "kilic"
Those "i" s are dotles turkish "i" 's that are pronounced like the "e" in "pointer".
That "c" has a little mark under it and pronounced as "ch" in "reach".
"Kilich" is just one of more than 40 traditional Turkish types of sword/sabers each of which has a distinct name. Pieces in Topkapi Palace Museum and Military History museum in Istanbul proove that they were made with very high quality steel and craftsmanship.
Kılıç
so its, 'cur-lurch'?
And yes, it's true! The katana is simply just another sword. Beautiful, with a cool history, but just a sharp piece of metal like any other blade. Not immaculate, and not garbage either. Simply because something isn't the best doesn't mean it can't be your favorite, though! That's what makes the world interesting. Personally, I respect just about every blade I see and appreciate learning something about them, especially their respective martial arts. Thanks for the informative videos!
I have a theory on the subject of curved swords being very good cutters. It revolves around the curve placing the center of gravity behind the blade in the cut, making it's mass act a bit like a stabilizer, giving a natural tendency for good edge alignment as long as you put energy into the cut.
It depends on what specific type of European sword you're considering. But generally speaking European swords have tough construction with spring steel blades, through-tempered like a leaf spring, therefore able to take a lot of shock and abuse and therefore good in defence for parrying, whilst also being pretty good at cutting, thrusting and having a balance that lends itself to complex fencing techniques. Tulwars are great cutters, but designed to be used with a shield for primary defence.
Can a katana cut trees better than a chainsaw ? I don't think so.
+scarfacemperor I'm not sure. I think it depends on how you measure it. For example, if everytime a teeth of the chainsaw hits the tree counts as a cut you might be able to use fewer cuts to take down a tree with a katana.
+scarfacemperor Can a chainsaw cut orks better than a chainsword? I don't think so.
+gurkfisk89 except the katana would probably bend in the attempt. Even spring monosteel blades could receive nasty damage against a solid tree trunk
+scarfacemperor What about a chainkatana?
er.. no.
I remember reading that even in the Middle East of the Middle Ages, Indian swords were famed for their quality and were used as royal gifts.
Damascus Steel originated in India if I'm not mistaken, though apparently popularized in the West through Damascene blacksmiths (thus the name).
Also, it seems Mamluke warriors in the Middle Ages were trained to be able to apply precise cuts, such as cutting a guys whole ear off, during battle, which seems to indicate that quick precise sharp cuts was the prefered tactic, atleast among medieval Middle Eastern fighters (from reading David Nicolle's stuff).
Wootz is extremely high quality crucible steel that, while well imitated, has never been fully reproduced with modern science. Damascus, often confused with wootz, usually pertains to pattern welded steel. This is further muddled because many middle-eastern Damascus blades were made with two or more types of Wootz...usually varying mainly in carbon levels.
Monosteel or extremely well layered pattern weld steel will generally be FAR harder to bend permanently than Kobuse style sandwiched katana blades that people are so obsessed with. Many don't realize that folded steel doesn't mean the blade is sandwiched/layered like a Kobuse type...it simply means the steel itself has been folded over and over to homogenize the steel and get rid of slag.
Why is monosteel or pattern weld going to be better than a sword that has a harder steel on the outside than on the inside? because, like bronze swords with two or more alloys and differential tempering, they tend not to bend without permanently damaging the blade. It's also a little known fact that, if a kobuse type sword is chipped on the side, it's become virtually useless since that little chip in it's hardened exterior makes for a stress point that will easily cause the blade to break if struck in the right place.
3choBlaster
Yes I am aware that these swords are descendant from the central Asiatic swords, but that doesn't mean Indian sword makers didn't make superior quality swords.
I'm just repeating what I read, Mid-East rulers would often give and take Indian swords as gifts.
Vebinz, you misunderstand, Middle Eastern sword makers used Indian steel which was the best steel in the World, but it took Middle Eastern sword smiths to get the best out of it.
Damascus steel did not originate in India, this is just pure baseless achievement claiming. Even a cursory google search reveals this to be just a youtube comment lie. Secondly, Persian Shamshirs adopted from Trukic designs later replaced swords in India. Guess Indians got tired of their superior weapons and adopted Middle East designs?
Memlük state is real name kölemen. Kölemen state is turksh
Today a fellow in Cordoba, Argentina used a katana against two thieves who broke into his house. It's all over the news down there... they even released some pretty graphic photos. One of them has half his ear hanging off and quite a lovely look of astonishment on his face. They are lucky they weren't killed.
Excellent video, by the way. Loved the whole series.
Any sword would result in the same thing.
People into Katanas tend to be fanboys who read comics and watch Ninja movies and and imitate martial arts moves in the mirror when no one is looking.
MarvelDcImage Yes we refer to them as Weeboos :D now you have a term for them .
JD Tremblay
The original term was Wapanese (wannabe Japanese).
Weeboo, which didn't really have a clear meaning in the newspaper cartoon it came from, was used as a substitute (on 4chan) after the word "wapanese" was banned on the site.
Wapanese is a clear insult, implying that the own culture is rejected, as it is the case with many katana fanatics.
Weeboo on the other hand, as it has been in use for a fair amount of time and somewhat changed in meaning, might be misunderstood as a non offensive general term referring those that like anime and manga (but not 1980s ninja movies).
It is even used by some younger anime and manga fans to refer to themselves ... ¬_¬;
Older ones might use "otaku" for this purpose, although the japanese actually use it like "nerd" or "geek", and wouldn't see anything strange in referring to someone as a model-tain-otaku or longsword-otaku ...
So I'd recommend to use "wapanese" or "wapanese weeboos", rather than only "weeboo" as there have been anime and manga much more realistic in regards to bladed weapons than Hollywood movies...
Karsliyu
WEEBOO!!!!!!!
MarvelDcImage not only is that mentally challenged thinking that one cannot appreciate a katana without being a weaboo or wapanese or whatever else you want to call them but its down right ignorant in many ways. I appreciate the Katana for its look and its symbolistic history not for its cutting power but apparently that makes me a fanboy in your limited ability to perceive the world around you. Also before you say I am a weeboo or wapanese, I am part japanese. So kindly sit down and shut the fuck up about my culture, K?
icesnake84 Thanks for proving my point about katana fanboys.
Thanks and good luck training with Dave - we're old mates for more than a decade.
As a former talwardhari (swordmaster), there are many variations of the talwar as well. Basic Light versions are for thrust and slice, while medium versions are for cutting, and large ones are for crushing and cutting.
Talwar dhari is not a sword master. It means practitioner...
@@Adventurer-Rikth he meant he is a practitioner mastered in swordmenship.
Another fantastic video, did you know when examined under an electron microscope Japanese swords from the Kamakura Period to the Meiji Period show nanowires forming chains along the edge of the blade where the hardest steel is, this in theory would make it a good cutting material for the same reason the Indian swords were as Damascus steel shows nano wires and nano tubes when examined under an EM and (again in theory) make the blade easier to keep an edge. Commercially available Katana's made today are highly unlikely to have these are they largely aren't forged by the way of Bushido I do actually have a Taisho period navel katakana but the blade is slightly bent and I'm not eager to damage it to satisfy my curiosity, if somebody does attempt this please link me.
The most amazing thing to me about the katana is the fact that they were able to make a very good quality weapon out of mostly inferior metals. Their ability to fuse a small amount of rare steel to a body of common iron to create a hybrid blade. Of course there were many equally amazing metallurgic feats going on elsewhere. Damascus steel, Toledo steel and Ulfbert steel to name a few.
I've heard of Damascus...gonna have to look up that Toledo and Ulfbert steels, though. Never heard of them.
Kami Nana
I have a crucible powder steel katana, very nice, most top quality knives are made with the new microfine powder steels
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucible_steel#Methods_of_crucible_steel_production
Kami Nana , Toledo swords were the finest swords in human history in my opinion.
