Memes aside, what were the best swords?
Pic unrelated.
It's really hard to say. Swords were a reflection of defences at the time. There is no one universal "best sword." They were best in situations. Piercing swords for armored foes, fast ones for duels. It was cleave or stab, heavy or light. Each one suited its own purpose.
inb4 Nippon steel, folded over 1000 times.
>>1206712
which sword would be the best in 1v1 scenario
>>1206717
Depends on what sword the other guy is using
>>1206720
>>1206717
Exactly.
If you used a rapier against a broad sword you would get disarmed easy. It all depends on combat situation. While I'm not an officiando on swords, I doubt they were made for a particularly defensive position.
That being said, in a 1v1 scenario it would stop being about swords and it would start being about technique. Think of it like racing: whoever has the better reflexes wins. If everyone drives the same car, it all comes down to individual skill.
>>1206717
Why do you think one sword simply beats another sword? This would only come into play if you had 2 swordsmen literally at the exact same level of 'skill' with their own respective sword, which would be extremely hard to judge in the first place.
There will be many cases of a man with a katana beating a man with a rapier, and there will be many cases of men with rapiers beating men with katana's.
It all relies on the person using the sword, not the fucking sword itself.
>>1206720
a standard longsword?
>>1206717
Depends on the dude wielding it.
>>1206741
Its all in the technique
>>1206741
>Why do you think one sword simply beats another sword?
I don think so I just think some swords can give certain advantages
>>1206790
Well a duel in a vacuum wouldnt last very long, would it?
>>1206703
The best sword is a type of pole-arm or spear.
>>1206720
It also depends on your particular fighting style. A two bladed weapon would result in just cutting yourself with certain fighting styles.
One sword isn't better than the other. That's an ignorant view. The correct view is this: the SWORD-MAN determines what blade wins.
where can I find a quality compedium of swords with their respective fighting techniques included?
>>1206703
a lightsaber
>>1207009
A good start
http://burtoniana.org/books/1884-Book-of-the-Sword/burton-1884-book-of-the-sword.pdf
>>1206703
my dick
>>1206703
Depends on the setting
>>1206703
weapons are almost always situational, for a one on one duel the dueling swords of various cultures like the short sword are probably best, but if your looking for the all around most "practical" sword there isnt one
>>1206703
Rune scimmy
>>1206741
nah, the correct answer is the rapier.
>>1206796
This.
Best for what?
Probably Small Sword or Rapier for unarmored targets, and for armored targets you shouldn't be using a sword in the first place. Half-swording wasn't that effective.
>>1206703
The roman gladius probably killed more people than any other kind of sword, so theres an answer
Katanas are the best
to lose with xD
>>1207629
honestly people shit of the katana so much here but its not a bad sword, its just not the ultimate sword it was made out to be in movies and anime
>>1206703
Probably the gladius. Stout enough to stab, wide enough to chop and sharp enough to cut, all in a compact package perfect for fighting poorly armored enemies and capable of being made of relatively shitty metals.
>>1208769
Its a fine sword for line infantry, but I would want something longer if I had to fight in the open
>>1206739
>If you used a rapier against a broad sword you would get disarmed easy
Silver please...
How come rapiers are easy to disarm as they would be longer and of similar weight or even heavier than some broadswords ? What exactly make a rapierist prone to be disarmed ?
>>1206739
>>1208808
Yeah the rapierist wouldn't be easily disarmed and he could parry the broadsword just fine. In such a situation the greatest disadvantage of a rapier would be that as a mainly thrusting weapon it is more likely to get stuck in the opponent and unlikely to incapacitate immediately, as lethal as thrusts can be the afterblow is often a problem. In the case that my opponent isn't suicidally aggressive I'd choose rapier over broadsword because of its superior reach.
Against a longsword parrying might become slightly more problematic because of the leverage advantage the longswordsman could strike my rapier out of the way more easily.
>>1206978
>swingy swords on horseback.
wew
>>1206717
Assuming no armor, shield or off-hand weapon, I'd like to take full advantage of both of my hands and have some kind of two-handed weapon.
>>1206741
Maybe it would be easier to approach from the opposite angle, which swords would be the worst in one on one fight? I'd definitely pick any of the following: longsword, rapier, arming sword, katana, saber, backsword over smallsword, gladius and spadroon.
