If all discussions about Longswords and Katanas were like this one, we'd be a lot closer to the romanticised ideals of Knights and Samurai that won us all over as wide eyed children and made us come to apprechiate these weapons in the first place.
It wouldnt be the internet if stupid people weren't allowed to have a voice. Also the problem with weebs and nerds is that for people who seemingly love rpgs they can't seem to grasp the fact that some swords are used for one purpose and other swords for other purposes. You would use an axe to do a spear's job after all. The katana is amazing against what it was intended to fight but shit against things that it was NOT intended to fight.
@@bensweeney5878 I prefer long swords. You know like... swords that are long, designed to be used with two hands, used as a symbol of your caste and the trust placed in you by a superior. A sidegrade to a military long weapon or a ranged weapon. Something people associate with armed martial arts. You know, long swords. Wait...
When England knighted a pirate, chivarly died in England. See my series proving that the British Empire was NOT the biggest. Idiots count the last grain of sand in Australia but say the Pacific Ocean (Spanish lake) doesn't count. Ridiculous.
The katana has it's mysticism and iconic status because of how it was used in the edo period and what it represented during that time. After the battle of Sekigahara, Japan's long period of warring samurai clans came largely to an end, and large scale warfare became more and more rare as peace (or, well, peace relative to what had been the situation for the last 200 years until that point anyway) became the norm. As I assume many viewers of historical youtubers like Skallagrim will know, before firearms formed the bulk of an army, most soldiers would have been armed with either spears, bows (or early firearms) as their primary weapon. These were the backbones of large armies, not swords. Swords were primarily sidearms, or weapons for fighting in confined spaces, like urban environments or indoors. The samurai were more commonly depicted with bow on horseback, or with polearms prior to the edo period. During the peacetime of the edo period, when samurai fought, it was often on a much smaller scale to what had been before. Duels were somewhat common too, and the samurai wouldn't carry his polearm around to go about his day, he would always have his swords though. The katana gained a status during this time similar to the six guns of the old west which were used in a similar circumstance. Stories of lawmen battling it out with outlaw gunmen in the streets with their sixguns are iconic, and revolvers like the colt single action army gained a reputation, as did notable figures of the period, like Billy the Kid or Wild Bill Hickock (or to give an example from my country; Ned Kelly). The katana was the Japanese version of the sixgun, and the edo period was very different from the American frontier, but the culture of tense familial relations between powerful samurai factions led to small and often personal conflicts, many of these became iconic stories, and the katana was always their weapon of choice. It was this history and this period of use that gave the katana its iconic and mystified status, and it's also why the saber doesn't have the same status despite being a very similar weapon in many regards. Like how six guns became associated with the individual "hero" characters from stories of the old west, so did the katana become associated with the individuals who wielded them, the katana became an integral and personal part of their stories.
add to this the deliberate glorification of an idealized version of bushido promoted during Japan's expansionist imperial ambitions in the early 20th C.
I'm wondering if everything doesn't just come from status. In the edo period, the katana was the weapon Samuraï would defend their honor and title with, and when you know how much hierarchy is important in Japanese society (and even more back then), it would make sense that the "small people" would recognize it as particular, or even mystical. In other words, they were not defending their title against armed foes but against the pebble that could rebel if it was not emphasized enough who had the power and status. It's slightly the same in Europe (and in China too actually). We know footmen were mostly armed with polearms, but the sword, as a sign of nobility, is the one that remained in peoples minds. Now why is the katana so much iconic even nowadays in Japan, and not in China or Europe ? Well that's history again : Japan remained very closed to outside influence... it could be as simple as that. In China, Mao made sure the past was burried and forgotten, and Europe has gone through so many small but continuous transformations it simply has less passion for nostalgic sentiment than Japan. And for the civil war saber, again : the saber was not the weapon of nobility. I mean of course it was the weapon of higher ranked military personnel, but the status difference is nothing compared to how feudal nobility was compared to feudal peasantry (basically demi-god vs. less-than-human).
The most interesting thing about both your videos is that they showcase the purpose of each swords design philosophy. I don't personally think one *can* be better than the other because each was made in a different environment for a specific purpose. Medieval swords were made to be versatile, deal with thicker armor by bashing or stabbing through gaps. Fights were potentially longer, so the guard helps a lot as well. Katanas were made with very little of that in mind. Japan had significantly less iron and thus armor was rarely even comparable, so a sword that cuts flesh extremely well is better than an all-rounder.
