What's your favorite historical /his/? For me it's the zweihandler. Intelligent, nihilistic and with a wicked sense of humor.
>inb4 katana
>>1064343
Call me a weeaboo but Katanas really are the most aesthetic swords
For me it's the Chassepot. Intelligent, nihilistic and with a wicked sense of humor.
>Seen a century of service.
>Still in use today
>Not a glock-fuccboi
What is not to like?
>>1064341
Rapiers are cool too.
>>1064346
Contemporary European swords were just as much of a status symbol.
Except straight blades actually work on armored targets. Samurai rarely killed each other with swords; mostly it was spears and bows and arquebi, in the sengoku period anyway
>>1064456
That's beautiful
>>1064456
dang that's a +3 at least
>>1064341
>Germans were technologically ahead of everyone else
>they could have won the Thirty years war if only they could have made enough Zweihanders
When will this meme end. Pic related is superior Russian armour that could easily stop a Zweihander
is there sexier weapon?
gimme an arquebuse with that and i'm good
>>1064346
i don't like you.
broadsword
>>1064483
why did fully armored early middle ages warriors look the best? its true basically across all cultures.
![pl_1_2_6477[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/sHn8jfJ.jpg "pl_1_2_6477[1].jpg")
>>1064341
>zweihandler
Mein neger.
Since you already posted my favourite I'll post my second fav.
Behold the danish type XVIIIe sword, also known (or rather modernly called, there's no sources calling it so) as the danish montante.
>>1064540
What's the point of that mini guard?
>>1064768
For half swording.
>>1064352
>What is not to like?
The magazine capacity for starters.
Who /HEMA/ here?
>>1064343
>>1064346
personally the mythical and unique quality of the blade was kind of diminished when I found out the koreans had a near identical sword. Kind of ruins it for me.
>>1064627
It's all about the helmet 'stache.
>>1064813
>katana
>mythical and unique quality
It's just a fucking short, chubby chopping sword with a broad stabby bit. I really don't get the katana hype.
>No Indian weapons
A regular old Tulwar is good enough for me
>>1064823
>katana
>not mythical
nigga it's the most romanticized weapon out there
>>1064832
Katar with dual flintlocks attached are also cool.
>>1064842
The actual quality of the weapon has absolutely nothing to do with that fanwanking, though.
All my this
>>1064847
And if cant use bladed weapons I'll use a bagh nakh.
>>1064813
Korean "katanas" are likely influenced by Japanese katanas exported to Korea and China. In turn, Japanese katanas were influenced by Chinese curved swords even further back.
Also the typical two handed katana design was probably not prevalent in Korean military. Yi Sun Shin, for example, is always depicted with a huge sword, but most likely never saw combat and was a badge more than anything.
Pic related was a more common sword during Joseon period. Similar in design but shorter blade and one handed.
Anything that's oakeshott XVII
I know it's not practical for killing but they are simply beautiful and fun to throw.
>>1064794
It uses .45 you 9mm fuccboi.
>>1064892
/k/ memes are so cringe.
Longsword with crusader armor is the most aesthetic combination
>>1064900
But their bucket helm.
>>1064900
>crusader armor
Which crusade?
>>1064996
le based remove kebab crusade of course, they're the only ones
>>1064456
They still used katanas. A lot. Don't even try to pretend. Weapons like spears and the naga were in fact made specifically to counter swords.
>>1064813
You mean the design stolen from japs because they love everything japs do? (like animu manga)
>>1065005
>being this illiterate
American, pls.
Falchion best girl
>>1064341
I'm a fan of kriegsmessers and grossemessers. Something about the aesthetic is just really nice.
>>1064341
Khopesh desu
>>1065110
nice vibroblade brah
>>1064349
honestly it's a good gun
>>1064483
battle on the ice is a meme battle. it was more of a skirmish, and only promoted by russian historians for propaganda purposes
>>1064795
I wish, nothing within an hour of me though.
>>1064562
God tier taste familiar
>>1064900
Also the most anachronic, well no not the most but it ain't too bad.
Thanks Ridley Scott I guess ?
>>1064456
>Except straight blades actually work on armored targets.
O really ? Don't go an say half-swording cause the japanese could do this as well.
Swords aren't good against armored people, you can make them less shitty, but they aren't a good choice against people in armor. Even an estoc is a bit silly when you can have a poleaxe.
>>1064857
looks like a wakizashi to be honest
>>1064341
love this nagimaki blades
>>1064456
I doubt the percentage of Europeans wounded on the battlefield by swords was much higher than Japanese of the same period, off the top of my head maybe 5%
![IMG_9937[3].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/WjpGdRn.jpg "IMG_9937[3].jpg")
Sideswords. Good god they're nimble, feel fucking amazing in your hand, still have complex hilts so your don't get your hand hit nearly as often as with a normal single sword, are better balanced than backswords and sabers, and can cut better than a rapier. They're also goddamn /sexy/. Before the end of the year, I want a Regenyei one.
>>1064341
Nippon-dutch smallsword with curazy blades because why the hell not !? And pariser smallswords in general...
>>1065871
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFg9tirtTJ8
Always go full frutti di mare.
>>1064540
This
>>1065883
did you receive any formal training? if so, where?
or is it just manuals and sparring with friends?
>>1064899
/k/ memes are great
>>1065871
you have never LARPd or even witnessed a fencing match
>>1065986
Anyone have more information about these things?
The Portuguese had been long gone by the mid 18th century, if they were making replacement blades it implies someone was carrying them
>>1067196
other anon, but what do you mean by this?
>>1065871
small swords are basically child sized rapiers m8
also it cant cut for shit, its too light and hilt heavy
they look nice tho
>>1067213
You will never get hit in the hand by a sword if you're not retarded
>>1067256
with proper guard, this is true, then again, if you're doing everything perfectly, you never get hit ever.
maybe he means to say that the design lends it to being easier. my swordfu basket-hilted broadsword, for clear reasons, means you'll never get hit in the hand by design alone.
>>1067256
The hands and wrists are one of the most common targets in swordsmanship, I don't know where your coming from
>>1067309
Well that's fine for rapiers I guess. rapiers do have sharpened edges though dont they?