Tulwar is an amazing sword, and it's quite believable that they're the better cutter...but katanas are also awesome thrusting swords; that chisel shaped tip is great for poking the shit out of someone.
It's a very good tip for stabbing through dense fabric or other soft armor. So are the rounded/spatulate tips on old dark/viking-age swords. This is often overlooked in shallow "cut vs. thrust" discussions. Acute but edgeless tips are better at punching through metal but worse at stabbing through fabrics.
The katana is not really a stabbing weapon by technique its more used to make wide debilitating cuts rather than poking an opponent full of holes and watching them bleed to death. I compare the techniques like using a 12 gauge vs using a low caliber. You get a successful hit with a katana they are are quickly out of the fight but it comparatively takes a while to 'reload'. Unless you hit something vital a thrust is usually fairly shallow and although debilitating over time your opponent can keep going but you can also re-position more readily and 'get more shots off' .
Indin sword are use in war and kanata are one for show off it is not used in war.....
@@joshridinger3407 that's not really all that accurate. Round/spatulate tips that are sharpened are capable of delivering thrusts through fabric and softer armour, and this can be enough to make them effective but are not, as a rule, better at it. Acute tips almost always provide less resistance in the thrust essentially regardless of the medium as there is simply less surface area on which energy can be lost as friction. Furthermore acute tips on swords didn't tend to be used to "punch through metal" as essentially any kind of significant steel or even iron plate in armour would be either exceedingly difficult or near impossible to penetrate (especially with enough depth to effectively wound or kill the opponent). Rather acute tips on rondel daggers and European swords were designed to burst open the rings of mail and create an opening in the armour to penetrate the softer target underneath.
The evidence that acute thrusting points work potentially even more effectively on fabric is the continued use of dedicated thrusting blades such as rapiers and smallswords in military and civilian use when plate armour became less common. It doesn't take a particularly powerful thrust to run someone wearing just thick clothing or the like through with a rapier or smallsword, by all accounts it was not a particularly uncommon occurrence. The same does not appear to be true for migration era swords.
Katana is good for bigginers and also a looker I mean katana looks awesome infront of other sword the designed of katana is really modern and very beauty but talwar is more durable than katana talwar steel is much more thicker and can easily decapitet someone head but katana can't decapitet a head it can give a half cut due to light weight
The fact is, that every weapon ever fielded was designed for a specific purpose. That purpose was determined by the needs of the person making or wielding it, and reflects their life, the time and the specific use that they had decided that it needed to fulfill. Does that make one sword better than another.....maybe, at that time and in that place. But it isn't necessarily so 500 years after the fact, and halfway around the planet. All of these various sword have their advocates....but as someone else said the person on the receiving end wouldn't be able to tell (or care) whether it was a well made katana, a Damascus shamshir or a rusty panga beaten out of a truck spring.
I actually got the idea from your mother...
Scep Tyk I actually know all I need to about this person....and I'm not likely to change my screen name to satisfy your opinion. And I'm pretty sure the moron here is you......
i Love your stuff man! i am a European sword lover i hate how the katana has be over done and i love you bringing other swords form the world into it!
As a guy that ownes talwars, samsheers and Kilic (pala) ... Here are my ratings based on personal experience:
Rank 1: Talwar
Rank 2: Kilic
Rank 3: Samsheer
However, the Talwar and even Kilic takes a lot longer to learn. The learning curve is more acute. Using the Samsheer with its stiffer lozenge shape cross section is easier. Ease of use is a big factor!
Meanwhile from India
Rank 1: Urmi
Rank 2 : Dandapaat
Rank 3 : Khandwa
Rank 4 : Talwar
Rank 5 : Rajput Scimitar
@@charbakamunisrestha9557 urumi is the most useless of the useless. It's ineffective and highly dangerous to the user. I can very much agree with dand patta but What on earth is a Rajput scimitar?
Hi Justin, I'm not sure what you are referring to exactly - what is a myth?
Skallagrim recently tested decent quality katana. His impressions are that it cuts pretty well, but no where near his two handed Albion Knecht Kriegsmesser : )
+Robert Tauzer of course because he tested one katana and there is hundreds of different katanas ..like there is hundreds of different european swords. .JESUS CHRIST ...katanas have the same concept but they are not build in the same way ..they don't have the same balance and not the same density .
+Ckyntosh Density ...? You don't know what you talk about, do you? ; ) No katana will ever cut as good as kriegmesser, they lack mass, length, curvature and let's be honest, sheer steel quality of modern albion sword replicas. People let's try to be realistic and forget urban legends of 1000 times folded superkatanas. Technology and steel quality has move forward from 14th century.
+Robert Tauzer Why does steel quality even enter the discussion if we're talking about modern steel swords?
Katana are made of modern steel these days, so why does it matter?
His point was simply that katana vary in blade dimensions just as much as any European sword, so a dedicated cutting katana with a thin spine, curvature near the tip, properly formed kissaki, and correct shinogi will be a superior cutter.
Katana are slashing weapons with a *very* secondary consideration for thrusting, while longswords are usually well balanced for both, but lean towards thrusting.
+DeathsHood Because superior steel quality of older blades is often an argument in katana fanboys. Btw, katana are among least "vary"ed swords on planet and no matter of her type, age or steel, katana cannot cut as kriegmesser, that blade is a whole different category. Perhaps some no dachi could. Perhaps.
+Robert Tauzer 1) Who cares? That had nothing to do with his comment, so it's essentially just a red-herring.
2) No, the katana is not the 'least varied' sword on the planet; not even close.
Off the top of my head: four distinct kissaki styles with at lease three variations within each, three different primary curvatures, various curvature degrees, length between 28 and 36 inches, two shinogi types at least, and that isn't even factoring in distal and profile taper variants, or length and depth of bo-hi, OR hilt length, the list goes on.
3) The kriegsmesser is irrelevant. It's a heavy-duty chopping weapon, not a slashing weapon, so you're basically saying a longsword sucks since a falchion dismembers people easier.
Actually try *researching* weapons before baselessly bashing on them.
Objectivity is more valuable than opinion.
at the middle of the vid i was about to shout "the Kilij will surpass the katana" but watching the whole vid i relaxed a bit :) (great vids, i spent the whole day watching them and you sir have a new subscriber).
Honorable scholagladiatoria,
I am very interested in one of the most ancient swords in history, the Khopesh. They seem to have unique abilities in hooking other weapons, in addition too a mixture of the abilities of both curved and flat blades that integrate the pressure provided by the curve with the balance and thrusting ability of a straight blade. I am wondering if you would you be interested in doing a video on them.
Sincerely:
Loa Dan
A point to anyone who wants to take up the 'best cutting sword,' challenge. I'm not a sword expert, but I do know a great deal about honing and sharpening steel. So I'd like to throw something out there.
If you want to compare the cutting potential of a sword's design, quality of manufacture, material quality, etc. then everything you test should be honed to the same standard with the same abrasive medium. This is easy.
However if you want to compare historical capabilities this is where things become tricky. You're going to need to find natural abrasives that were available to the owners/manufacturers, and this can potentially make a substantial difference. Not all regions are equally blessed with an abundance of ultra-fine natural abrasives.
Just something worth considering that deals with a subject I enjoy.
Mike Na Interesting - what would you consider an ultra-fine abrasive? Everybody had leather, used for final stropping/polishing.
scholagladiatoria Well let me make it clear first that most of what I know about natural abrasives has to do with sharpening razors and certain tools (plane blades, cabinet scrapers, etc) so I'm not certain how far back the natural whetstones I know of were in use. Aside from some Japanese stones which go back some way. The oldest sources I've come across dealing with sharpening and abrasives are all about razor honing.
There appears to be very limited information available on sharpening historical weapons, or what was used to do so. That said I'm fairly sure that garnet-based stones from Belgium/the Ardennes (known as coticle stones in modern times) awere used historically. The regions reputation for such things dates back to Roman times.