Medieval longswords were also used often in duels with both opponents wearing little or no armor. Some techniques were changed up for this, others were still utilized. It doesn't mean they weren't just as deadly to armored vs unarmored, either technique or blade geometry.
@@brendanmatthews8236duels made up 0.0000000001% of medieval combat, so it was of utmost importance, that all medieval weapons were also good enough in a duel.
A good comparison with the cultural legacy of the katana is probably the English late-medieval longbow. They're both decent weapons that played an important role in the arms&armour of their period, but have become mythologised to the point that there are an obscene amount of over exaggerations about both, and attitudes to them are (for some people) closely tied to feelings of superiority of one culture above others. This creates a backlash of people who are so fed up with the myths - and the mythmakers - that they then go to far and needlessly denigrate the weapons. All this makes anything approaching a rational discussion of the strengths, weaknesses, and historical impact of those weapons all but impossible.
Yeah, honestly. Don't get me wrong, english longbows are impressive and fearsome weapons. As an archer myself, I can't even fathom how people would shoot certain longbows up to 100lbs for an entire battle. However, that doesn't mean it is superior to other bows outright. In the end it depends on circumstance and the skill of the user and a dose of luck. As with all weapons
@@canadious6933 I was thinking more of the longbow vs crossbow and longbow vs armour arguments that people have on the internet. Compared to other hand bows, the yew longbow is laughably primitive. It is Neolithic (if not Mesolithic) technology compared to the recurve and/or composite bows that existed in the early iron age: 1500 years before the Hundred Years War. Not to even bring Turkic or Chinese bows into the comparison. And yet, in the hands of skilled archer who was part of a professional, combined-force army, the longbow was remarkably effective. Just goes to show that, before the early modern period, technology had a minor impact on the battlefield compared to the social and human part of war. But that's a whole other debate!
@@QuantumHistorian I'm an archer myself (previouosly modern recurve, now composite bow) and i 100% agree. Comparing a longbow to a composite bow is like comparing a club to an intricately designed and balanced mace. Sure both can do the same job, but there is so much more technology benefiting and optimizing the composite bow. The only true advantage of a longbow is it being much cheaper and easier to produce, especially in masses. Composite bows are simply lighter/smaller, thus much easier to handle (and carry), and physically more efficient, thus basically shooting the arrows faster and with more energy, at the same drawweight. Longbows tend to be overhyped imo, since composite bows never really needed those absurd drawweigths (thinking of 160+ lbs), and a 100 lbs composite bow doesnt sound as frightening as 160 lbs, even if their performance is very roughly the same (i'm not exaclty sure how much of a difference there is for two bows having the same performance, but i'd imagine the 100 lbs composite bow being able to accomplish the same tasks than a 160 lbs longbow, even if the power might be slightly lower)
@QuantumHistorian The thing about the katana is that it permeates pop-culture. The longbow, not so much. The longbow vs crossbow arguments, for example, are mostly done by hobbyists of historical warfare, arms and armor. Katana, on the other hand, is familiar and popular with plenty of people who have little to no knowledge or interest in history.
@@QuantumHistorian Spot on, the main advantage for yew longbows is that it only takes a relatively skilled intermediate bowyer a few hours to turn a seasoned stave into a bow while complex composite recurve horn bows take even a very skilled bowyer days at best when accounting for glue drying and also the extra time it takes to make every part fit and pair perfectly in order for the glue to set. And material costs etc etc etc you could go on forever.
The sabre also earned it's cult status, however, not in the Western but rather in the Eastern European regions. In Hungary, even when rapiers started to become popular in the West, the sabre stayed as the most popular sword to carry. Most of the better known hungarian dueling techniques developed with a sabre in mind.
cult status yes, but I am not aware of any "magical sabers" in fiction or myth that e.g. could stop bullets etc. In other words, a saber is a piece of metal that can be used to great effect in the hands of a skilled fencer, whereas by contrast the katana "is part of the soul of the samurai / must draw blood before being resheathed /..." What I find funny is that in turn, through that kind of storytelling, historical persons become mystical figures (e.g. hanzo hattori transforms from a tokugawa retainer to a mystical swordsmith etc.)
@@doyouwanttogivemelekiss3097 That depends on the cultural background. In hungarian folktales, there are magical swords, and most of the time they are represented as sabers. But yeah, in Europe, we treated weapons differently. Not mystical objects but rather tools for killing/self defense.