>>1067309
>i dont know fencing
>>1064346
nah, the gentle curves on the Katana are aesthetic as fuck.
same with things like kriegmessers and 1822/1845 infantry officers saber
If you aren't erect it's because you're gay
>>1067224
Side swords start at "arming swords with complex hilts" end end at proto-rapiers. Especially the former are perfectly fine cutting weapons.
>>1068362
Are you supposed to grab the rings? I can't imagine how you do it.
>>1064768
For doing stuff like this. More control.
>>1068402
Take a look at where the sword wielding guy puts his finger. Imagine what happens when a blade slides down the wrong way. That's why they added the rings.
>>1068362
10,000 minutes in photoshop
>>1065871
My nigger. Sideswords, rapiers, and sabers all make my dick diamonds. Though I never could get into epees or smallswords or anything of the sort.
>>1064346
yeah no
>>1068516
The rings are mostly defences to protect your fingers from cuts. They are generally not grabbed - at least in the case of side-swords or rapiers.
>>1068550
>>1068553
>>1068556
>>1067256
Except the hand is one of the most vulnerable parts of your fucking body.
>>1068550
But thats wrong!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiG5idGT_Bc
>>1068906
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBmR1QtNnCQ
>posting Easton vid
>feel really dirty now
>/his/, you suck at swords, really bad.
>>1068906
I think you're misunderstanding what I said. Refer to >>1068448 to get an idea of what is not done. The defensive rings of a complex hilt of side-swords and rapiers are not "hilts". You may hook into them naturally when holding the weapon, but you don't specifically grab them in the sense of doing something akin to fencing with the half-sword or something.
>>1064456
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDkoj932YFo
>>1068986
>mfw katanas
>>1068998
You realize that gif is fake right? Here's the real one.
>>1069004
Not the guy you're talking to but take a look at the shape of the blade, it actually changes during the cut. This >>1068998 seems to be the real one.
Would have surprised me if a katana could cut through a broadsword lol
The Japanese were actually known to have shitty iron so they couldn't make good enough swords to do that.
Katanas as you know them today, were developed during the Tokugawa period, a time of relative peace, but a rigid class system with a warrior class who wore swords mostly for the purpose of honor. This honor was represented by the status affording to the ownership of a costly object, displayed a sense of aesthetic taste and refinement, and would be used to protect one's honor when dueling or insulted by a filthy peasant.
They are not highly specialized dueling weapons, although they were not dedicated war blades either. If needed they could perform either function, but were not optimized for either.
During that period, swords were mostly made for aesthetics, placing an emphasis on an aesthetic hamon, a line differentiating between different forms of steel, shape, fittings etc.
Their performance was optimized for being extremely sharp, because the most likely use was for test cutting or practice, not actual use in combat. They would be optimized to cut tatami, and according to some sources, unarmored corpses or criminals, as this was the accepted way of determining how good a blade was. This sharpness requires a very hard, fragile, rare high carbon steel edge. In order to compensate for that, the non-edge part of the sword was made with more common lower softer steel that was ductile and would bend instead of shatter.
Which explains your picture.
Your picture shows a blade made in a similar fashion to Tokugawa era swords. The European sword uses high quality modern steel, with a durable through temper and thicker cutting edge. It makes fewer compromises of durability for aesthetics, tradition or sharpness, and is closer to a warblade.
The fact that it is made from modern steel makes it stronger, where the techniques used for katana were mostly to compensate for the limitations of historical steel in Japan, and offer less benefit with modern steel. And again, compromises are made for aesthetics and absolute slicing sharpness.
>>1068998
God that makes me fucking mad. Some dude probably spent ages making those and then these dickheads just wreck them. I get that that's the point of the video but man it pisses me off.
>>1069049
Pretty sure he's baiting. It's an edited version of >>1068998 with a cut between the katana being raised and the longsword(?) from later in the vid hitting another longsword.
>>1069080
>implying it isn't some $50 mass produced chinese replica
>>1068986
>american style documentary
my god, I just can't stop laughing
I kept waiting for them to measure something by lengths of a football field
>>1069087
No, they actually hired a competent sword smith to make the weapons. They even imported Japanese tamahagane to make the katana.
>>1068978
But thats retarded anyways, it is not like you do half sword techniques with a side sword, those are for long swords, which usually do not have complex hilts.
>>1069087
Then I'd be mad because they're not testing real swords. There's no winning here, only anger
>>1069074
>Katanas as you know them today, were developed during the Tokugawa period, a time of relative peace, but a rigid class system with a warrior class who wore swords mostly for the purpose of honor
Wrong.
>Although they were not dedicated war blades either.
They are.
Otherwise we wont have Katana/Katana copies propping up for use as military swords in China or Korea.
>>1069004
That's not real,katanas dont flex that much when they cut
>>1067204
I would assume it was a sword made entirely in Japan for the European market, though the crown was the decorated hilt ("it's from the other side of the world you know..."), but then eventually the blade got damaged, so they kept the gilded hilt and put a new smallsword blade in Europe. It's just a reasonable guess, but having a foreign hilt (indian, chinese, japanese) with a european-made blade was done pretty much as soon as the europeans hit those countries.
Smallsword were used up until a good deal of the 19th century after all.
>>1069100
I said katana as you know them today. I didn't say all katana. Sengoku swords are different from Tokugawa swords. It was the Tokugawa period when sword smithing really became an art.
>>1069113
I'm sorry for triggering you anon
>>1069097
That is my point.
I have lied the Italian Rapier
>>1068531
Literally pleb sword... though there's nothing wrong with being a pleb... I guess.
>>1069113
>That was a German reproduction, not a real sword.
It was made with historical techniques from historical materials.
>The one they use with Gunny in the youtube video was a real Japanese manufactured katana
No, that's factually wrong. They used Chinese made Hanwei weapons for both the katana and the longsword.
>>1069116
>They used Chinese made Hanwei weapons for both
Source?
>>1069123
*liked* fuck me
>>1068986
Dammit I'm weeb as fuck and this is always so cringey and so wrong on so many levels. Just seeing the thumbnail is enough for me.
I mean, if you want to defend the japanese sword, you're actually doing some disservice putting this horrendous vid.
Then I imagine everybody needs a good laugh...
>>1069142
Someone on a sword related forum looked the models up.
