Why do people believe katanas are the best swords?

[AfroGamerNinja]

Seriously. We know that those swords were nothing more than backup weapons for samurai, their primary weapons being the yari (spear) and the yumi (bow).

 

P.S.: If this is the wrong section to post this thread, you can feel free to move it elsewhere.

[Vagrant0]

Not really. Spear and Bow was the primary weapon for fighting wars in feudal Japan because they did not require much in the way of formal training to use them without causing damage to the weapon. This is similar to how spears and bows were the primary weapon used in fighting battles in Europe,,, Also because of their relative ease of use and low cost.

 

Katanas were a weapon forged with what can be considered comparatively lower quality steel than European swords, even those made several hundred years earlier. The lower quality of steel made the sword easier to bend instead of flex, requiring trained techniques in using, storing, and treating the weapon so that it could retain its edge or keep from bending or snapping. In being something that required such training and care to keep it serviceable, katanas became romanticized and found its way into folklore. As a weapon, katanas were designed to slash through cloth or leather armor, and usually had trouble dealing with wooden or metal plates making it necessary to attack the vulnerable spots between the plates. As a stabbing weapon, due to the tendency for the sword to bend or break, it would not generally be used against any kind of armor, with the short sword being much better suited. As shields were seen as dishonorable (because using one would make it extremely easy to bend another's weapon), this was never a factor like it was with other kinds of swords.

 

As a weapon, since very few of us use swords in actual combat, and since modern swords are usually made with higher quality steel, it really doesn't matter. More to the point, anyone who says that any sword is "The bestest and mostest superior weapon" is probably an idiot who is just fanboying as every sword was crafted to suit its own culture, style, period, and method of use, and usually fails outside that situation until you start dealing with some of the European weapons of the later ages which simply had the superior technology and materials to draw from. And most of that became moot as soon as the crossbow and later the firearm came into use.

[Beriallord]

Katana's are completely ineffective against chainmail or platemail armor. They don't deliver enough of an impact to inflict a debilitating wound through chainmail, and can't crush or pierce platemail. Besides, a katana is designed to be a slashing weapon, not a piercing one. Samurai's armor from what I gathered was made of a combination of materials, some wood, bamboo, leather, bone, and resins. Or some combination of those; basically whatever they could find. A katana was sharp enough to cut through light armor in certain areas, certainly legs & arms.

 

A claymore was designed to pierce armor. It had enough weight to it to penetrate chain mail, and even some thinner platemail armor. Just an example of a sword that is more effective than a katana.

[Vagrant0]

Katana's are completely ineffective against chainmail or platemail armor.

To clarify, they are completely ineffective against later period European chainmail or platemail... As mentioned, katanas were usually used in a way such that they would slice at the inside of the joints where there was no armor, a situation which European armorers had already started to protect against long before they left the dark ages. As the Sengoku period neared its end, most of the fighting was being done with spears, bow, muskets, or other bladed weapons designed to deal with those few soldiers who were wearing metal armor, with the sword being used mostly for beheading an already wounded opponent.

 

The romanticized notion of the katana really didn't happen until the Edo period, when you had a long period of domestic peace but a lingering population of people who had grown up inside a generation of knowing little more than how to fight. In this period there was more emphasis on particular schools of sword fighting, rivalries between who was superior, and most of the engagements being duels without anything beyond regular clothing for protection (cost, practicality, and making it more dependent on individual skill than how well armored they were).

 

To put it in comparison, you would not be using a rapier on someone wearing full plate, just as you would not be using a katana on someone wearing full plate, just as you would not be using a scimitar or other weapon which never had to take full plate into consideration for its usage.

[AfroGamerNinja]

 

Katana's are completely ineffective against chainmail or platemail armor.

To clarify, they are completely ineffective against later period European chainmail or platemail... As mentioned, katanas were usually used in a way such that they would slice at the inside of the joints where there was no armor, a situation which European armorers had already started to protect against long before they left the dark ages. As the Sengoku period neared its end, most of the fighting was being done with spears, bow, muskets, or other bladed weapons designed to deal with those few soldiers who were wearing metal armor, with the sword being used mostly for beheading an already wounded opponent.