>>1208845
>Using swords when repeating firearms and handguns are widespread.
At least you could have chosen a french napoleonic sword from a time where swords were still slightly relevant...
>>1208836
The afterblow is already a problem in rapier against rapier, it's discussed in pretty much every rapier manual...
Against longswords, you can still offend for further away and well, parries are harder but still doable with the proper technique (see Tom Leoni about Fabris's parry). It may requires more skill, but then again what doesn't ?
>>1208845
That was just a recent development though.
Late Cavalry """sabres" were literally swords pretending to be lances. It is fucking long.
It came from a time when you weren't expected to fight a man from horseback anymore. Just literally run him down, poke him.
Also thrusting cavalry swords are generally a horrible idea. You dont want shit to et stuck in someo
>>1208769
I've always found gladius the least attractive of all sword designs. It's short, unnecessarily wide and has practically no hand protection. A bit like fat and short isn't considered a good-looking body type. I wonder why similar type of blades were practically never used during Middle Ages and Renaissance.
>>1208882
By which I mean I would consider smallword, gladius and spadroon poor choices.
>>1207598
Smallsword had no edges so they were easy grab. They were also so light that parrying a heavier sword with them would be problematic. Nor do they have the reach advantage of a rapier.
>>1208885
>The afterblow is already a problem in rapier against rapier
Yeah but in rapier vs broadsword the one wielding broadsword, when he hits, has a better chance of stopping the rapierist fighting immediately and not getting his blade stuck in him. The rapier has a better chance of hitting him first on the other hand.
>>1208939
Absolutely on all points but the thing is the rapierist should already be thinking about the afterblow, facing a broadsword or a rapier doesn't change that, it's one thing he's already familiar with. My own point was that it's not something that will be surprising to him, he doesn't have to figure it out during the fight.
Besides, I would argue that being able to strike first and pre-emptively is a bigger deterrent than being able to strike more "forcefully" or after every blows.
Hell, some rapier may be long enough that you could "poke and retreat" fast enough and thrusting far enough to kill someone while still outranging the broadsword.
Besides, to think that a broadsword has a better chance of stopping a fight is somehow a wrong way to approach the fight as you should always expect the worst and hope for the best, thus always give twice or more without being ever touched once. You should always assume your attack won't affect the enemy while assuming that any blows from the enemy will kill you immediately. If you think that your broadsword will finish the fight in an easier way, you might do mistakes just as well.
Both thrusts and cuts are susceptible at failing to kill in a single blow, you should never think about what's enough, you stand until they're down and that's it, thinking about stopping power statistics is a good way to have a bad surprise, in that regard, the theory of the afterblow between rapiers should be approached the same against a broadsword, making it irrelevant as a specific argument as it's always true in all configuration.
>>1208896
They actually were, they just get much less press because they were mostly an Iberian and Italian thing.
>>1207647
There are worse swords out there (spadroon and smallsword for example), and katana is probably equal, perhaps even better against most one-handed cut & thrust swords without off-hand weapon. What sucks about katana is that it is so short for a weapon with a two-handed handle.
This guy also makes the argument that the katana's curve does practically nothing for it's cutting capacity while making it significantly worse with thrusting: https://youtu.be/h8EieeQRllM?t=1175
>>1209246
He talks about the curve starting around 19:35.
>>1206796
You can't bring a pole-arm with you in civilian life without being that annoying guy who always knocks things over.
What made swords useful was that you could always bring them with you.
You can even bring a sword with you WHILE using a pole-arm, and that's what factually lots of people did.
>>1209246
>What sucks about katana is that it is so short for a weapon with a two-handed handle.
Actually this is what blew the minds of the East Asians reacting to the Katana. Particularly the Chinese.
Its a "bastard" sword so to speak which was in that comfortable zone between a single hander (i.e. A cavalryman can use it on horseback) and a two hander, without being too big or too small.
The Wodao was popular among Ming/Qing Period cavalrymen because it wasnt as cumbersome for horseback as the fuckhuge Zhangdao or the Shuang Shou Jian, which are large two handed Chinese longswords. Since Cavalrymen in China did a lot of foot fighting, they saw the Katana- known to them as the Wodao, a nice two hander for cavalrymen.
>>1209341
When you look at it that way katana seems pretty good compared to saber. When using a saber on foot, the other hand isn't really doing anything most of the time.