In any case, it's easy to see that >>1068998 shows a real katana while the American documentary uses a fake one (just like their armour is fake).
A real katana is differentially hardened and constructed in a manner where it envelops a hard mantle steel around a soft core steel. It only has a high carbon steel edge but the rest of the blade is more iron-ish soft, and as the edge chips away from the impact it has not enough structural integrity to remain in shape.
>>1069165
I need a better source then that, dude.
>>1069165
>real katana
What most people consider today real katana are Tokugawa period status symbol art swords, and not patterned off of real warblades.
>>1069185
You can even see the katana vibrate upon cutting the ice block in the American video which should immediately indicate to you that this is not a weapon made of bloomery iron and thus not made in a historically authentic fashion.
>>1069193
Kobuse construction is not what makes a sword a warblade. The reproduction shown in the gif is patterned off of status symbol art swords. The ways of grading such swords was sharpness and feel in cutting tatami mats and unarmored peasants, aesthetics of the blade shape, and especially that of the hamon. I already explained this.
Japan went through a period of relative peace when swords became status symbols, and swords as common weapons were banned. At this point any surviving school of sword smithing adapted by making sharp aesthetic swords, not utilitarian swords meant for war. Sword smithing was only preserved in modern Japan as tradition, and tradition had been dictated by that period of peace by that point. Post war sword smithing was specifically justified because of the artistic value and craftsmanship, not because of use as a weapon.
>These status symbol swords were quite often of higher quality since they didn't need to be produced in large numbers.
Swords were not the main armament for the masses (not the main armament of samurai during war time either), so this doesn't really make sense. It was spears, guns and bows that were mass produced. There are different measures of quality. The ones found in surviving Japanese sword smithing traditions are extremely biased towards making status symbols, not tools of war.
>>1069228
>Kobuse construction is not what makes a sword a warblade.
It pretty much was though.
Whether you polish the blade and what sort of hardening line you give it does not affect the quality of the weapon. What affects the quality is the material used and the manner of construction - and for most war blades this was the kobuse method since it resulted in relatively resilient blades that could be cheaply made in great numbers.
>Post war sword smithing was specifically justified because of the artistic value and craftsmanship, not because of use as a weapon.
Not exactly. The Japanese had armed conflicts even after their civil war period and swords were used in those.
>Swords were not the main armament for the masses (not the main armament of samurai during war time either), so this doesn't really make sense.
It makes a lot of sense, since a nobleman would want a sword he could rely on. You're forgetting that swords were the primary weapons of self-defence in civilian life.
>It was spears, guns and bows that were mass produced.
Swords were mass produced too, since plenty of people carried them as a side-arm.
>You are using Bonetti's Defense against me, ah?
>I thought it fitting considering the rocky terrain.
>Naturally, you must expect me to attack with Capo Ferro?
>Naturally, but I find that Thibault cancels out Capo Ferro. Don't you?
>Unless the enemy has studied his Agrippa... which I have!
What did he mean by this?
>>1069243
>Whether you polish the blade and what sort of hardening line you give it does not affect the quality of the weapon.
Yes it does actually. There were several periods of oneupsmanship when designing hamon patterns. Very little fuck was given to how it affected the integrity of the blade.
>What affects the quality is the material used and the manner of construction - and for most war blades this was the kobuse method since it resulted in relatively resilient blades that could be cheaply made in great numbers.
The actual shape, thickness, degree of hardening all matter. I don't know why I have to keep explaining this. By that point in time, they were optimized for cutting soft targets and tatami mats, not tools of war. You refuse to address this issue.
>Not exactly. The Japanese had armed conflicts even after their civil war period and swords were used in those.
Considerably fewer. I already said the swords could be used for war. I said they weren't optimized for war.
>It makes a lot of sense, since a nobleman would want a sword he could rely on.
You're not even keeping your argument straight. You said swords suffered quality during that period.
>You're forgetting that swords were the primary weapons of self-defence in civilian life.
Not katana.
>Swords were mass produced too, since plenty of people carried them as a side-arm.
Mostly not katana.
>>1069244
It is basically bullshit talk enriched with the names of famous historic fencing masters.
>>1069258
>There were several periods of oneupsmanship when designing hamon patterns. Very little fuck was given to how it affected the integrity of the blade.
I very much doubt that it would affect the blade significantly since the hardening is not something you can control to a great degree. Whether you give it a squiggly shape or a straight shape was more a matter of taste than something that would result in significant differences in regards to the hardening itself.
>The actual shape, thickness, degree of hardening all matter. I don't know why I have to keep explaining this. By that point in time, they were optimized for cutting soft targets and tatami mats, not tools of war. You refuse to address this issue.
Even during peace time swords were still weapons of self-defence. They changed in shape, but for various reasons. Armour, or lack of was a big reason. Another aspect is cultural in the sense of sword length being limited by law. However, they remained weapons that were capable of being used - they weren't merely objects for cutting tatami with.
>You're not even keeping your argument straight. You said swords suffered quality during that period.
No, I think it's more a matter of you not reading attentively. But be my guest and point me to the post where I said that.
>Not katana.
Yes, katana. What do you think did they defend themselves with?
>Mostly not katana.
Yes, also katana. They were commonly worn weapons.
>>1069244
Guy Windsor to the rescue.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCg0pqX-y3s
Seriously, how many of you did actually some formal training in either some sort of fencing or bladesmithing or antiques dealing and how many are just passionately debating about something you actually got no clue about?
HEMA looks badass. There's a club about 20 mins from me focusing on German long swords.
Is it worth it? It seems pretty nerdy but idgaf anymore
>>1069263
>I very much doubt that it would affect the blade significantly since the hardening is not something you can control to a great degree.
Are you retarded? Do you even know what tempering is?
> Whether you give it a squiggly shape or a straight shape was more a matter of taste than something that would result in significant differences in regards to the hardening itself.
Yes, it's a matter of taste. It got to the point where people didn't give a fuck about how it affected the blade. They also went for a high contrast one every time.
>Even during peace time swords were still weapons of self-defence.
The requirements for a self defense sword are different than one meant for war.
>They changed in shape, but for various reasons. Armour, or lack of was a big reason.
Yes, that's a huge one, and it goes exactly against what you're arguing about. It's also something I've mentioned repeatedly, about swords being optimized for soft, unarmored targets and tatami mats.