Ultra-fine natural abrasives which have been used in whetstones (or which occured within them rather) could include things like novacuilite and garnet. However while an area might contain a desirable abrasive it needs to occur in a reasonably high concentration within a subtance that makes a suitable binder such as slate. The density of the abrasive within the binder will lead to faster or slower cutting. The size can contribute to the fineness of the edge. Though some minerals in a pure form might be suitable for burnishing like beryl or biggs-jasper for example. Moreover some free abrasives like carbon black or chalk could be used to polish.
In relatively modern terms (though some were used historically) I know stones suitable for fine honing and polishing have been found in France, Germany, Wales, Scotland, Belgium, Turkey, India, China, Japan, and in some areas in North America like Arkansas. Not all of these are equally effective. However you will also need more agressive, faster-cutting abrasives to get your edge to a point where it will benefit from honing in the first place. Some of these (I believe sandstone was used historically) are very common, but only at the 'course,' end of the scale. For example I can personally only think of two mid-range natural whetstones from Europe.
Mike Na I forgot to mention that they were also found in England. If only in Charnwood Forest (Leicestershire)
russian or slavic warrior swords are mainly influenced by the turks and mongols . the eastern swords. shasquas,shamshir,kilij,talwar pulwar are all eastern ...
shashquaa is caucasian, not russian. It literally means long knife. There is an illustration of Leon 2 of Abkhazia with a thin curved blade. Probably got its design from his Khazar allies.
Slavic broadswords would beg to differ.
Best cutting sword is a rapier, obviously. :)
EmperorNarcissus You're full of crap. The best cutting weapon in the world is the quarterstaff! Nothing on Earth cuts better than a quarterstaff. A stick or a tree branch comes in at a close second. But who cares about second place, am I right?
Empirical Purity
Oh my god you're right, I had totally forgotten about the vast amounts of cutting power held by blunt weapons!
***** west might be best but east is a beast
***** dweliq ... Know what? Calling it for Africa. One word... Assegais. :)
+EmperorNarcissus THEY ARE ALL THE SAME . IF THE AT LEAST ARE SHARPED .
Katana =/= Lightsabor
(insert european sword here) =/= Excalibur
Lightsaber is american
@DarkEternal6 STFU
I'd love to see a comparison test video of those sword, falchion, kilij, shamshir, tulwar and katana. It would be so cool to see.
In my opinion, when it comes to raw, unadulterated cutting power... I'd say the Kilij is one of the best. A deep curve and a weighed tip makes it into a giant meat cleaver.
Which sweeping statement??
to be fair though the Japanese didn't have as many encounters with foreigners over time as other nations did so i think if they were more battle hardened against different types of blades maybe. As far as I know (i may be wrong) but the general idea is that they didn't really use shields too much so maybe if you put a few archers, heavily armored infantry and some shields the katana would maybe havea hard time. What some people i know get wrong is that its not a chopping weapon. You slice at an angle with it. Its great in a 1v1 situation but outside that it struggles even against the naginata. My reason for liking single edged blades over double edged ones is just that i think they look better, they are more stylish in my opinion. I'll stop this comment now xD.
You're not wrong. Japanese shields were rectangular wooden planks used to shield foot archers and gunners from incoming fire. So it's more a form of quick field fortification. In terms of 1 on 1 contest, the Katana works well as long as the opponent is unarmored; then again, any sword that won't come apart in your hand will work well if the opponent is unarmored. This is why for most of Japanese history, when battles were still fought between armies of troops that wore armor, Katana was just a backup weapon a warrior fell back to when his primary weapon was destroyed or lost.
Remember too that the katana was a shortened tachi. The sword originated from being used on horseback to cut down infantry who also used no-dachi or odachi (longer tachi) to defend on foot against horsemen. Once most of the battles stopped taking place from horseback and lent more towards foot engagements (due to the locations that the battles were as well as anti-cavalry fortifications), those very same tachi swords were cut down and resharpened into katana which could be work blade side up in the obi for combat on foot. The katana was never designed from scratch to be the weapon that it was ultimately used for. Iron was very hard to come by in Japan, and in fact is of very very very poor quality, most of it being black iron sands or meteor fragments. This was why the iron had to be worked/folded into steel to forge the weapons. . . so it was far more economical to cut down the swords that already existed.
can make a video about Damascus steel?
Do you want 1?
As someone who has studied kendo and kenjutsu for years, as well as some Chinese and Indian weaponry. I agree with just about everything you've said.
The Katana does not have supernatural properties; it is just a sharp piece of metal. Is it the best sword ever made as some say, no, it is no better or worse as any other weapon.
I am very effective with a Katana in an O-Yorio, but the Long Sword and Plate feel unnatural, and a shield is unbearable. But, that is due to a lack of training not its inferiority.
I’m unsure who you have been talking to but they do not seem to understand much about Japanese swords or swordsmanship. There were hundreds schools dedicated to different styles, separated by regions, clans, villages, ect. Many began fading after the Tokugawa Shogunate unified Japan and most vanished after World War II. The interest in the Samurai and subsequently Budo is relatively new, even in Japan. The reason why many think all Japanese swordsmanship is the same has to do with the growth in Kendo, and stage fencing (movies), being all people are exposed to.
So while I was expecting some rant about the superiority of Western swords and fencing I am happy to have been wrong. Could you post something on books on Euro swordsmanship and schools or societies in the US. I’m particularly interested in the mace.
What is really interesting (and rather odd) when you think about it, is that the first of the really great "samurai movies" - certainly at least the first to be seen much outside Japan - were ones by Kurosawa such as "The Seven Samurai". In that movie, katanas were generally relatively minor weapons compared to spears, naginata, longer swords and bows and matchlock firearms. This was also true in Kurosawa's other pre-Tokugawa era samurai movies.
The "all Japanese swordsmanship is one style of katana fighting" really appears in movies like Kill Bill ... which I believe was made by that great great Japanese director, Quentin Tarantino...
Yes a variety of weapons and tactics where used in combat because many of those who fought where peasant conscripts. Books, TV, Movies, ect have all help foster a culture of ignorance about combat in general, not just swordsmanship. In conversations I’ve had with many people, they think movies fights and combats scene are real, which is pathetic.
ol' Man I remember when my little brother said that the goal of sword-fighting was to hit the swords into each other (while trying to kill the other person). He's 16.
People who think hitting your opponents sword will help in most fights watch too many movies.
True...but remembering some of the ideas and beliefs I had at 16...his is a lot better...
***** ...Remote control tank?
A KATANA CAN CUT THROUGH A FUCKING MOUNTAIN. NIPPON STEEL FOLDED ONE BILLION TIMES CAN SEVER HYDROGEN ATOMS FROM OXYGEN ATOMS AND THEN SLICE THROUGH A TANK.
+Harris Turpin GLORIOUS NIPPON STEEL FOLDED OVER A THOUSAND TIMES CAN CUT THROUGH ANYTHING FILTHY GAIJIN GO HOME
THE PLANET? NO. THAT IS INFERIOR. THE KATANA INFUSED WITH MINAMOTO YORITOMO'S KI IS THE MOST POWERFUL SWORD EVER IT CUTS THROUGH SPACE AND TIME
Somebody fetch these trolls some mutton :)
YOU INFIDELS THE EXCALIBUR IS THE SHARPEST SWORD THERE IS!! IT CAN CLEAVE TROUGH THOUSANDS OF WORLDS IN ONE DRAW!
+Malik Smith Their joking around xD
Katana's are heavy, awkward and require allot of maintenance. not the best for fighting hordes of zombies, sorry people in the comment section.
But they are beautiful.
ricois3 No argument there, it looks great. Just not as good as many European swords.
The biggest issue is range. A rapier or a halberd would be much better against zombies, unless you're in a confined space of course.
Katana's on average weight less than longswords..... only 1.1 kg's. Last time I checked 1.1 kg's is not heavy. Hell even longswords where usually a maximum of 1.8 kg's. I can't see how it's awkward hit things with the pointy and sharp end. Your only valid point is they may take some maintenance but that is any sword really and comparatively katana have harder edges so they should take less maintenance than the average longsword.