Katana is simply appealing in fictions. Samurais are considered to be brutal and exotic. Their culture such as Harakiri is extreme and crazy. The crazier, the more appealing in fictions.
>>1207157
kek
>>1209341
Actually, there was one figure in a painting of a Qing Emperor's entourage of a man witha Changdao on horseback.
Either he's merely carrying it or he's a lunatic badass.
>>1207607
That was because of superior tactics. A gladius in a one on one would be pretty garbage.
>>1209430
>the other hand isn't really doing anything most of the time.
More power, niqqa.
>>1209246
Personally I would not listen to that guy. katana were used to thrust all the time.
and the curve serves a function is the draw and cut.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tAPgIghEm4
The design "flaws" he highlights only make sense in fantasy matches between the katana and various other weapons.
>>1209341
This guy has it right, the katana was short and light enough to be used one handed, while having enough leverage to contend with larger weapons like polearms. Thus it fit its role as a side arm perfectly
>>1209852
There are accounts of Japanese warriors using long blades like that from horseback, what the specifics of it were I dont know. I think their might be one surviving school that maintains some teachings on using a great sword from horse back.
>>1209852
Or maybe the painter didn't know shit about war, it can be that too.
>>1206717
for a 1vs1 i think it would be better a spear than a sword
>>1206739
https://youtu.be/6r7VWIQCHvM
>>1210418
I'm somewhat critical of that groups sword vs sword videos. There is so much more to it that, and to be fair they admit that.
>>1209246
>>1210325
Well according to people who are actually knowledgeable about japanese swords and their use, the curve is mostly advantageous in a bind as you can do many things with even a slight curve that are impossible to do the same way with a straight sword. Not to say that curved sword are better in a bind, just that you have different options someone with a straight sword doesn't especially expect and have, especially while thrusting as it also serves to push aside the opponent blades and allow straight thrust with only a minimal hip rotation to be protected, and thus attacking effectively deflects the enemy's sword.
It doesn't really have a significant advantage with cuts from the draw really. Not to say that there isn't anything, but the bind thing is bigger than the draw thing, it's not like drawing quickly a straight sword isn't possible and many masters of old talked about it, though less than japanese for sure.
>>1210937
I would like to see videos of drawing straight swords, I am sure its possible, I just think the length and curve of the katana makes it much easier.
Otake is certainly knowledgeable, though other authorities do say that the curve does not make a big difference for their style. katori shinto ryu however does take big advantage of the curve
>>1210965
Well this channel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a10ncllct6Q) made three videos about the 21ft rule with swords where they test the rapier and the longsword (and the sabre but it's curved so...). It's just an exemple though, not saying it's an actual demonstration of historical technique, just a test, but it shows drawing a straight sword.
I know for sure that Talhoffer, Fiore and Viggiani for instance, showed cuts or thrusts from the draw, though it's usually only a couple of techniques maximum, unlike the japanese schools where it wasn't uncommon for kenjutsu focused schools to have at least half a dozen iaïjutsu techniques (as you should know if you know about TSKSR).
I would say it's easier with japanese swords because the japanese worked through it much much (much) more than any another culture, so they came through many additional tricks and stuff to make it work. Now the length certainly helps, but I think drawing an arming sword shouldn't be significantly harder, with good practice of course. On the current stage, I doubt any HEMA person could best the japanese iaïdoka at it but that's just an unfair comparison as after all it's a very specific skill.
>>1211033
the rapier is the last sword I would pick for a quick draw technique, I could see a saber or an arming sword.
after years of watching iai/batto this is pretty underwhelming. even compared to this nodachi (long sword) battojutsu its much slower. and this guy has been criticized buy members of that style, he was actually kicked out but you can get an idea of what they do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gF9hzH3D26Q
>>1211158
>the rapier is the last sword I would pick for a quick draw technique
Indeed... and that's exactly why you should know how to quick draw it ! As I said, it's just an exemple, I don't know if there are many instructors nowadays that think about it seriously, especially since it's such a small part of the typical curriculum. You could check the big names (Fiore, Talhoffer) and look for the techniques, Fiore's is sword vs dagger for instance, but a quick check showed nothing. About the rapier draw, it could be so weird (especially since some of them could be like 130 cm long) that some masters had special stuff about drawing (just drawing the damn thing), Thibault for instance shows pretty funny pictures about it. But yeah, no quickdrawing those, I mean, you can practice getting fast "enough", but not fast "fast".