>However, they remained weapons that were capable of being used - they weren't merely objects for cutting tatami with.
I said they could be used for war you illiterate fuck I said they were not optimized for war. I said they were optimized for cutting tatami mats. If you were designing a sword for war against armored targets and not tatami mats you would design the sword differently you fucking moron.
>But be my guest and point me to the post where I said that.
You heavily implied it, because the topic was art swords vs war swords. If that isn't what you meant, then you straw manned.
>Yes, katana. What do you think did they defend themselves with?
You do realize there are other types of Japanese swords other than katana right? Or are you just proud of showing off your ignorance.
>Yes, also katana. They were commonly worn weapons.
You're just being a retard at this point.
Katana does not mean Japanese sword. Educate yourself.
>>1064346
I agree desu
They aren't the best, but they look nice
Fuck, you don't have to go all the way from "Katanas are the best folded 1000 times" to "KATANAS ARE WORTHLESS NO REDEEMING QUALITIES"
>>1069293
Depends on the club, the better ones are really worth it, but it takes years of practice and hard work to get guud.
Being able to fence really well is pretty useless in the 21st century, but then being able to play golf really well is objectively also a no-use-skill (safe for the millions in prize money you can earn, ofc)
>>1069311
Yeah it'd be more of a hobby anyway.
But it seems interesting. There is no pricing or anything. Does it usually cost much?
>>1069322
Membership fees are usually very affordable, but gear can be expensive. A full contact sparring kit can cost something between €800-€1000. Plus you can end up with nasty habits, like collecting historic weapons which serve no real purpose and cost a fortune.
On the plus side, theres a lot of interesting literature to read, and high interval training with the added motivational of a 200 lbs guy hitting at you with a steel rod is pretty good for your general fitness.
>>1069302
>Are you retarded? Do you even know what tempering is?
I do know what tempering is, which is why I was talking about 'hardening'. Tempering and hardening are not the same thing. What creates the hamon is not tempering but hardening, which is done through differential quenching. Tempering means reheating the blade after hardening in order to lower the internal stress.
>It got to the point where people didn't give a fuck about how it affected the blade.
As I said, as long as the sword is constructed properly the pattern shouldn't affect the hardening significantly. Keep in mind that most of the blade is made of low-carbon steel. This is mostly speculation, but I'd love to see some actual scientific data from you to back up your claim.
>Yes, that's a huge one, and it goes exactly against what you're arguing about.
No, not at all.
>swords being optimized for soft, unarmored targets and tatami mats.
I rather doubt that. Any sword needs to be able to withstand a certain amount of blade contact, and these weapons were still weapons of self-defence. They needed to be resilient. Not to mention that even in the later conflicts armour was worn. The Shinsen-Gumi for example commonly wore mail shirts.
>You heavily implied it, because the topic was art swords vs war swords. If that isn't what you meant, then you straw manned.
You made the distinction between art swords and war swords. I never made such distinction. I told you that said "art swords" were likely of higher quality since they were not to be produced in large numbers but they were unique pieces where the craftsman could put all of his knowledge and skill into.
>You do realize there are other types of Japanese swords other than katana right? Or are you just proud of showing off your ignorance.
I am well aware that there are different types of Japanese swords, but if we're talking about the early modern period then that would imply that we're talking about katana as they were the most common.
>>1069302
>>1069344 continued
>You're just being a retard at this point.
So you're trying to tell me that katana were not commonly worn weapons?
>Katana does not mean Japanese sword. Educate yourself.
Indeed, katana could also be used to refer to a European sabre. In western contexts however, it very much means "Japanese sword", also referring to earlier variants e.g. the tachi.
>>1065126
>Khopesh le really really good sword! xDDD
I want this meme to end.
>>1069344
>I do know what tempering is, which is why I was talking about 'hardening'. Tempering and hardening are not the same thing. What creates the hamon is not tempering but hardening, which is done through differential quenching. Tempering means reheating the blade after hardening in order to lower the internal stress.
Okay, so you are extra retarded if that's what you meant. Sword smiths had lots of control over hamon shape and brightness. This is basic knowledge. Do you think differential hardening is just sticking half the sword in water?
>As I said, as long as the sword is constructed properly the pattern shouldn't affect the hardening significantly. Keep in mind that most of the blade is made of low-carbon steel. This is mostly speculation, but I'd love to see some actual scientific data from you to back up your claim.
It's a minor point about how swords were picked for aesthetics over durability. And yes, the durability changes if you have a wide edge or a narrow edge.
>No, not at all.
Yes, shitloads. The requirements for a sword meant to cut soft targets are dramatically different. It's not at all surprising when a katana folds in half trying to chop a broadsword in half when it has been designed for soft targets.
>I rather doubt that. Any sword needs to be able to withstand a certain amount of blade contact, and these weapons were still weapons of self-defence.
Then you'd be wrong. Self defense does not imply you need the sword to be as durable as a sword meant for extended combat on long campaigns.
>They needed to be resilient. Not to mention that even in the later conflicts armour was worn. The Shinsen-Gumi for example commonly wore mail shirts.
Again, not the primary arms for war.
>>1069344
>You made the distinction between art swords and war swords. I never made such distinction. I told you that said "art swords" were likely of higher quality since they were not to be produced in large numbers but they were unique pieces where the craftsman could put all of his knowledge and skill into.
And my point was that the metrics for quality changed.
>
I am well aware that there are different types of Japanese swords, but if we're talking about the early modern period then that would imply that we're talking about katana as they were the most common.
For peasant soldiers that use mass produced weapons, as side arms, really?
>So you're trying to tell me that katana were not commonly worn weapons?
Not as common as your retarded argument.
>Indeed, katana could also be used to refer to a European sabre. In western contexts however, it very much means "Japanese sword", also referring to earlier variants e.g. the tachi.
>Katanas as you know them today
Why are you so fucking illiterate?
You are a fucking moron, and all you can do is ignore arguments you don't like and straw man.
>>1069334
Very cool. I'll look into it. Thanks friend.
>>1069074
>/his/ makes pasta
>>1069355
>Sword smiths had lots of control over hamon shape and brightness.