Rafaello Fareday A rapier would be a HORRIBLE weapon against a zombie. The only way to kill a zombie is to destroy the brain, which means that the thing that rapiers are so good at, poking holes into someone's body, would be useless unless you were able to thrust with enough force to pierce through the skull or got through the eye socket or something.
Plus, in general piercing weapons are not as good against zombies because they tend to come in large groups so your weapon getting stuck in one would almost certainly get you killed.
Bladed weapons in general are not as good, because you can't make them bleed out, you NEED to get past bone before you do anything, and since less force is delivered to an enemy in a cut (since some of the force of a blow is reduced by the drag of going into flesh) a non-killing blow isn't going to knock them away from you.
Because of all that, the best weapon against a zombie...is probably a baseball bat. Or, if you wanted something more weapon-y, an axe would be perfectly accetable, or as you say a Halberd would be a good weapon. Any sort of sword would be bad unless it was an excellent cleaver and you were skilled enough that you always made a decapitation and never risked hitting too high or too low and getting stuck in a collarbone or skull.
Seriously due to the biomechanics of zombies and how they differ from living people, a baseball bat would be better than pretty much any sword or bladed weapon. Just crack open the skull and continue on to the next one.
I think the Katana is a beautiful sword but personally I am more of a fan of the Naginata, and the chinese Dao and Jian. Also I am fascinated by the Katar, but I don't see any videos about it! If even someone like you who has a keen interest in eastern indian weapons doesn't have videos with the Katar it must mean they are extremely hard to find...
Why would you, it's just a push dagger used for fashion and self defense. There's nothing special about them, there's no mystical martial art to using them (or at least nothing that is particularly practical).
98abaile Well they have quite a unique design, not only as far as look is concerned but use.
If you like the katar, you'll love the Pata! Also an Indian weapon.
EmperorNarcissus Ya the pata also looks really cool!
La Nausée
I'm fond of the yari, myself
Fighters against racism
Um papo sério e abrangente sobre a katana e outras espadas. Acho que a maior diferença do corte da katana para o corte das restantes espadas são as técnicas, os japoneses desenvolveram um método de meditação junto ao corte. Agora o vídeo já chama a realidade, que venham os testes !!!
Shamsher is Persian not Arabic sword
***** How?
+KuwNova Arabic is Saif
JAndrade Serpentine saif just means a general sword
yeah saif just means sword it could apply to any different sword but originally that sword was of arabic origin arabs were most famous for forging those swords but ofcourse some countries who had ties with them were inspired by the fatal design so they made like it but the only ones who got it 100% accurate were the ottomans and to be frank it kinda still tops the katana when it comes to: slashing and cutting and sharpness...it tops the long sword when it comes to:weight effectiveness and type of metal....and tops both swords for the design allows fatal stab wounds and fatal slashes...when it comes to stabbing with it the curved tip is made especially for when pulling the sword out after stabbing the enemy to rip the flesh so that it never heals also the metal they used was hard and light allowing them to slash and cut deeper alot faster
Bakr Abya turks were using curved swords before coming to middle east
Blocking and parrying are the same thing. No problem blocking any kind of two-handed sword blow with a one-handed sword. Parrying a halberd or poleaxe with a one-handed sword is difficult, but longswords and katanas are not hard to block at all, as they are only a little heavier than a one-handed sword.
No one sword is better than the other, they were all designed for different things. It's just our personal preferences that make us say that one is better than the other. I personally like longsword, whereas my brother in law likes katanas, and my brother prefers likes bidenhanders, or greatswords. I am personally fed up with the internet, and with tons of anime fanboys saying that the katana is the perfect weapon.
Some other video mentions, and though I am a katana fan, I must agree, that the "best" sword was the gladius. Simply because it conquered the greatest empire for the longest time.
blochtar
Probably didn't have much to do with the gladius to be honest...
I think... a combination of the sword type and strategy designed for the weapons they had.
blochtar Well, in this case I think logistics and organization were more important than individual weapon. As for Gladius, I guess it is not the most favorite weapon in the gladiatorial match.
blochtar I figured the tulwar was the best. I've seen many sword practitioners rave over it often enough.
And there is no perfect sword either.
No perfect swords just proficient swordsmen.
Also doesn't exist.
Shure? All praise the holy spadroon!
Yes there is. 1845 pattern wilkonson blade infantry officers sabres and similar sabre types. Hit the sweet spot for cut and trusting capability. Slight curve drop points. Good weight,length and stiffness before they gave up on cutting altogether to focus thrust and by then the sword was pretty much on the out with the last military swords been issued to cavalry in ww1 which was more like a short lance than a sword. It stands to reason it was the final evoloution for cut and thrust swords before they became obsolete.
Sabres are indeed pretty awesome... but they're pretty terrible against people in full plate armour
Katana is my favorite sword ever!
But im not one of those people who think it is all powerful... I hate those people D:
You thaught me lots of things so far.
And in addition I like your tshirt.
kilij is a turkic/magyar sword! the best sabre of the world
The Real Cr4fty Let me guess. You are a Turk?
Grahame Nicholson Nope, i'm Hungarian :D
Hungarians fought the Turks a lot yeah? Even up to the 1700s
It's not a sabre... If anything, it'd be more accurate to call it a scimitar.
Caius Nair Eropean Sabers were copied from scimitar(kilik) and Tulwar. I love those curved blades. They look so wicked.
Could it be the katana is just trendy with weeboo crowd?
that's exactly what it is
illusion466 If you can apply being stylish when steel is being swung.
The Tulwar It's not an 'Indian' sword and was implemented by the Mughal Empire.
Almost all sabre types derived from the Turco-Mongol Sabre Shamshir, Tulwar, Kilij, Karabela you name it. That includes European sabres, mainly the Cossack swords, Polish Hussar swords (and later French and British light cavalry swords).
The Turco-Mongol Sabre was initially introduced by Turkic/Mongolic nomads that were proficient in mounted warfare and let's be honest, a curved sword is what you would prefer on a horse.
You also forget to mention that swinging a curved blade from horseback is when you draw out its fullest potential. When nomads used to charge and raid with their light cavalry a curved blade prevented them from breaking their wrists, because the curve allows for the smooth transition when on horseback.
+Uger Iceman Yes it is.
No, they don't.
Which is why the vast majority of cavalry sabers are actually either entirely straight, or near as not?
Talwars existed in India before the Mughals. The Shsmshir was a Mughal sword while the Rajputs used both the Khanda and the Talwar. However, it's definitely true that the Talwar blade is inspired from the Turkic and Persian swords.
Talwar is a Sanskrit word (Originally “Tarwari” or single handed sword)
damn your katana debate video series lured all the weaboos and fanboys out of the loving arms of their body pillows, what have you done :D
Well half of them are satire. Poe's law applies in spades here.
I can improve the katana right now. Put a cross guard on it.
And M320 grenade launcher attachment.
Can I try?
1) Sell Katana on Ebay to an idiot for 3x the price.
2) Buy Roman Legionnaire kit of any period/Medieval armour and sword.
3) Spend the leftover on whores.
I can improve America. Surround it with a wall!
I prefer the disc guard it will stop a blade sliding down towards your hand even on the sides like a Longsword wont without a nail, but I dont have to worry about it hitting my wrist while maneuvering the blade.
No problem, thanks for clarifying :-)
You know, as a martial arts teacher myself, often kids come to me and ask: "which fighting style is better?" and I say: "the one that fits you". Here I say: the best sword is the one you can feel better in your hands and use better for that particular task. Cause a sword is a tool, nothing more, nothing less. For example, I fell in love with the nagamaki, even if I've never been a katana guy (I practice kung fu, not japanese martial arts) because the technique to use it is almost the same of the kung fu short pole, that is the kung fu weapon i like the most, making it very natural to me to use in a fight.
