Europeans were not used to swords that were two-handed and yet were used with such speed. Most smaller edged swords, such as cutlasses and sabres, were used one-handed. Two-handed swords were generally great, heavy things that relied nearly as much on sheer weight as cutting power. The Japanese, on the other hand, were using what was essentially a form of low steel (or at least a rough carbon-iron alloy), which allowed their blades to hold a keener edge. Consequently, katana were lighter and sharper than European two-handed swords, allowing them to be swept around in a very tight, quick arc. Two-handed power behind an exceptionally sharp blade, with the speed of the deftest rapier.
James Clavell is the author of Shogun (amongst other books), and although his characterization of Japanese culture is often derided by Japanese historians, he does get a lot of the sense of history right. He describes one particular scene in which English and Dutch sailors are horrified at the ease with which a samurai draws his katana and decapitates a peasant in the blink of an eye. No European could have matched that feat. (Of course, a musket ball at 10 yards is just as deadly and marginally safer than going toe-to-toe with someone who is perhaps at least as well trained as you.)
Seeing how we’re fighitng ignorance here, I’d just like to point out, that just about eveyrthing you’ve said here is completely 100% innacurate.
First of all the “Iron-carbon alloy” you speak of is STEEL, you know that, right? And steel was not a mystery to Europeans of the time, or even to Europeans of 1000+ years before.
European two-handed swords (by this I’m talking about the medieval longsword), were actually LIGHTER than Katana per inch of length. The end result is that a longsword, typically several inches longer than a typical Daito, weighed about the same (2.5 to 4 pounds).
It is also false that Katana were sharper than medieval or renaissance cutting swords.
Your info is outdated by about 50 years
Did he base his stories on historical evidence, or was he simply making stuff up?
Europeans were using swords long before the katana gained it’s popularity in Japan. European martial arts were highly developed long before the renaissance, and indeed Europeans appear not to have seen anything particularly interesting in the martial arts of Japan. They wrote a lot about the culture, but hardly anythign at all about their martial arts.
Certainly, decapitaiton by sword was somehting a european swordsman could also do.
I’m thinking you should investigate the histoprical veracity of this writer before you base your opinions on him.
Worst cite ever, but I’m sure in “Zatoichi at the Fire Festival” someone asks his master why he uses the short sword and he replies saying something about how useless the long sword is in their current confines of the casino.
So I assume, basing my answer on a movie made hundreds of years after the event, that it was for close quarter fighting.
A bit of both actually (though leaning more towards ‘making stuff up’ IMHO). I dont think the Europeans in Shogun were particularly surprised by the use of the sword by the Japanese, or surprised by the swords themselves, as they were shocked by how the Japanese used them pretty much indiscriminately (from their perspective). Historically I doubt that Europeans were THAT shocked by Japanese nobles cutting down peasants who annoyed them…but the guys in the book were.
This is true, though I think that the Europeans used their swords differently than Japanese did (probably due to their different armor). For Europeans the sword was really a secondary weapon IIRC, something you used when your mace/ax or lance broke, or to hunt down broken infantry. The Japanese also used other weapons on the battle field, but samarai fighting blade to blade on the battlefield was more common (I think) than European knights doing the same thing.
A lot of folks are under the impression that Japanese martial arts were much more advanced than our Euro brothers but this really isn’t the case. For shear killing its hard to compete with the Europeans…they really were the masters.
You mean, where I said “a form of low steel” a couple of words before the parenthetical statement you quoted? Unquestionably, by the 17th century, European metalurgy was far more advanced than contemporary Japanese technology. However, swords no longer had the same role in Europe at the time in question. In fact, the longsword was all but gone by that time (surviving only as a martial arts weapon of a couple of schools, no longer a battlefield choice).
Early longswords used on battlefields, and later “civilian” versions, were typically 46-52 inches long and 2.5 to 4 pounds, as you note. Later military examples, used mostly from horseback, were typically 54-56 inches long and 3.5 to 5 pounds. A katana, which is a type of daito, was typically around 27 inches, although different swordsmiths had their own ideas about the “perfect length.” They were usually 2 to 3 pounds.