I wasn't talking about shape and brightness, I was talking about the properties of the edge in regards to hardness. And most katana I've seen had properly hardened edges - no matter what their hamon looked like, because most smiths realised that they were still making weapons.
>Do you think differential hardening is just sticking half the sword in water?
That's what differential hardening means. The Romans already did that to their Spathae, since they only hardened the tips. Obviously there are more advanced techniques, e.g. the clay coverage you're likely referring to in order to control the cooling process more precisely, but differential hardening essentially means that you quench a part of the blade in order to give it different structural properties from the rest.
>It's a minor point about how swords were picked for aesthetics over durability. And yes, the durability changes if you have a wide edge or a narrow edge.
Edge geometry plays its part, but as I told you earlier: these were still weapons, they weren't just carried for show. The idea that later swords weren't intended to be weapons is utter nonsense.
>It's not at all surprising when a katana folds in half trying to chop a broadsword in half when it has been designed for soft targets.
I can guarantee you that no sword made of bloomery iron will cut a "broadsword" (the proper term is arming sword) in half. At best your sword is going to be permanently damaged while still remaining somewhat in shape, but no matter what katana (tachi, tsurugi or whatever) from what time period you look at it won't cut an arming sword. You'll always end up with a chipped edge and possible a bent spine. That's a consequence of how the weapons were made.
>>1069391 continued
>Self defense does not imply you need the sword to be as durable as a sword meant for extended combat on long campaigns.
That's why they had to make lots of weapons since they knew that their blades weren't going to survive extended combat.
>Again, not the primary arms for war.
Side-arms commonly saw combat, both in Europe and in Japan. Swords were used on the battlefield as well as in civilian self-defence situations.
>>1069204
I'd just like a properly cited source is all I'm saying.
>>1069391
>I wasn't talking about shape and brightness, I was talking about the properties of the edge in regards to hardness. And most katana I've seen had properly hardened edges - no matter what their hamon looked like, because most smiths realised that they were still making weapons.
Hardness is controlled through temper you retarded fuck. You are trying to have it both ways with hardness. Hurr, I mean hardening by quenching. Durr I mean the hardness of the edge.
>the clay coverage you're likely referring to in order to control the cooling process more precisely
>hurr they don't have much control
Educate yourself.
>The idea that later swords weren't intended to be weapons is utter nonsense.
As weapons for war. They were perfectly fine for dueling and cutting down unarmed peasants. Which I've said repeated times.
>I can guarantee you that no sword made of bloomery iron will cut a "broadsword" (the proper term is arming sword) in half.
I didn't say it would. Going to a high hardness edge, and a high contrast hamon are going to lead to an especially soft spine. Maybe I should get technical, but most blades weren't kobuse either. I've also mentioned the fact that historical steel limitations, such as the quality, and rarity of high carbon steel, were contributors as well.
>That's why they had to make lots of weapons since they knew that their blades weren't going to survive extended combat.
You're trying to have it both ways. Or they just commission a sword more suitable for war, or they don't actually do much war with them, or the commission a new sword if it doesn't hold up.
>Side-arms commonly saw combat, both in Europe and in Japan. Swords were used on the battlefield as well as in civilian self-defence situations.
Yes, and? You could still use a sword optimized for cutting tatami mats as a side-arms. It would not be optimized for war. Which is what I've been saying from the beginning.
>>1069399
Having "touched" a Japanese blade or knowing how to use it in "theory" doesn't give you knowledge about its material properties and makes you not any better at assessing the problem at hand.
>>1069416
So you neither ever saw a real blade in person nor did any formal training in martial arts, but for some reason you are still internets top expert on Japanese blades.
>>1069408
>Hardness is controlled through temper you retarded fuck.
It is, but I was obviously not talking about tempering but about hardening. As I told you earlier: these are not the same thing.
>Educate yourself.
I am educated enough on the matter to know that most swords of which I've seen a structural analysis, regardless of the shape of their hardening line, were properly made. If you're so certain that swords are a certain time period were hardened significantly differently: provide some material data on the subject.
>They were perfectly fine for dueling and cutting down unarmed peasants.
Duelling requires blade contact thus requiring a resilient weapon and you can't be sure whether the other is not wearing mail armour.
>I didn't say it would. Going to a high hardness edge, and a high contrast hamon are going to lead to an especially soft spine. Maybe I should get technical, but most blades weren't kobuse either. I've also mentioned the fact that historical steel limitations, such as the quality, and rarity of high carbon steel, were contributors as well.
I can only repeat: it's not going to happen, no matter what you do due to the fact of how the weapons were made. It doesn't matter what type of blade geometry you put on it, or what else.
>You could still use a sword optimized for cutting tatami mats as a side-arms.
I postulate that nobody - at a time when swords served as tools of self-defence - carried a sword optimised for cutting tatami mats. Show me such a weapon. Show me its material properties and how it differs from war swords in terms of hardness, manner of construction, or whatever. I can guarantee you that you won't find such a weapon.
>>1069421
I live in Europe near a blade museum, so I've seen quite a lot of historical weapons - including Japanese ones. It may surprise you however that the naked eye isn't particularly good at assessing material properties of steel down to its microstructure and composition. It all looks fairly same-ish.
>>1069451
>The majority of them were made in a kobuse fashion, based on what evidence we have.
Citation needed
>>1069446
> can only repeat: it's not going to happen
What are you talking about?
hydrogen bomb
Done.
>>1069463
The kobuse-gitae fashion resulted in resilient blades that could be relatively cheaply made with little effort. I'll have to look up the source for it exactly, but an argument of "reason" in just looking at the various types of blade compositions should tell you that they all involved a lot more complex forging methods - with the exception of the simplest one that didn't involve any composition but was mostly used for short blades and knives that didn't need a lot of structural integrity.
>>1069468
It's not going to happen that any Japanese sword made in a historical fashion cuts through an medieval arming sword.
>>1069491
I googled a bit:
>In Naked Blade, by Toshishiro Obata (Dragon Books, 1985), the swordsmith Kobayashi Yasuhiro is quoted as saying, "The sword constructed by encasing a soft core in a hard jacket of steel that became popular during the years preceeding Sekigahara, due to the ease and speed with which it could be made, I view as an abomination. It survived only because it was visually beautiful and the peaceful years of the Tokugawa Jidai lead to ignorance of swords and swordsmanship."