These kinds of commentary are also misleading. That makes a small modicum of sense for hand to hand, though not much, but it makes no sense for armed combat, which is heavily dependant on a number of variables presented by circumstance. Since weapons are very often a lethal method of self defense, the level of practicality vastly supercedes comfort. If allowed time to prepare, say like a duel, your polearm, a short naginata as you said, would tear me to pieces if i showed up with a dagger. If a situation arises unexpectedly, and there is a gun equidistant from a naginata, yourself and your attacker, I'm fairly certain you'll be reaching for the gun.
What's about thracian Rhomphaias? they have a pretty good reputation at cutting...
I like to think of it this way: Katanas are great swords because the Samurai who wielded them were great warriors. As Balin said in The Hobbit "Swords are named for the great deeds they do in war." Swords truly do get their reputation for the warriors who used them. Consider this, how popular would the Katana be if the Samurai were not the awe inspiring warriors they were?
Katana are mystified because of cultural hype and novelty by foreigners. Must like the katana is nothing supernatural or exceptionally special, samurai were simply warriors like many others.
Uncle Sheogorath
i'll tell you this.
in Korea katanas are just meh swords. guys from next door.
long swordsor a claymore:
HOLY SHIT WTF IS THIS !! THIS IS AWESOME!
i think it was the hype, not the warriors, samurais are hyped also.
lamia197 Agreed. Katana's became a symbol of being a member of the samurai social class during the peaceful Edo period. Earlier when the Samurai were actually fighting wars regularly, the order of importance of weapons went Bow (Yumi), Spear (Yari), Sword. And like European knights, they preferred to fight from horseback, where the sword is the least useful of these weapons.
WrappedInGray
I agree with you.
Although im not so sure about Yumi.
Koreans being people who exell at bows. Yumi just looks too long and uncomfortable.
Then again i dont know much about the yumi and how it did in wars between japanese people.
Uncle Sheogorath Katanas are great swords cuz of Hollywood. Samurai were weak warriors. The only time they ever really moved on past their little island which no one wanted was when they invaded China with guns. I'm pretty sure the reason why Japanese warriors gave that significance to their swords was cuz good steel was rare so that's like a big possession. But if you measure the Japanese to historical empires...extremely weak civilization...until Sony was opened. But that's more cuz USA send all the taxpayers money their way feeling sorry for the nuking! :P
Shamshir is a Persian/Iranian word generally meaning sword. I don't know why and how it has come to be known as a specific design of sword but it certainty isn't Arabic. Arabic word for sword, again in general is Saif and knowing their language a little and how sophisticated it is, they probably have specific names for different types of swords.
I don't think the mother tongues "native" meaning of a word is so important in this context.
I mean there are many examples, either in weaponry or anywere else.
The "Seax" in it's language also only means sword, knife or sometimes even scissors.
You might also compare with the literal meaning of "great sword".
Many weapons names natively didn't mean what they meant to mean after the use of the weapons became popular.
Would you argue the same way about the "Playstation"?
Alioth Ancalagon
I'm not saying it's important in the sense that every sword enthusiast should get familiar with the whole roots and language of the swords they are using or that imported words to other languages should have exactly the same meaning they had in their native language. I had two points here. one, my own surprise as to how this particular type of shamshir has become to be known as the Shamshir. second, just to point out his mistake at the end. some people appreciate to be informed of their mistakes and some don't. I think he is one of those who do.
***** I agree
Katana is a Japanese word for a single edge curved sword, so technically speaking Szabla or Scimitar would be a katana. I think it just has to do the fact that people don't speak Persian, Japanese, etc.. in Europe. .
Katana (as the word is understood today) is also is not a single type of a sword. Katana developed throughout ages depending on need. The really last major change was when samurai became the bureaucratic class during Tokugawa Shogunate. From that period (about 17th Century) Katana became a DUELING weapon and NOT weapon of war. Hence one can't compare Katana to a Long Sword, a far more apt comparison would be Katana vs Repair or Small sword.
Kaizoku Hyo
considering how much Iranians, Turks and Arabs interacted with each other, both in peace and hostility i be surprised if they weren't aware of the innovation of their neighbor like better steel or design, or if all of these swords were not common in the whole region. They definitely are similar and probably all were moving toward one perfected design.
I remember back in the day when I was a Katana fan boy. Man thinking back to it now makes me cringe.
No one sword is going to be good at everything, the very qualities that makes a blade good at thrusting detract from its cutting ability etc. However, the Katana design remained virtually unchanged since the 11th century, so must have something going for it. The katana does have an effective thrush 'Tsuki' I don't think the more curved blades would. I was lucky enough to cut with Viking pattern welded sword once, it was surprisingly effective.
I don't think it's fair to judge a sword's cutting ability without greatly accounting for the technique used for that particular weapon. Just like we don't judge a hammer on how well it can be used as a baseball bat, the traditional techniques used to cut these two different types are accordingly very different.
A cut is a cut though. A hammer and baseball bat do not do the same job, a tulwar and a katana do.
Ok how about a toaster and an oven?
I agree. The sword is at the end of the day a tool. The man behind the tool makes it complete and the way he wields it or the school of thought or doctrine surrounding the use of the tool is just as important if not more.
If we talk about modern times then the British, The French, The Germans all used bolt action rifles. But the British alone have the reputation of sustained rapid fire. This can only partly be explained because of the design of the rifle. For the complete explanation we must also look at the techniques drilled into the soldiers.
scholagladiatoria, what do you think of the cutting quality of yatagan? Did you mean that when you said "version of Turkish semsir/kilic"? Doo you think that "curved forward" quality of kopis-falcata-yatagan family of swords gives them a better cutting quality than curved backward scimitar-tulwar-katana? Any empirical, statistical information available? Many thanks
Could you do Katana vs spacemarine powersword please lol bet the katana fan boys would still say its better
Do best fantasy swords that be fun to do lol
Light saber can lol
Appreciation and love from India.
I hate it when people bring up the argument 'Katanas where obviously good as japan werent conquered.'
Japan where good in warfare due to being proficient at using the bow. In melee fights they relied on spears. The samurai had no chance of beating a knight if he had only a katana. This isnt because its worse than other swords but its inneffective against armour. The katana would however be proficient at dealing with unarmoured opponants. Another point is Japan had shitty steel often named 'Pig-iron' and thats why they had to fold it so much to make it functional but even so its worse than what the europeans where using. This made katanas less effective but was less of a factor for arrows and spearheads as the steel quality wasn't as important as it would be with as sword that is almost entirely metal. Also another thing i would like to mention is that the japanese were not the first to fold steel. Europeans where doing this before they where able to create more advanced steel.
Summary, Japanese have excelent archers and spearmen, but shitty swordsmen and metal. Japanese werent the first to fold steel.
Lensius Japan was also very lucky when it came to large scale invasions. Kamikazi saved them several times from the mongols.
NGCAnderopolis it's kinda sad when you lose because of wind
NGCAnderopolis Exactly. The only ones to defeat the Mongols (and Crusaders) on a regular basis on equal footing were the Kipchak Mamluks of Egypt.
Omar Attia that and nobles of what would become poland lithuania- which would stop the mongols from penetrating further into europe.
Katanas are great cutters, but so are every curved sword. Actually, even straight blades like the type XIIIa and claymores are great cutters. But the best cutting sword is a greatsword. The sharp edge with the massive weight means unchallenged power. You're not going to carry around a greatsword in your civilian life, though, and they're considerably slower and clumsier than other swords.
Uh, how heavy do you think a great sword is?
+Rafaello Fareday Greatswords typically only weigh around 6-8 pounds, so there still quite light. And balance is important is well. You're right that you wouldn't carry one in civilian life though.
+Rafaello Fareday Most swords dont need all that big a curve. Think of an arm... its rather wound, providing a good amount of curve on its own. :3
+ConnorJaneu Of course they're light enough to be usable, but his point was that a greatsword is heavier than a different kind of sword. And in comparison with such other swords (especially one handet swords) even 4 pounds is quite massive. "Good" balance however can make a farely heavy sword feel light and nimble.
