Ah... I see where you're going now Cudgel. I think you may be comparing apples and oranges here. Cavalry swords cannot have the same criteria applied to them as dueling swords and the rapier is a completely different creature. If a sword is designed for use on horseback, it must be long enough to hit the opponent. Leaning to extend one's reach is dangerous on a horse in battle - a lot of soldiers end up dying from falling off their horse rather than a glorious fight - Also, swords designed for use on horseback had to be one-handed due to the fact you were riding a horse. The strikes had to be directed from the elbow, not the shoulder due to balance. So the cavelry swords you have described are based on their function, not on the function of other swords. The rapier is designed to be long and light-tipped as it is a thrusting blade - it must be able to hit the opponent at a decent length whilst remaining light enough the manouver in response to counters. It is nothing like the katana save the fact you hold on to one end and try to hurt the other person... which can essentially be said about most weapons. The b@stard sword (or hand-and-a-half sword) is basically an off-shoot of the broad-sword with an extended handle allowing someone to get another hand onto it at need. It can be said to be an adapted weapon, not a sword of its own class. A katana is designed for two hands - the handle is considerably longer than two hands together - both hands had a role to play in the control of the blade, with the lower hand giving control to the strikes/parries and the top hand giving direction and force to the movement. It is not fair to compare a modified European weapon with an entire class of Oriental weapons. Perhaps someone can tell me differently about these points, I don't want to come across as arrogant being so new to the forums. Hopefully this helps.
If we are talking about a Japanese sword used on horseback for combative use, one would generally be talking about Tachi and not Katana. Tachi were generally longer in blade length, as was/is the tsuka, their center of balence was greater than that of a katana to accomodate the use of the sword with one hand. The Tachi was never used as a "fast" draw weapon due to it's extended length additionally this sword was worn cutting edge down (in contrast to the katana) It was drawn prior to combat engagement and not resheathed (generally) until the conclusion of the combat, even so, once the individual was on two feet the weapon was used with two hands. Although the nito ito (sp?) school of swordmanship existed it was very rare, 99% of Koryu Kenjutsu and modern Iaido is based upon two handed operation of the sword.
Au contraire, Shark Proof. You're right on. The Katana is most definitely a two-handed weapon. While it functions effectively as a one-handed sword, the design of the tsuka makes it quite obviously predelicted towards two-handed use.
granted the weapon is designed and taught to be used with two hands that doesn not mean one could not use it rather handily with one hand. My point is I dont like short blade that has to be or shold be used with two hands. if im gonna use two hands it better be becucase I cant use one hand or that it would make it much easier to weild with both rather than one. I jstu think its so weird that the weapons europeans used with a primarly twohanded grip longswords etc are longer than a katana even when taken into account the difference in heights across ethnic/racial lines. Granted I would probably weild a katana with both hands even though its short simply becuase thats how i was trained but I dunno. it must be becuase the japanese didnt use sheilds like the Europeans did. Do I make sense?
Yeah, you make sense. I can see your point. Just personal preference, as I would prefer to use a Katana with two hands, and be able to use them in any combination I wanted to. I learned my Kenjutsu through Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu, so I don't limit myself to the use of just one type of grip. One hand, two hands, no hands, it doesn't really matter. I'm not at the point yet where I can actually successfully use all of these, but I am in the process, as we all are, of learning. Again, it's all just personal preference.
No handed sword fighting? Does that involve hurling your sword and saying "look, no hands" when it embeds itself in the opponent?
Compare the relative size of your average Japanese to your average European and it is obvious why a European would look at the katana and say "one handed weapon". justpointinouttheobviousmartialartsnobout!
OK what I meant martialartssnob is if I were to take a katana sized for me anda longsword sized for me the katana is significantly shorter than the longsword. Both are weapons primarly designed for twohanded use, both a similar weight, but one would be much shorter. he only adavantage that having a shorter blade is would be a faster draw and thats about it. Do you see what I mean? if I were to uses a japanese style blade it would probably be a tachi, or similar styled blade.
Hmm. I think you're thinking of a different sword here. For the most part, Tachi were very similar to Katana, maybe only slightly longer. The term Tachi, however, denotes the style of furniture the sword sports, usually involving two hangers, leaving the blade hanging from the obi blade down. I think you're thinking about the Nodachi, the much much longer sword the Samurai also used. And as far as "No hand" fighting, sure, you could throw your sword, or you could just leave it in it's saya, and fight a more psychological battle with the opponent. Or you could throw your sword to the ground to distract him, etc etc. Lots of stuff. No-hand fighting is generally considered the highest form of understanding of Japanese Fencing.
One of the main reasons the katana is supposed to be used with two hands is the cutting motion involved. The bottom hand is supposed to initiate a downward tugging motion to make cutting more effecient, hence the curved shape of the blade. If a katana was weilded with one hand, the cutting motion that I described would be extremely difficult to initiate, therefor making one-handed weilding of the katana extremely ineffecient. As for the Tachi, it was longer, and was mostly used on horseback.
Samurai sand blasting No bloody good if not fighting on the beach! I'm afraid no self respecting samurai would dream of defacing his sword (soul) in this manner. When the clay is applied to the blade prior to tempering, slightly thicker bands called "ashi" are applied at oblique angles to the cutting edge. This results in alternate thin bands of harder and softer steele being formed along the cutting edge to minimize chipping. Japanese swords are made for killing not gardening. As to the use of tsuba, dave has covered that one pretty well.
Gotta throw my 2 cents in. I'm a student of ancient/medieval weaponry of all types and you guys seem to have some misconceptions about european weaponry. The standard length of a japanese Katana's blade was between 27.5 and 29 inches. The standard length of a European broadsword blade was 30 inches. Not much of a difference. The primary difference in the swords was that the blade on a katana tended to be razor sharp, it was a cutting weapon. The blade on a broadsword was like a butter knife. A broadsword was used for hacking, smashing through an armored opponent or battering aside unarmored foot troops. The Longsword on the other hand was much longer than both of those weapons, coming in at about 38 inches for the blade. And even at that length it was rare for a Longsword to weigh more than 4 or 5 lbs. Most came in around 3 1/2. Both the broadsword, and longsword were commonly used as two handed weapons. Even when wearing a shield the blade was swung with both hands. The most common one handed swords of the era were rapiers and scimitars. Kintanon
Ok first off you are wrong about "broadswords" being dull as a butter knife. Even when used against armored foes a siginificant portion of the blade would be sharp. Dull blades dont cut flesh very well. ANd if you wanted to use a weapon to smash or batter use a war hammer or a pollaxe. Also what period are you tlaking about when you say that scimitars and rapier wer the most common one handed swords? Rapiers didnt come into existance until the early 1600s and scimitars refer to Middle eastern swords.