My theory as to why the "katanas can cut through anything" comes from how they're depicted in fiction. When a person cuts through metal like it's butter in a story fro the west, it's because they have a supersword. When they do it in anime and manga it's because they're an expert swordsman. This makes the idea that *any* katana can perform supernatural feats of its wielded by an expert, while European swords need magic to do that.
I always blamed a good chunk of it on the movie Highlander. Many of the myths I hear mocking weebs and katanas are straight out of that film (cuts through anything, folded 1000s of times, etc.)
@@01taran The thing with Highlander is that Katana is a special case, since it was made a long time before Katana as we know it were first created. It's very lightly implied in the film, but nobody would be remiss to think that specific sword also has some magical properties.
I believe that the skill of the warrior and the determination.of that warrior is more important than the weapons they use. The Chinese 29th Big Chopping Sword. Brigade armed with C96 Mauser pistols and the Chinese Big Chopping Sword was more than.a match.for the Imperial Japanese Army. The mythical Katana often were broken by the big, simple Chinese Sword. During the age of the sword in Europe and the Middle East ,there were schools of fighting with all edged weapons. During this period , the swordsman of Europe and the Middle East were equal to the swordsman of Japan. All swords tend to take second place to spears and pikes.
I feel like many of the legends and tales of "superior uber swords that cut through anything" comes from late bronze age/early iron age times, where someone with an iron sword completely obliterates the blades of their enemies. In some cases even meteorite steel that is quite literally a "gift from the gods sent from the heavens" And then obviously the ninja craze of the 70s, where everything japanese was exotic and superior.
I think that one reason why the saber doesn't have the same mystique than older medieval weapons such as the longsword and the katana is simply because by the 18th century, sabers were often mass produced tools with standardised or near standardised patterns which left much less room for putting the artisan own mark in its making. So, when you wield a saber, you feel like fighting with a fairly generic sword for its time while a longsword or katana feels like fighting with that unique sword made specifically for you by a talented swordsmith with his own style and personal touch. That helps creating a legendary status around the weapon.
I'd say it's also related to the wielders. Knights and samurai cut far more romantic/dramatic figures than, say, American Union soldiers or British sailors. Even musketeers (if you'll pardon me from bringing rapiers and their ilk into the discussion), while romanticized, don't exude nearly the same sense of awe as the first two. So among sword enthusiasts you're obviously going to get a hearty appreciation for the saber, when it comes to the average person they're not gonna have anything "badass" to tie the sword to. The closest would be pirates, but they're more associated with cutlasses or hanger swords (are hanger swords a type of saber? I've been told they're not, but I'm ignorant on the subject), plus they're more about being rogues and rapscallions than they are about being badasses. The funny thing being that during the height of their power samurai didn't favor the use of the katana, and I'm pretty sure knights didn't favor the use of the long sword. I know samurai originally preferred using bows from horseback, and once they ran out of arrows would pull out the tachi (a precursor to the katana). But the samurai most people are familiar with (the one of the 16th century) would have preferred the yari (lance-esque spear) both when on foot and on horseback. The katana would have only been pulled out when the yari was no longer an option (when battle got too close quarters, or if they lost their yari). Things like naginata (glaives), nodachi (very long katana, up to six feet) or even tetsubo (big-ass club/mace) would have been used before the katana. It just wasn't a very effective weapon against armored opponents. The katana became more associated with the samurai during the 250 year Edo period (starting at the beginning of the 17th century), as it was a time of peace and samurai rarely had need to put on armor, and carrying a spear around would have been impractical. As peace time isn't exactly great for warriors, and because laws prevented samurai from pursuing other careers (peace or not, losing all of your warriors wouldn't be good for their government), the Bushido code was created to give them a sense of purpose, and their swords were considered a representation of their warrior spirit. The reality is most samurai of the time were glorified clerks and administrators, and most of them weren't actually very good at fighting. They were *expected* to train in martial arts, but reality is often far divorced from the ideal. Incidentally, if anybody is interested in a film about that time period of the samurai I highly recommend "Twilight Samurai". A very good look into the realities of the time period. It has some incredible action sequences, but it's not an action film. I like to call it the "Real Last Samurai". Anyways, I've completely lost the thread of the conversation XD To anyone that read this all, I appreciate your indulging me :)
There is one American blade that could be considered iconic in that regard and that would be the Bowie Knife which was more of an Artisan made knife built for fighting and cutting. It was a very popular knife used here in the South during The War Between The States and was a very feared weapon of the field. I'd argue that they are as Iconic as sabers but they are just widely forgotten about.