The point remains that this fashion resulted in quick to forge blades that were resilient enough, though not of the highest possible quality.
>>1069446
>I live in Europe near a blade museum, so I've seen quite a lot of historical weapons - including Japanese ones.
>internet expert at its best
>>1069503
Because it would simply break.
>>1069503
Because maru blade were typically for knives and short swords (kodachi and the likes). Almost no proper long swords were made using the maru method because it's even more prone to breaking and snapping than the other types.
>>1069510
Anecdotal larping experience mean very little when it comes to evaluating the metallurgical properties of historical weaponry.
>>1069506
>It survived only because it was visually beautiful and the peaceful years of the Tokugawa Jidai lead to ignorance of swords and swordsmanship
I think it's time you gave up. Sekigara is practically the end of Sengoku, and that only seems to apply to new swords made during that period.
>>1069521
These were the common types of weapons used during the largest battles in Japanese history.
If anything is characteristic as a "war sword" it's those kinds of weapons.
Not to mention that my original point was: a war sword is not necessarily "better" than a sword of peace time, which you seemed to indicate.
>>1069530
You sure seem to be projecting and assuming a lot. I think you should give it a rest.
>>1069510
kek that explains why everything he said sounds like it came from a single paragraph plaque from a museum
>>1069539
No, I'm not projecting at all.
You questioned whether the weapon used in the video was a "war sword" due to your belief that a "war sword" would perform better than what you called an "art sword". I told you that a "war sword" would not necessarily perform better than an "art sword", due to the fact that actual war time swords were often of comparably poor quality due to war time having different demands, e.g. swords being made cheaply in great numbers, which is backed up by my quote.
In the end, the point remains that no matter whether you take a war sword, an art sword or whatever: no Japanese sword forged in a historical fashion will cut through a medieval arming sword.
It's an impossibility due to the limitations of the material.
>>1069543
What is your scientific background then to evaluate material properties?
>>1069549
>No, I'm not projecting at all.
I really think you are. For starters you keep saying "you" a lot.
>>1069556
What part do you disagree with then?
Was it not your original point that a war sword would perform better than what you called an "art sword" (whatever that may be) and thus the test they made should be disregarded?
>>1064850
This
>>1065110
>guaranteed_replies.jpg
>autist1 goes full autist trying to explain katanas even though its bait and no one cares
>autist2 disagrees because hes an expert since he went to a european sword museum
Gentlemen, let us consider the gladius.
Hispanic short sword, refined and utilised by the Romans.
This vicious meat cleaver probably killed and mauled more people than any other weapon on this thread.
Vae Victis!!!
koto blades from the earliest period did have different construction from sengoku era blades. the need to make swords enmasse meant more shortcuts were taken compared to the older blades. Often koto period smiths didn't even have access to steel through trade and had to produce their own steel from local sources. Koto blades that survive are often of very high quality. Some modern smiths have even worked to reproduce the methods of this period over shinto style blades
There is something to say about the hamon,
A simple hamon is considered more durable than the more elaborate designs popular in edo.
mass produced swords were indeed made for ashigaru, they were of poor quality and were often referred to as "cut and throw away" They were of much lower quality than those carried by samurai.
>>1071184
>Vae Victis!!!
das irony
>>1064795
Indeed. Sabre and Broadsword.
>>1071184
>Vae Victis
lel
>>1071184
To bad it needs a giant shield to be useful...
I'd argue that the romans infantry main weapons were first the scutum, then the pila, then... well the gladius, in that order of importance.
I guess as a short-ish sword with no guard it's decent, I guess...
charming
A historical weapons thread that has devolved into arguing about weeaboo sticks. How unusual.
I don't understand why every foot solider didn't just go with the ultimate sword and board combo.
>board for the blunt force/something protecting a portion of your body from all but the heaviest of weapons.
>sword for the kill
RIGHT ARM
Quarterstaffs. I don't think they are god tier or anything, but all the different stances the lightness and the reach it has, plus, you get bragging right for killing armed men with a giant stick.
>>1071310
>what is a shield
>>1071340
Sword n board has been synanamous for sword/shield combo.
>>1071298
There are not so many weeaboo's in these threads as people who insist everything Japanese is crap
>>1071291
>How do you like yur Bandanese senpai?
>Joost Foock Em Oop.
>>1065792
Nah.
Chinese/Korean Katana-Copies were often cut down to short/single handers to facilitate their use with shields. Or generally get out of the way while using another larger weapon like a pike, glaive, bow or musket.
>>1071420
<3 globalization
>>1071291
>>1071420
>How do you like your protestants, sir
>>1071437
even with the shorter mount that blade is long enough to be classified as a daito rather than a shoto (wakizashi)
I do wonder what its balance is like with the one handed grip
>>1065075
>being this much of a faggot
Eurotrash, pls
>>1070817
I'm autist2 and I specifically said that having been to a museum does not make me an expert. It was a response in regards to that guy trying to discredit my arguments on the basis of me "never having seen a historical weapon" or "studying martial arts". I responded that I have seen plenty of historical weapons (including Japanese ones) since I happen to live close to a museum that keeps them but that this does not make me an expert of any sort, since the naked eye isn't actually that great at assessing the metallurgical properties of a weapon. Waving them around doesn't help you either. Knowing a bit of material science however, makes one at least capable of understanding the processes involved in making these types of weaponry, as well as the resulting limitations of them in regards to certain types of stresses.
His argument was essentially a no-true-scotsman argument claiming that if they had used a "real" katana, which he referred to as "war sword", in opposition to what he called an "art sword", then the katana would have cut the other weapon - or at least that would be the implication, for otherwise I don't know why he was making the argument in the first place.
To that I replied that war time swords, intended for actual combat, were on average of poorer quality than peace time swords, since war time demands weapons to be made cheaply made in great numbers while the most elaborate methods of construction went into weapons that were never used in combat. My central argument however is that no matter what manner of sword would be put to the test, if it was made akin to a katana in a historical fashion with historically authentic material, then it would be subject to the limitations of the material and its construction and the result upon trying to cut another sword would always be the same: you would always end up with a ruined edge and possibly a bent blade which is why it's generally not advisable to try to cut swords.