I only checked your video quickly, it's Kage ryu is it (from the comments) ? Only read a few things about it by Hyakutake Colin (iirc), pretty nice though. I've seen the stuff by the "Tenshin ryu" too but I couldn't really check the legitimacy of the ryu-ha so...
Then again, this whole 21ft thing, they didn't practice the draw at all before the actual videos, so it's totally unfair to compare them with iaïdokas and such who would have decades of experience. You asked, I remembered this first so...
>>1211229
>>1211158
iirc, the longsword video is a bit better:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whSEcvOxEGM
At 1:00 for instance, it's a decent draw speedwise (is it ?), maybe the strike isn't really assured, but there's nothing to strike at that point so...
And this is the "tenshin-ryu hyoho" I was talking about (if you hadn't seen it):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWmkbzImrFQ
Couldn't find a lot about it (didn't looked a lot though), many things looks close to the TSKSR iaïjutsu but not that it means anything in particular.
>>1211229
tenshin ryu was made buy a guy named louvre. he had some traing I think, mostly in daito ryu but he made a lot of claims he could not support.
well it is always interesting to compare, I think the rapiers strength is certainly not in the draw. Its very good in many other respects though
>>1211282
> the longsword video is a bit better
Now that you could do something with.
never seen this before, it might be a different tenshin ryu than the one I mentioned. Still looks a bit iffy on first glance
>>1207598
the estoc was made to wreck armoured dudes though
>>1209341
Wodao never supplanted the Yao Dao and in some cases the Duan Dao was preferred(Li Rusong's retinue).
Yatagan. And the sword in the picture belongs to Mehmet the Conqueror.
>>1206703
Well nice to know there are some people here who actually know about swords rather than endlessly shitpost about which would win in a fight
>>1206703
Best at what? Can you answer what is the best screwdriver without knowing what kind of screw you need to turn?
Different swords were developed in different historical contexts to serve different purposes.
A longsword is not better than a rapier as a marathon runner is not better than a sprinter.
>>1211503
That's a Kilic you dumbfuck....
A bayonet because it can be used alongside a rifle.
>>1213440
>bayonet
>sword
Anon...
>>1211306
>>1211319
>tenshin ryu was made buy a guy named louvre. he had some traing I think, mostly in daito ryu but he made a lot of claims he could not support.
>Still looks a bit iffy on first glance
If it's the same I wouldn't be surprised, it looks like an amalgation of some Itto-ryu and TSKSR. They really have a lot of katori-lookalike techniques, but they insist almost everything is from some Itto-ryu. Legitimacy wise, I've never given much credit to it, even with my sorta amateur eyes.
I've read a bit about Lovret (if he is he same guy), he definitely looks like the kind to create his own stuff and call it koryu, so it wouldn't be surprising really.
Now you could always focus on the techniques and about the draw, their is still some nice things to witness.
>>1213473
>not knowing about sword bayonets
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_bayonet
>>1213473
It's only barely a sword and obvious it's not gonna do much against steel but I think macuahuitl are cool
>>1207246
>for a one on one duel the dueling swords of various cultures like the short sword are probably best
What? Where has "the short sword" been a "dueling sword"?
>>1206717
are we talking wearable swords or any sword?
>>1211444
I never said supplanted, I said popular.
Also the Duan Dao/Jian were fucking everywhere in Chinese weaponry. Even the meanest foot soldier wore it.
>>1214574
In France ? With the smallsword.
Katana aren't bad swords. Just because they're overhyped by weebs does not mean they were ineffective. They were lightweight and very sharp, not ideal against armour or shields but you'll notice the Japanese didn't really have those.
>>1214719
I wouldn't call smallswords short swords though. Aren't they of fairly one-handed sword blade length? They are short compared to rapiers of course.
>>1214731
>not ideal against armour or shields but you'll notice the Japanese didn't really have those.
Are you kidding ? They certainly didn't have a lot of hand-held shields (they did have some, just really not widespread), but no armor what have you been smoking ? All of the guys who could have a japanese sword would have armor (as most low ranking bushi just had a kodachi and a spear or a missile weapon), yeah well maybe their armor weren't as complex and complete than gothic plate armor and the likes, it was still pretty heavy and protecting armors (Tosei Gusoku, Haramaki-do, etc).