Alexander Bürger Exactly
When you said "crude, baseball bat type swing" why did Uma Thurman in "Kill Bill" come to mind?
like your videos, but that shirt earned my subscription. Thumbs up!
I think that when we talk about sword cutting power in general, will get to historical swords specifically in a bit, we have to consider two things: design, and materials.
Design wise, I think the Katana is in general (and I can't stress that enough, in general) is a superior design for cutting and in general - or anything close enough, honestly, in terms of design the one you showed and a Katana, when striped down to their functional design elements, ain't that much different design wise, so I would lump anything together there. It is curved enough to have all the benefits of being a curved blade, which we are both are, while being "straight enough" that it might not really have any draw backs, for instance it is still a decent thrusting weapon. But I think it really shines in its ability to be easily draw in an aggressive manner (which can also be used defensively as a strong parry followed by an attack while your opponent still recovers from the blow to his weapon), which a more curved sword wouldn't have, and which is generally slower to do with a straight sword of similar size. Otherwise, I think it comes down to personal preference and what you are more skilled with, really, hence why I say it is generally a better design - IF you manage to master its use better than you get used to other swords, then you would manage to benefit. In the end of the day all decently designed cutting swords (to separate it from swords specifically meant for thrusting primarily or only, which served a different purpose anyway) are trying to do the same very objective and specific thing, so it is no wonder over time the designs arrive at not too divergent optimal solutions. So if we were talking about swords made with modern materials and blacksmithing machinery, I think a Katana inspired design would be the best at cutting as a whole.
Now thinking about materials, I was watching this documentaries about the viking ulfberht swords, which were probably made from metal imported from the middle east, if not made there. It was a stainless steel of very high quality, significantly better than the steel varieties available elsewhere at the same time. Obviously, that material or a similar one was likely used to make the local's weapons too. It doesn't take much to put one and one together, you take middle eastern curved designs with all the cutting advantages a curved sword has + people who are as dedicated and skilled at it as everyone else who practices with their weapons + a blade that is made of way superior material, and you have the best cutting weapons (or at least the best cutting weapons in actual practice). So I think there is very strong argument to support you final conclusion about the best historical swords, not only by what people reported, but also by the nature of the swords and their use.
Schoolboy opinions.
@@ScorchedEarthTactician "opinions of a person with an education, who I pretend to be young so I can sound condescending" isn't the smart insult your peanut of a brain thinks it is. It just tells on you, really.
Katanas were inferior metal but they made the metal seem pretty good by forging skills, whereas middle eastern and Indian swords used wootz which is much more superior
@@ScorchedEarthTactician Mate, you don't need to parrot ignorance. You already demonstrated your disdain for learning. A demonstration was not needed.
Alright :) The katana debate is getting interesting! :D
Now, why not tackle the point* that started this whole debate? The katana pierce potential? (From the orginal video that provoked your series?)
Wouldn't the stiffness/thickness be an advantage here too?
There is no best sword. Each sword type and style exists for reasons specific to the place and time of origin.
How would one objectively measure which cuts better? Antique swords are too valuable to be used and need resharpening. Modern production swords use modern alloys and are all essentially the same regardless of what stylized shape they are in to appeal to buyers.
If one style/shape sword was to be truly better than any other then I think the whole world would have been using identical swords.
Also, antique katana swords arent 60 Rockwell, more like 48 to 52. The steel also is far from being of good quality. The forging methods and steel production of Japanese swords is equivalent to late iron age China, around Han. By the time Japanese swords were exposed to the rest of the world they were 1000 years out of date and valued not for how good they were but for the simple fact of being made in long forgotten way.
Everything else since then is just pop culture myth and Japanese national pride that still to this day tries to sever its cultural ties with China and Korea.
I agree with everything you said, except the first sentence. It is just physics and science, the kilij is the best cutting AND hitting sword/saber.
This series cleared a lot of misconceptions I had. Thanks for preventing me from talking out my ass about the Katana in the future XD
wodden sword is the best cutting sword
Sriram R Wodden?
I can attest from my own experiment, a wooden sword can cut through paper!
Inner curved blade is better or outer curved blade?? Please someone tell me I am confused.
Personally I prefer a turco-mongol sabre with a yelman. I like the extra weight it affords me in my swings
Try a Tegha.
If you going into a battle ..Talwar would be your best option, it was simply designed in such a way that it causes maximum cutting power per swing.. If your in a street fight....... :) The Katana would be your best option !
I love the backhanded compliment in there. "Any idiot can pick up a katana and cut something, but with a longsword, if you aren't highly skilled, you won't do very well with it."
why are u mis-quoting this man? he said, "...anybody can ...." he did not say any idiot....it wasn't a back handed compliment it was his assessment based upon his experience and expertise....to me he seemed objective
blklion25 Yes - what he's saying is that the katana is more forgiving of cuts which are slightly off-plane.
It's also true that the katana, being stiff, will cut no matter how far along the edge you make contact.
With laterally springy longswords, it's very important to hit at or very near the centre of percussion - which is the point where the waves of springiness along the length of the blade cancel each other out. This also generally known as the sweet spot. ( www.exploratorium.edu/baseball/sweetspot.html )
There is some recent research disputing this, but it's not yet gained much traction.
ultimately the moral of the story is that the sword is only as good as the one wielding it....nuff said- no need to bicker over somethng that, in the grand scheme of things, matter very very little.
Don't think it was a backhand compliment, as statement of fact. Put it this way, anybody can pick up a Rapier and stab with it. It is very natural to do so and you WILL poke a hole in whatever you hit. Katana is a very well designed cutting blade that is VERY sharp. It takes no real effort to make a successful cut.
Now to use a sword WELL (be it Rapier or Katana) that's something different.
Eric Beall Well I can tell you from personal experience that to cut takes no real effort. Hell you can swing it like a baseball bat and being a hard sword and a very sharp one, it cuts very easily and well. Long sword is more difficult, again from personal experience, because it does bend.
Notice Eric. I am NOT saying that Katana takes no skill, just that basic cut is easy.
Put it another way, any idiot can pick up a baseball bat and hit a ball, right? Now to hit a ball well while going 100MPH? That takes a "bit" more effort.
Of my sword collection I find my Kat to be the fourth best cutter behind my Kukri, British 1796 Light Cavalry Sabre and Burmese Dha. All three have hatchet tips, which seems to give them the edge.
I've not tried a Kopis but I love my Dao, it's my favourite sword. Not put it through a tough cutting session though.
Another one like the Kopis is the Falcata. I have never actually used one so I can't say it's really better or worse than anything, or that it's truly my/a favorite, BUT...it's basically a favorite of mine. I mean, I have read a bit that says it/that type of blade is fantastic at cutting.
I have a katana and a one handed sabre, I think the katana is much better, I can swing it faster since im using both arms while the saber seems slow and less powerful.
Good work Matt, I have to mention that.
I just watched all 7 parts of this debate before writing this comment and since you said you're not that much of an expert for katanas I wanted to share some of my knowledge here, because I am worried that some important things might stay unconsidered otherwise.
But what really bugs me are some comments I read under the videos.
So first: Yes, I do love katanas. But I am not a fanatic. I know what I am at with my favourite type of swords and to be honest, I do accept every flaw it has, since it adds to the own character a sword type has in my opinion.
And I do love the design of european longswords aswell!
*KNIGHTS VS SAMURAI* e.g. longswords vs katanas
YES, a knight WOULD have better chances against a samurai in a duel - at least in my opinion.
But not really because of the european plate armour or the misconception about katanas being shorter than longswords.
There were successful katanas especially designed/smithed to cut or rather pierce through armour (japanese samurai armour was not that bad compared to the european plate armour, really).
Also katanas normally were not as short as we imagine them nowadays, they were almost about the same length as a good longsword (thus making them slightly heavier I guess...).