>>1073609 continued
Not like European swords could "cut" other swords either, the longsword in (>>1068998) does not cut but break the sword. It survives the process better than the historically made katana because it is likely made of modern steel and given a springy temper. While it is true that during the late middle ages, weapons with similar properties existed in Europe, it would by no means be the norm. All kinds of manners of construction and heat treatment were applied well into the modern period, from various kinds of lamination resembling that of katana, to differential hardening and tempering.
>>1073609
Sengoku era swords are not known fort their quality, but edo era blades are often considered even less so. koto blades are often considered the best from historical times.
I would also argue to truly understand a weapon you have to have a general understanding of how its used, which requires some training.
Now you did say something interesting here
>weapons with similar properties existed in Europe, it would by no means be the norm
Ive been trying to figure out how common a spring temper was on European blades but Ive not found an answer. was it just something for the rich? region specific?
>>1064832
I love the Firangi. I think it's sexy ass fuck.
>>1073609
>>1073612
No one said a katana would slice the other sword in half you gigantic autistic projecting faggot. I hope this triggers you and you get a heart attack and die. Stop bumping this shit with your retarded weeb shit.
>>1073888
>Sengoku era swords are not known fort their quality, but edo era blades are often considered even less so. koto blades are often considered the best from historical times.
That is well likely. However, I'm not convinced that it has something to do with the manner of construction, e.g. kobuse vs san-mai or something even more elaborate. A lack of quality was more likely a consequence of inattentiveness of the craftsmen due to producing blades in great numbers and resulting macro-structural issues within the blade rather than the process being faulty.
>Ive been trying to figure out how common a spring temper was on European blades but Ive not found an answer. was it just something for the rich? region specific?
I'd be very interested in that too but I don't have any numbers. I would assume it was tied to the progress in metallurgy, more precisely the invention of the blast furnace and oxidisation techniques, very much like the development of plate armour was, as these more "modern" steels would harden differently. This is mostly speculation though.
>>1073976
If nobody said that, then everything is fine. You seem a bit butthurt to me though; hopefully not the result of getting told. Also, I might add that I commonly don't bump threads when I'm discussing with someone in particular or making remarks that don't bring up anything new. I sage my posts in such cases, as it should be custom.
>>1074132
>If nobody said that, then everything is fine. You seem a bit butthurt to me though; hopefully not the result of getting told.
Good job, you sure told that straw man.
>>1074168
I'm fairly certain I've summed up your argument in >>1069549; you claimed I was projecting, but upon being asked where my misunderstanding of your position was (>>1069563) you didn't provide any further clarification. I interpreted that as you not wanting to be understood out of fear of losing some internet argument.
But maybe I was wrong and you do want to be understood: in order for that to happen you need to clarify your position however and sum up what you originally meant to say so that we can see whether I was misunderstanding you the whole time or whether we're still in disagreement.
My point is that due to the material properties of a katana resulting from the manner of how they are made, it shouldn't be surprising when they bend upon attempting to cut a sword blade with them. If you're not in disagreement with that and not interested in continuing the conversation (I certainly am not because there's very little to gain) you could also agree with me and we leave it that.
>>1064346
>No bling
>Aesthetic
Yeah, no.
I used to think rapiers were gay, but good god do they look sexy when you actually take the time to appreciate it
>>1065110
Ah yes the euro-katana. All the fun of a katana plus the added benefit of not being called a weeb.
>>1069482
It's very nice but this is the sword version of an 5k "edc" knife
>>1064474
I don't have "identify" ready so what do you think this one is? +2?
>>1064832
>>1073912
I myself am more of a Khanda person.
>>1071459
Winning, thank you
>>1074132
>That is well likely. However, I'm not convinced that it has something to do with the manner of construction
I had to dig out one of my old books and do some searching but here is what I have on this
"The Shinto, or New Sword, period (c.1596-1781) brought with it a steady decline in the combative effectiveness of blades. The swords of this period were deemed as "new" at the time of their making because forging techniques underwent radical changes."
-Japanese Swordsmanship: Technique and Practice. Draeger and Warner.
according to the Japanese sword society of Hawaii the decline began in the mid sengoku (1467-1554)
http://jssh.org/koto.html#/2
>>1074230
>autistic weeb things everyone who calls him a weeb is out to get him and the boogeyman and making up straw man arguments makes him feel like he is a winner
No, people just want you to shut up because you're an idiot. The fact that you're refuting a summary you authored instead of what other people actually said shows how pathetic you are.
>>1075527
>All the fun of a katana
Except the very hard edge which is really what the katana has for it, so not really all the fun of the katana...
>>1064456
Ebony Claymore
Base damage: 24
Weight: 56
Base value: 2200
Health: 624
Reach: 1.3
Speed: 0.8
FormID: 00035E70
>>1064899
Eat shit
>>1076913
I'll show you my ebony claymore
*unzips sheath*
>>1076435
I don't doubt that people were under that impression, but what I question is more that it was a consequence of the forging technique rather than a consequence of the large scale production in great numbers and the resulting lack of effort that went into making the blades in war time. What would be more convincing to me would be a structural analysis of multiple blades that were made in a certain manner of construction and an evaluation of their structural weaknesses in order to see whether there is a certain pattern, i.e. common issues that would emerge when applying a certain manner of lamination, hardening, temper, etc.; then it could be seen whether there were actual issues with any of them. Obviously the qualities of metal weaponry is something that was rather hard to assess for people in the past since they didn't have the means to look inside them and understand their properties in the way we do nowadays. They had some mostly superficially visual properties by which they could go, but in the end, whether a weapon was properly made or not would only become truly apparent in serious combat. Given the fact that each weapon was a unique piece, where a lot of things could go wrong if the smith didn't pay attention, this opens the gate to anecdotal bias, e.g. some guy having heard from his grandfather that the swords of the past could cut through stone and would never dull, and then he finds himself in battle with a "modern" weapon and it ends up breaking or bending, and he comes to the realisation that weapons of today simply lack in quality. Warfare obviously changed too, armour became more protective and involved more metal components than in the past, infantry field combat opposed to skirmishing from horseback became more prominent and thus the usage of swords may have become more prominent - these are all factors that need to be considered.