 

The romanticized notion of the katana really didn't happen until the Edo period, when you had a long period of domestic peace but a lingering population of people who had grown up inside a generation of knowing little more than how to fight. In this period there was more emphasis on particular schools of sword fighting, rivalries between who was superior, and most of the engagements being duels without anything beyond regular clothing for protection (cost, practicality, and making it more dependent on individual skill than how well armored they were).

 

To put it in comparison, you would not be using a rapier on someone wearing full plate, just as you would not be using a katana on someone wearing full plate, just as you would not be using a scimitar or other weapon which never had to take full plate into consideration for its usage.

 

 

For full plate, you either:

 

-use a mace;

-wield your sword by gripping on the blade and using it like a mace;

-attack with a polearm;

-shoot him with whatever ranged weapon you have.

 

Besides, anything made in Japan is for wars within Japan, considering they were (and probably still are, considering their immigration policies) isolationists.

Edited March 10, 2014 by AfroGamerNinja

[Maharg67]

Samurai often fought each other one to one, even when fighting in groups. Do not mix up samurai with foot soldiers. So they fought katana against katana for sakes of their honor code and to gain status amongst samurai and the clans. When it came to mass battles, Samurai tended to be of the minority as the conflicts were mainly fought by others that they directed. The strength of katanas came out in fights between those weilding them. Thus the katanas had a special place in the history of Japan.

 

There were stronger katanas made during at least one period of Japanese history but they were very few, very expensive, and many of the secrets of making such weapons have been lost. Do not mix up more common katanas with the very few elite ones.

[AfroGamerNinja]

I believe Cracked explains it in one of his articles quite well why katanas aren't necessarily the greatest swords, among others.

[rizon72]

I don't know much about swords and such, but I did download a katana sword mod for Skyrim. Why? It looks badass.

[Maharg67]

I wonder how modern made katanas would be with far better quality metals and improved techniques, technologies, to make them. Perhaps then they would be far more like those in the legends. Then one could use a katana that is not so fragile and which does more damage, is more versatile in its uses.

 

Perhaps one day there will be something like carbon fibre katanas.

 

PS: Some cyberpunk type stories have used advanced versions of katanas such as being lighter, with amazing strength and cutting ability.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Maharg67

[Vagrant0]

I wonder how modern made katanas would be with far better quality metals and improved techniques, technologies, to make them. Perhaps then they would be far more like those in the legends. Then one could use a katana that is not so fragile and which does more damage, is more versatile in its uses.

 

Perhaps one day there will be something like carbon fibre katanas.

 

PS: Some cyberpunk type stories have used advanced versions of katanas such as being lighter, with amazing strength and cutting ability.

I would probably not be the same thing. With a traditional katana, the curve of the blade comes from a differing tension between the front and back of the blade when it is forged and cooled. With modern materials, the curve has to be manually formed allowing for a greater likelihood of flaws developing that would ultimately weaken the blade, or more inferior materials would have to be used. The curve is, in essence, what makes the katana stand out as a weapon and is a factor when it comes to the style of fighting allowing for more fluid strikes. Western swords are not limited by this aspect, allowing them to be made without as much difficulty or tendency for flaws while also maintaining it flexibility and style of use. The method of use is important since quick fluid strikes still wouldn't be very effective against chain or plate armor, no matter what the weapon was made out of, meanwhile a sword designed for piercing or delivering solid blows would have little trouble.

 

Since people who do these sorts of comparisons generally try to factor in armor, or the lack of, forcing the argument one way or another, taking skill out of the equation.

 

In terms of a lightly armored engagement, I would actually favor a scimitar over a katana since they tended to be balanced better and much easier to used both in close and at medium range while still having enough weight behind it to stagger a blocking or armored opponent. There is a reason why Muslums were a difficult contender against the more heavily armored Crusaders of the later middle ages.