But to be honest the term "katana" formed fairly late in the samurai era and swords given that term were already not designed for the battlefield but for displaying in public, becoming more of an piece of art than an efficient weapon (the original term for a battleproof katana was "tachi"). But we don't want to put up our fancy knight against some decadent wannabe warrior, right? So I assume a samurai from the prime of his era would be a more fitting opponent.
Still the samurai has harsh times against a knight. The reason for this, in my opinion, is the material used to make the swords.
Folding steel was a necessity to make japanese low quality tamahagane useable (it was just unclean, duh), while differential hardening was a clever addition to make best use of the quality steel given.
So what am I telling you with this? Simply that Japanese had inferior material for their swords throughout the samurai era.
And on a side note: If both sides would have fought against each other in their prime you wouldn't believe the Japanese hadn't improved to compete with their opponents, right?
Good fight, sir knight.
Given the technology today and the high quality carbonsteels available katans would perform equally well compared to longswords, I believe. (Overall I mean, given characteristic differences, of course.)
You don't even have to differentially harden your katana traditionally.
A through hardened katana would be more durable nowadays actually. It would only become slightly faster dull.
The whole "Which sword is superior?" argument is nonsensical in my eyes... from BOTH sides.
There really is no magic behind katanas and they were NOT made especially good in the past.
But calling the katana "inferior" or "not good at anything" based on misconceptions or "anti katana cultist" biases is just as ignorant.
Therefore I thank Matt for giving a pretty clean, neutral and rational comparison/statement.
About the kenjutsu arts everything I know was said by Matt and I don't have to add anything, so that's it.
My "two cents".
Have a good day, all.
"2 cents" you mean 2 hundred crisp dollar bills
Stup1d0zz
***Given the technology today and the high quality carbonsteels available
katans would perform equally well compared to longswords, I believe.
(Overall I mean, given characteristic differences, of course.)***
But this is a silly thing to believe. A classic longsword is optimized to do a different job: a k'a doesn't have the point designed to punch through mail, it isn't designed for half swording to attack the joints of plate, etc. In fact, the k'a is nothing like a longsword and isn't mean for the same job - it's actually a two handed sabre.
And if you make a k'a out of modern steel... well, then you have an overweight sabre with very poor reach, because of the two handed grip. Of course you modify that - taking advantage of the better steel to have a lighter longer blade that can be used one handed and so side-on and faster. It's still not as good as a real sabre because it lacks a false edge and hand protection, so you add those.... and what you have now is simply a sabre, with no trace of k'a at all.
..This is because the k'a is a brilliant special purpose design for making the best sabre possible from the world's worst iron ore. Given good ore, you'd simply make a sabre.
What's really amusing is the number of weaboes who don't seem to have watched The Seven Samurai. There's very telling scene when one of the heroes plants half a dozen k'a in the ground because he knows they were going to break in combat. K'a were hardened wrought iron, not spring steel, so they bent and took a permanent set (or snapped) relatively easily.
TheGreatAmphibian
I neither see a problem with the form nor the fact that it's meant to be weld two-handed. One might say I am only a fan of the aesthetic design of the katan and wouldn't be far from truth. But I doubt that it's needed to sacriifice some characteristics of the katana or to adapt characteristics of the longsword to make it on-par with it in overall performance.
You don't need to make a katana "halfswordable" to make it a good concussive weapon, since the katana already has a thick blade which would also perform well in smashing when made out of high-tech steel. It still won't beat the longsword when it comes to smacking your opponent to a pulp, but you at least don't need to change the grip completely to do so.
When it comes to the hand protection, even though I never really felt that uncomfortable about this point, mainly because I practice kenjutsu and the way you (and more important: your opponent) handle your sword never made me question the lack of safety of the hand guard., you can search for russo-japanese katanas/sabres. They are a pretty good example of what you just mentioned in your comment.
My point though, is, that instead of adapting the performance of regular sabres or even the performance of the longsword, you could also build on the characteristics of the katana and extend their use from there. Just my opinion.
But when it comes to "weeabos", I fortunately never came across this species of the internet under my comments. Even though I may be a defender of the katana I acknowledge most, if not all, flaws this beautiful weapon has. Something about ralism it seems repells those pests.
*I neither see a problem with the form nor the fact that it's meant to be weld two-handed.*
Yes, but so what? That you're too silly to understand that a relatively blunt point won't pierce as well as a sharper one doesn't alter reality, it just means intelligent people will laugh at you. Ditto for the fact that you're too silly to realize that the same length sword wielded sabre fashion will have a longer effective reach than in any two handed grip. (Which is something you could confirm for yourself in just seconds using a broomhandle.)
*My point though, is, that instead of adapting the performance of regular sabres or even the performance of the longsword, you could also build on the characteristics of the katana and extend their use from there.*
Once again, this is stupid. *Because in every respect that the katana is different to a class combat sabre the difference exists because of the inferior steel the Japanese had to use.* Once you get rid of factors that compensate for the awful iron ore, you have a weapon exactly like a sabre - because that was the weapon a katana was trying to be. (Or you could call it a backsword.)
If you think that there was a feature of the k'a that would prove advantageous to keep once you're making it out of decent steel, could you explain what feature is and why? Eg "I like swords with poor hand protection because I want to lose a finger so I can go home 4F!" Or "Swords with overly thick slow moving blades are great because I don't want to hurt anyone." Or "I want my sword to have a foot less reach than the other guy's because I've been feeling really depress lately.." Or "The backcut is unsporting, dammit, I'd rather lose than emply it!" Or "Fullering is the work of the devil - it says so in Bleach! Or Poekemon - one of the Holy Texts, anyway!"
The problem is that you literally understand nothing of what a sword is. It's not a collection of cool styling traits as you martial arts movie freaks think but simply a type of lever. It has very definite characteristics that set its ability to thrust and to cut, and you don't understand what any of them are - least of all the really important ones like centre of percussion. The k'a is simply a crippled version of a sabre, said crippling being the result of a design that strengthens a sword made from poor steel.
..You really can list everyone of the k'as deficencies - all the result of poor steel, not stupidity by the smiths or users - and tick them off. Once you've removed them all, what you have is 1796 sabre. It weighs 800g but has more reach than a 1.5 kg k'a, and the 800g includes hand protection the k'a lacks. It's a tougher sword because it is made out of spring steel instead of wrought iron. And it has so much cutting power than any increase would be pointless - in combat it split heads vertically, removed limbs etc - it has so much cutting power that adding more would be pointless, because human bodies just big enough to justify it! It's faster than the ka - this inevitable for a longer, lighter, one-handed sword - and has more reach. It can feint in ways the k'a can't and it back-cut, which alone is a very powerful fight winner.
There are videos of the C-grade Coldsteel version cutting animal carcasses in half; go and watch them and stop wasting people's time.
Is a Kukri a knife or a sword in your books. Either way for cutting it gets my vote. If I had one I would make a video demonstrating its abilities. I have only used it on plant life much in the fashion most people use machetes but it was a remarkable tool for that use.
I think the best cutting sword is a chainsaw. >:D
Goes through pretty much anything
lol yep
chandelure99 But on the down side it's the only melee weapon you need to reload =)
ColorMeWTF That, and it's heavy as shit
what you want is the chainsword from 40k lol
The Kilij, a Turkish falchion basically, cut just as well as the Katana.
I've seen those tested. They really are marvelous.
Katanas are the best ever cos it has the coolest name!
To me yatagan sounds cooler.
If it comes down to name coolness, I'm gonna have to go with Ulfberht. It makes me think of a bear. Katana makes me think of a cat.
Quite like the sword name Urumi.
I prefer bastard sword.
Mean and to the point.
Sebastian Meid If you can heft one and wield it for more than twenty minutes.
Great comparison video!!! BTW 4:14, its a Pulwar and not a Tulwar. Tulwar is a long(a little longer than Pulwar), tapering curved sword, they have a D-shaped hand-guard, and Pulwar does'nt have a D-shaped hand-guard. Pulwars were generally used by guards in those days where as Tulwars were used by kings, army generals, and soldiers.