>>1076775
Your unwillingness to clarify your position only betrays that I was right all along. If you're not interested in discussing historical weaponry (including Japanese ones) then I don't know what you're doing in this thread. Sticking around making butthurt, pointless replies does not contribute in any meaningful way in any case.
>>1077482
From what Ive read, it was both, the needs of mass production meant that many new methods were adopted to deal with the numbers, and as a consequence older forging methods were forgotten.
At the same time many koto period smiths did everything starting from making iron ore into steel from local sources, so there was a lot more quality control
The same book makes mention of shin-shinto smiths making studies of famous koto period swords to reproduce them in the traditional manner.
>>1064341
Reminds me of a godsword
Fucking love the naginata. Ez as fuck to use and looks gr8.
Runner up is sabres. Great fucking swords.
>>1077870
Finally someone with taste
>>1077870
My favourite jap weapon
The iberian falcata is one of my favourites, I also like the dacian falx.
>>1064346
What are you gay or something?
>>1077870
Are the Onna-bugeisha a thing? How common were they in battle?
>Muh nip shield maidens
I've got a Seax
>>1064341
Fusil Automatique Modèle 1917, single greatest small arm of WW1
>>1078046
Rare, more common during the early period or in the sengoku where sometimes women would fight as a last resort.
They were not wedded to the naginata but could fight with just about any weapon.
>>1065005
Piss off illiterate swine.
>>1078046
Rare, but not shieldmaiden tier legends.
A lot of aristocratic women were taught how to use it, so they could defend castles to the last man.
I know it never saw any use, but I really like the Low Maintenance Rifle.
I also like Baselards a lot.
I'm not sure why.
>>1078053
Historically, these were made exactly like katana. You can even see the same pattern on the blade as a result from the folding and the hardened edge if you polish them. Pic shows a 5th century Alemannic Seax.
>>1064456
ywn polish this daily
No kukri?
>>1077870
>Ez as fuck to use
I'm curious to know what makes you think they are easy to use, as in easier than any other weapons ?
Anyway, since we are going for big weapons, might as well go for bigger weapons...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wem9KZeFKEA
>>1079965
>I'm curious to know what makes you think they are easy to use, as in easier than any other weapons?
Spears and polearms tend to be easier to use than swords and more effective in large scale battles because they rely more on the advantage of distance than actual skill. A good swordsman would probably be able to take a lone spearman, but it takes less effort to train spearmen than it does to have swordsmen than could reliably beat them, particularly in larger scale combats where reach is more important.
Also that mega-naginata was sexy as fuck
>>1064341
>ctrl+f
>no "Szabla"
>>1079238
>Historically, these were made exactly like katana.
Source?
>You can even see the same pattern on the blade as a result from the folding and the hardened edge if you polish them. Pic shows a 5th century Alemannic Seax.
Looks like spot welding, I may be wrong. This is really cool, but I'm wondering how this would be true. The Anglo-Saxon heptarchy was one of the most stable political entities in the world at the time, so metalworking there may have been more advanced than that of elsewhere.
>>1080919
>Spears and polearms tend to be easier to use than swords
Spears maybe, but complex polearms like naginata or poleaxes aren't really simpler to use than swords. Having learned both the naginata and the japanese sword, one isn't inherently easier than the other. Of course, some people will learn a polearm faster than the sword but the opposite, naturally, also exist. The naginata can offend in at least four ways, so there is a lot to do with them.
Now is the polearm usually more potent than a sword, absolutely, but it doesn't make them easier to learn, spears maybe, but cut&thrust polearms like a naginata, not really.
Also, the naginata requires a lot of room to be wielded, they aren't for mass close combat, this is indeed for spears, which would of course be easier to use en masse. That's why there was a severe decline of naginata usage against spears after the mongol invasions.
>>1081226
Source is the PhD thesis of Dr. Stefan Maeder (http://kokugakuin.academia.edu/StefanMaeder). It's only available in German though.
>all these swordfags
Polearems are the objectively superior weapons.
>>1068421
The root of the blade is no sharp.
Also, the swordsman would be doing more of a sweeping movement than a hacking movement and would use his finger as leverage to slide his sword out of his opponent's skull before meeting the tip of the blade to the ground on the inside of his right foot.
>>1081591
Until you have to walk around town all day every day and tend to your non-fighty activities.
Enjoy the rough looks when you enter the tavern or any shops with your 7ft spear or halberd...
>>1081606
I don't doubt that injury could be avoided, after all it took them long enough to add the rings. But it did certainly happen, otherwise they wouldn't have bothered to do so in the first place. And the rings were among the first additions leading to complex hilts, so this was definitely an issue for people.
>>1081541
so did you learn through gendai budo or a koryu?
>>1081628
What I learn were koryu kata... it's complicated.
Anyway, in the kata that I was taught, the main blade was used both for cuts and thrusts (as in most if not all styles), but the butt spike was also used for thrusting and "false-beatings" done with the inside. So it's very dynamic with a lot of change of targets and "twirling" as the two ends are used.
>>1081556
Nifty as fuck, lad
>>1081617
>Until you have to walk around town all day every day and tend to your non-fighty activities.
Literally what some hired guns in Imperial China did. With jobs like merchant/produce caravan guards or a lawman's hired deputies, "Youxia" (wandering blades) walked around with military weapons, usually a polearm.
>>1082503
I wrote about merchants and the likes, you're talking about hired guns and bodyguards, of course those ones could have battle weapons, but why the merchants and lawmen didn't carry halberds and such...? Well perhaps polearms are only really good if your job is a "fighting involved job" (and that's why I said "non-fighty activities, which patrolling and guarding aren't - to me).
>>1082503
There were laws and social norms in Japan that made carrying a pole arm around town for self defense impractical.
>>1082573
Also Chinese civilians. There was really no weapon's laws in Imperial China beyond "don't own 'state weapons' like crossbows, muskets, cannons." And a lot of rural folks in China did their policing themselves.
Also the most common civilian polearm would be the Hu Qiang (Tiger Spear). As it was a hunting weapon cum law enforcement weapon (i.e. prongs serve as mancatchers. Spike serve as tool for when criminal is not cooperating).
>>1082579
That's what happens when your cucked by a warrior class.
>>1075665
+1 Masterwork Damascend Spatha
+1d4 damage against Saxons and Slavs
>>1080983
muh Sarmatian