Besides, no sword but an estoc is ideal against armor as swords are typically all-around weapons and not specialized ones.
>>1214753
*fairly typical.
"Short sword" length to me would be around wakizashi/gladius length.
>>1214753
They could have a blade length between 25 and 35in though most had something closer to 30in and less. They would be on the shorter arming sword range (Type XIV for instance). Now it's true they are longer than gladius or wakizashi if that's what you are asking.
I guess they are just shorter than earlier period swords, even sideswords were pretty long at that time, and as you said, it's not even fair to compare them to rapiers.
Wasn't there a story about portugese soldiers outclassing samurai with their rapiers in duels?
Speaking of smallswords.... Did they suck? Were they nothing but a weapon for ritualized duels? Were they any good against backswords for instance?
>>1214819
It's very unlikely proper duels were had between portuguese and japanese but yeah, there was multiple incidents were portuguese soldiers killed some japanese and later authorities on both sides decided to stop things getting awry pretty quick.
>>1214852
By definition, every duel is ritualized. Smallswords developed with the advance of the professional army, and the role of the nobility getting less important in direct combat; having a sword was just an indication of the fact you were a gentleman and, well rapier were too heavy and too cumbersome for that. France had a very hard interdiction of duels in the 1620's and the smallsword developed a generation afterwards, when people fought less and didn't need a really efficient weapon, but more a common and compact weapon than anything.
A smallsword though can be very dangerous because of the speed you can achieve with it, it's like 2/3 of the length of a rapier but three times less the weight, it's still a very stiff metal rod that will kill you proper and arguably the rise of the parry/riposte in two tempi was to avoid the all too common double kill. Recovery is extremely quick, which makes it dangerous if you are in its range. Obviously, it's great against knives and let's face it, many street thugs of the old days had daggers and knives rather than swords.
Backswords would probably have the advantage over civilian smallswords, but more combat-oriented ones (colichemardes and the likes) wouldn't be at such a disadvantage. In fact, some manuals like the scottish ones (Hope, McBane) and Girard for instance talked about broadsword (or sabre) against smallsword.
>>1213907
"Sword" is a bit tricky to define once you get to the realm of non-metalworking societies
Australian Abos made these, which had sharp edges, and in the north of Australia some even had pommels, wrapped grips and sharp points. They were made of very dense Ironwood and would be used to slash rather than bash, but at the end of the day it's just a big hunk of wood. D.S. Davidson, who is probably the main expert on the matter, called them "sword-clubs", which I think is a fair compromise.
>>1215155
>it's like 2/3 of the length of a rapier but three times less the weight
Careful there, that would be negative weight. I presume you mean a third of rapier's weight.
>colichemard
So that special blade shape has its own name. I find it quite ugly, but I can see that it makes some sense.
>>1206703
The idea that you could look at something as tailored to specific martial ideas and competing technology (e.g. armor), with thousands of variances throughout history, and think that there is a "best" comparison to be made is, itself, a fucking meme.
>>1215319
>I presume you mean a third of rapier's weight.
I'm underfed and couldn't type (nor think properly apparently), you're right obviously.
>I find it quite ugly, but I can see that it makes some sense.
It's fairly basic really, a reinforced forte but the triangular blade and the very nasty point of a smallsword. Apparently it's mainly a 17th (early 18th) century weapons, afterwards sabres and the likes were more popular as army weapons.
In France it's also called "épée à la franc-toupin".
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4CC061523AEE25DB
i'm really just using this thread as an excuse to post this but here goes
company that makes and tests swords in hilarious videos
>>1206703
The ulfberth and similar swords are known to be pretty damn amazing, no? If we're talking quality and bendability and so on.
Since we can't ever agree on the "best sword", let's talk about the shittiest swords instead.
Matt Easton thinks spadroons are rubbish: https://youtu.be/rrERuG9mnLc?t=226
Lindybeige doesn't think cinquedeas are terribly practical either:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3wIYWG-cz4
>>1215476
>known to be pretty damn amazing
For the 10th century that is.
>several_thousand_folds.avi
>>1213094
Kılıç means "sword" in Turkish you retard. Yatagan is the type of this sword. It's a bit slanted as you can see.
>>1215155
There are incidences of Japanese killing western sailors as well