You’re right. What I meant but failed to express, is that they are designed differently. The edge of a longsword was forged as an axe, not a knife, because it relied on heft behind the blade to cut through metal armour. A katana, on the other hand, has a much narrower blade, more suited to slicing lightly armoured opponents than European warriors would typically be facing. It would be utterly useless against your average 15th century heavy knight. European swords designed for lighter armoured opponents were typically one-handed.
Good thing there are people like you around to correct me, then.
From another forum, there was this discussion about katanas vs. european swords, and one poster said the rapier is actually faster than the katana, and if we would pit a samaurai vs. a fencer in a quick draw contest, the samurai will lose as the rapier is lighter (and hence speedier) while the katana, being a battlefield weapon, is heavy.
Of course…they were designed for two different things so its comparing apples to oranges. Ever heard the old adage ‘the point beats the blade’? Its pretty much true and the rapier was designed as a thrust weapon for dueling while the katana was a battle field weapon for slashing. Its sort of like comparing a hand gun to a rifle. On the battlefield you’d much rather have the rifle all things considered. For close in work though a pistol might be the optimal weapon.
As xtisme says, a rapier would probably be faster, especially since it is designed as a piercing weapon and so moves less when used properly. There are two mitigating factors to this that should be kept in mind: 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, and 2) samurai practiced drawing a katana as an art (iaido). I’d still take the rapier fencer, though.
No-Dachi = Samurai Great (2-handed, huge, used from horseback) Sword
Katana = Samurai Bastard (hand and a half) Sword. As some have said, this sword was traditionally weilded with both hands, but a few could weild well with only one hand. Sometimes referred to as Tachi.
Wakasashi = Samurai Short (one hand or off hand) Sword. A back-up weapon, or to be used in the off hand attacking multiple targets at once. Also to be used in Seppuku.
Together the Wakasashi and the Katana are referred to as the Daisho, or the Short and the Long. In later times, this was the mark of the Samurai. Any soldier could carry one sword, but the two marked the Samurai as noble. Ironically, though, the Samurai were originally known for their bowmanship.
Tanto = Knife.
The above are known for their quality, but also their curve and tip.
Ninjato = Ninja’s Short Sword. This is what Leonardo carried. (He was a Ninja afterall!)
I had a fencing instructor who once went head-to-head with a kendo enthusiast of comparable skill. Epee vs. kendo sword seems like a decent simulation of rapier vs. katana. My instructor won.
Reasonable, but Kendo is not Iado, the art of drawing a katana and striking in one fluid motion. Also, Epee simulates the “first blood” duels of Europe, and relies on speed and accuracy, to honorable nick your opponent before yourself are nicked. The katana however is meant to kill and or maim. Sabre or foil might be more fair comparisons, since they simulate duels which were of similar lethality to katana duels.
If this were a real epee vrs katana fight, I imagine that the epee fighter would easily get first blood, and the katana fighter would hit last, there being no more fight after that.
I would have to correct you here again though and point out that both weapons encountered armor. Certainly, European weapons would encounter a lot more plate, specially during the high middle ages and early renaissance, but swords were not designed to cut through that type of armor anyway.
The confusion, I think, arises from modern replicas of Katana. Many modern smiths are crafting pieces that aren’t historically accurate. They are made to be razor sharp (among other things), which is fine today when most people either hang them up on a wall, or test cut on very light targets like pool noodles and water jugs. But would not be ideal for a piece meant to be used in combat as it would only hasten edge failure.
BOTH European and Japanese swords, then were typically made sharp (equally on most cases), but not razor sharp, that would be bad.
I don’t know about this. It’s not really that the Rapier is “faster”, certainly not because it is lighter. A historically accurate rapier will weigh close to what aKatana weighs anyway.
It is perhaps it’s foigning style of use and it’s greater reach that might prove an advantage on a one to one duel with light or no armor. Hence the popularity of the Rapier in civilian self defence. The Katana (or the longsword) is the more versatile weapon on the battlefield, however, IMHO.
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.
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.
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.
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).
You do realize that a rapier has a blade, right? I think there is some confusion here. Check out this