Pulwars don’t have disc pommel, it’s more bulgier
Musashi Miyamoto basically said the katana is a secondary weapon not to be relied upon in his memoirs, and that if you have any other weapon available, to use that instead. He said it was good at slicing as long as it was 'glided' over the target, or else it will soon break.
Put a katana up against a European longsword and the katana is going to break. Not to mention samurais wielding katanas would be useless against European armoured combatants due to their use as a slashing weapon (which is useless against plate armour - you need a straight blade for precision thrusts, or better a blunt force weapon to hit the armour with). Plate armour was not heavy (more evenly distributed weight than a modern soldier's gear) and not restrictive of movement (greater range of movement than the human body, you can climb ladders and do cartwheels in it), meaning knights were not the slow clumsy fools people love to think of them as. A knight with a longsword would have been just as fast as any samurai. And given a katana is designed for cutting motion, not stabbing, the samurai is going to get smashed quite easily.
So to all the anime fans who think the katana is legendary, or that the samurai is so much more skilled than a knight, suck on that for a while.
Like you said, though, Samurai didn't rely primarily on the sword...it was bow and yari/spear that were used first. I wonder how a knight would have fared against a historically accurate Samurai using these weapons, instead. Curious about their bows draw strength and what kind of arrows/arrowheads they used, though.
There was also the kanabou...
Kami Nana Probably not much better than they would with their katanas, plate is very resistant to arrows and the Japanese yumis typically didn't get up to the same draw weights as some examples of the English/Welsh longbow and Idon't think that the Japanese equivalent of a bodkin arrow head was any better than the European's. Against mail it's debatable but probably equally ineffective since it seems that a properly riveted set of mail is quite arrow proof, at least to the point where the arrow isn't able to penetrate through past the gambeson/padded jack worn underneath the mail.
It would be interesting to see how well a Japanese yari would fair against European plate, something tells me that it would probably wouldn't punch through the plates themselves but maybe through the mail, maybe. In the end a fully armored samurai just isn't much of a match against a fully armored European knight because Japanese weapons just don't seem to be optimized for use against a heavily armored opponent, at least not one that's encased head to toe in steel. Even the latest models of Japanese armor never developed the same coverage as even early models of European plate.
did you think that katanas cut throug japanese armour? samurai when fighting armoured opponents looked for the unprotected spots the same way a knight went for the parts not covered by plate.
Riceball01 There is no doubt in my mind that Japanese arrowheads were far inferior to those made in Europe (more specifically England and Wales), and even that they would be useless against plate armour. It's pretty common knowledge that Japanese steel was poor compared to European steel, and there are records that suggest English arrows at Poitiers simply crumpled on French plate.
***** Japanese armor is made of wood, silk, cloth and leather, you don't need a 'weak spot' if your blade is sharp enough to cut through leather and wood (although you might blunt/bend it if you don't watch out).
i would have to agree with what he said was best for cutting i can see how a blade of that design could cut very well but it all really comes down to skill at cutting and sharpness of the blade
Tulwar means sword
+Md.Yousuf Azad sami So does Saif, Tegha and various other words used in India. It is, nevertheless, a specific type of Indian sword.
+Md.Yousuf Azad sami Gladius and Espada also mean literally "sword".
You guys are all correct.
"Katana" also literally means "blade".
I just wanted to throw that in there :P
The word kilij comes from kılıç which means sword in turkish
The most detailed experiments with swords as weapons where carried out by the British War Office prior to World War that concluded that double edge sword with a point used for thrusting was the best.
i just hope people realise a katana in truth is just an iron thing for hitting people
Pat Moon Steel thing*
Pat Moon Steel thing*
Pat Moon Steel thing*
I doubt someone will really test this. A well made Turkish kilij is very hard to come by unless you are willing to have blacksmith make it for you. The most affordable I've seen are $1,200 and I have never seen them tested (besides deadliest warrior). I would love to see it tho.
Fuck swords. Spears all the way.
Solid Structure Guisarmes for me.
Fuck u
I think they definitely have more power in the bind (the presence of both hands and the distance between them give good leverage) but I'm not sure in translates in better impact
@scholagladiatoria
Could you link your sources? It would be a great read.
Happy to, but sources for what exactly? I can't link all sources for everything :-)
The ones about the trades of weapons would be great but everything is always better. Thanks.
Beaujangles McJiggle Sources to support which point exactly? I can provide sources if I know what you want me to provide sources for.
scholagladiatoria Sources supporting your reasoning for why european traders, throughout history, determined that middle-eastern weapons are more proficient at cutting than the katana.
If you've read this in a book, or a collection of books, it would be interesting to know where. I wouldn't mind reading such a book myself.
Also, you state that you feel they aren't the best cutting swords. Is this because you have experienced better cutting ability/ technique with other swords?
I was talking about blocking...not parrying.
Blocking a two-handed sword when it is swung side-to-side may be easy (with one weapon), but not overhead strikes.
every sword has its pros and cons. overall middle eastern and Turkish swords are the best since they are curved, very well sharpened, uses the best steel. And the design that makes it the best combat weapon, especially in the sword category. they are the strongest weapon and the most versatile. The curve is the main feature that makes it the best, because it gives the sword a faster speed when swinging and makes it cut and slice through better. middle eastern or Arabian swords as well as Turkish sword usually has a bit of weight on top of the sword, to give it my power on impact, and to give the user a better swing coupled with the curve. another weapon that uses similar feature is some old Indian sword. they are great weapons for slicing but the middle eastern and Turks sword is still superior as it has the length advantage the perfect curve that has been perfected over the long years of weaponry.
One word: Scimitar.
I would thing just because of body mechanics, a one-handed sword would give, assuming equal blade length, a range advantage. I too love middle and near-eastern blades and am privileged to own an old Wootz khanjar which is every bit as sharp as the day it was made likely around 300 years ago.
Al M
Yes. And much more so again if you fight sabre style - side on and using the lunge.
GO MUGHALS, OTTOMANS AND SAFARVIDS. Also Shamshir is persian not Arabian I think.
oyeaaaah !!! :)
Turk power broh
+Akbar The Great isn't it spelled Safavid?
+Akbar The Great Also, Rajputs!
more curved edge automaticly means beter cuting
BUT more angled edge means center of weight is accualy out side of sword and that makes it tricky to master and handle
BUT more important with edge curwed like that u cant stab,or not very efectivly any way
katana could do stab thrust and cut
The Ulfberht is the best cutting sword
You have evidence of this?
benfrombelow
The Ulfberht is a sword, that is so pure, no other sword had that little amount of slag until the Industrial revolution. This meant it was a pure 100% steel sword that could flex like no other sword. It is also a short sword, but is capable of cutting through a human with one hand whereas a katana needs two hands to do such. It is fast, it is sharp, it is incredibly durable, it can pierce chainmail and it was a sword that was 1,000 years more advanced than any other sword.
Lord Baldur I agree with you that the ulfberht was an advanced sword for its time and place, and offered a significant advantage, but I assume you've seen the documentary which presents some pretty good evidence that the steel used in the ulfbehrts was produced in Iran. The Persian people and other central Asians were using the same steel at that time. Are you certain that the ulfbehrt was a better cutter than theirs?
benfrombelow The problem with that idea is that if it were true, steel weapons in Iran would have been just as pure as the Ulfberht's. Not even close.
Lord Baldur You might want to at least check out the wikipedia article on crucible steel and some of the citations there.
Liked that video, also I am not so happy with your few on such a legendary weapon in general... But probably you read my other comments... so please keep them coming...
Hi! Can you say something about polish sabers? I thing that polish saber is also better in cut than katana.
If we're real here, an obsidian knife would cut better than any piece of steal made. Obsidian is like glass or flint though, so it's impossible to keep an edge for a long time.