What was the function of a samurai wakizashi (short sword)?

[XT]

@Critical1

yeah but unlike a katana you can just grab the rapier with your hand and push it away

lol, good luck with that. You do realize that a rapier has a blade, right? I think there is some confusion here. Check out this wiki article on the rapier.

A rapier is a relatively slender (blade 2.5 centimetres or less in width), sharply pointed sword with a blade at least 90 centimetres in length, often sporting an elaborate hilt and hand-guard. For most of its period of use, the rapier was double-edged, some later rapiers were single-edged (with a sharply triangular blade) or edgeless. A rapier is capable of both cutting and thrusting attacks, but the thrust is the main attack in all rapier fighting styles.

The term refers to a variety of blade and hilt forms depending on who is writing and when. It can refer to earlier “spada da lato” (much like the “espada ropera”) through the high rapier period of the 17th century through the smallsword and duelling swords, thus context is important in understanding what is meant by the word. (It should be noted that the term “sidesword”, used among some modern historical martial arts reconstructionists, is a 21st century translation in English from the Italian “spada da lato” and is not referred to the slender, long rapier, but only to the early 16th century italian sword with a broader and shorter blade that is considered its ancestor).

Somehow folks are equating a rapier with modern fencing weapons/styles. I took ExtraKun’s question as asking about the real, historical weapons…rapier (perhaps with off hand small shield or short sword/dagger) vs katana. Depending on how we set up the contest would depend on which would have an advantage. In an unarmored duel I’d say the katana would be at a huge disadvantage. On the battlefield, especially from horse the rapier would be totally outclassed. They are tools for different purposes.

@Cerowyn

1. one of the reasons that slashing weapons were never completely eclipsed by thrusting weapons is that it is much, much easier to dodge the latter

I disagree here. Slashing weapons have their role on the battlefield just like thrusting weapons do. The main reason slashing weapons continued on was because they worked well from horse back against broken and fleeing infantry. You could ride in at a gallop and slash down without breaking stride and go on to the next victim.

@Cerowyn

2. samurai practiced drawing a katana as an art (iaido). I’d still take the rapier fencer, though.

I studied iajitsu for a time and I’m not sure I agree. Iajitsu is the art of drawing, cutting and returning the blade in a fluid motion (or a series of fluid motions depending on what specific kata we are talking about). Obviously if you got the drop on the rapier wieldier (i.e. if you drew, cut and returned while he was sitting there drinking his sake…er, mead I guess) you’d win. But in an actual duel with his blade(s) out I don’t see how this would really help…he’d be ready for your attack even if your blade was undrawn. Also, while I’ve seen some blazingly fast sensei who could draw and cut in probably less than a second, I’ve seen some folks who re-enact rapier style combat techniques who are even faster.

If you think it through you’ll see…all the rapier guy has to do is basically lunge forward (i.e. stick the pointy end into the target ), while the iajitsu master needs to draw and cut. I have a mental picture of both and I’d say the pointy end would be in the chest of the iajitsu master around the time the katana is sweeping up for the cut. Bad news for the katana wielder.

Put them both on horse back though or in full armor and it might be a different story. Then perhaps the question would be…katana vs sabre or long sword (or ax, mace or lance).

-XT