@@dogwoodhillbilly That's a good one, you're definitely on point here. Though I reckon the Bowie knife has a little more recognition than the saber due to legends like Davey Crockett and his ilk.
I think for the US the Bowie knife is probably the closest thing to a cultural blade. It got it's start rather early in the pioneer era and stayed strong through the Civil War and into the Western era. It was frequently paired then with the guns that have been and still are heavily romanticized, that being the Colt Army and the Winchester Model 1894. Those guns were critical to the expansion of the US and therefore made a massive mark on the culture. Heh, revolvers in general stayed in the mind of the public well into the 70's as tons of police departments primarily used revolvers then. The next gun and knife combo was the Ka-Bar and the 1911, WWII had quite the impact on life, thought I think the Colt Single Action Army still has more cultural sway with all the westerns that were and are made. Oh, and General Patton. Still carried a Colt Single Action Army and was considered to have fought the last gunfighter battle with said Colt. So when it comes to cultural blades, we don't really have the shiny cool ones. Some cutlasses, sabres, and the like but nothing with a legend attached. They're mostly functional or just don't seem too special. So you either are attracted to the mystical blade of Japan or one of the many European creations with my own interest being in the claymore. It sounded quite cool, but not I've got a proper Bowie knife and a revolver so I ended up going to Old West/Civil War. Still might look into a cutlass, US Navy still has one as part of the dress uniform of the CPOs. Anyway, random geek out moment over. Cool video, I liked it. Got me to have a bit of fun with this goofy comment and think about things. Have a great day.
In Hollywood the swashbuckler films romanticized swords (usually small sword based fencing foils) in films like the assorted Robin Hood, Three Musketeers and pirate films over the years. In fairness they usually set these films in historical European cultures rather than American but Zorro was set in California.
@@BakaEngel If you disregard certain cultural appropriation issues, sure. I think there's a native american culture or two that have a better claim to tomahawks being their "cultural blade".
So I think, in the US, a saber is general reserved for military people, like a marine with high honors. But the US seems to have more fascination with its knives than its swords. (I.e the Bowie knife and ka-bar)
I was gonna comment something similar. I still have a cavalry saber from an old family member. But I’ve seen and had so many knives. My wife has her Bowie “cooking knife” that she uses for everything.
I just figured the revolver took the place of a sword in US mythos, with the way cowboys are portrayed and how they more or less take the place of samurai or knights in the US.
In the US, fighting knives and pistols are probably the best parallel to what a katana was in Edo period Japan; the sidearm you'd have on hand when it hits the fan and what saves your life.
If America had a cultural equivalent to the katana, I'd say it's the Colt Single-Action Army rather than a sword. They're both symbolic of a long-gone time seen as core to their respective cultures that people are nostalgic for, and instantly evoke the image. For Japan, it's the pre-Meiji era. For America, it's the wild frontier. And both of them have their properties exaggerated in pop culture in similar ways. "Katanas can slice through buildings", "The Colt can hit a fly's wings without kiIIing it", etc. etc.
A lot of people who grew up with anime love Katanas, and that's totally cool, but from my experience, I grew up with Peter Jackson's LOTR, and that really got me into longswords, in the same sense.
I got into European swords because I grew up with The Legend of Zelda; it got me interested in swords and medieval fantasy and all that stuff. Perhaps there's a bit of irony there in that I grew up with a piece of media made in Japan that got me interested in European swords rather than katanas.
Ironic because a lot of older animes actually prominently featured western styled fantasy swords, armor and apparel. Katanas were kinda only a ninja anime thing and didn't really start sparking in popularity until the later 2000s. Not to mention that before the 90s, it was more a cyberpunk thing with anime so swords weren't that popular back then.
@@GoodwillWright Not really, Western-styled fantasy swords only really became popular in anime with the introduction of Dungeons & Dragons to Japan in the mid-80s which gave rise to Japanese fantasy novels like Record of Lodoss War and Japanese fantasy games like Dragon Quest (via Wizardry). There were obviously also other influences like Conan the Barbarian given the prominence of barbarian warriors and bikini armor in early Japanese fantasy but it all happened at the same time during the mid-80s and led to a common early Japanese fantasy culture. Iconic samurai anime like Dororo to Hyakkimaru or even iconic samurai in modern times like Goemon Ishikawa XIII from Lupin III predate this development and so does iconic ninja anime like Ninja Hattori-kun. Meanwhile, the fantasy genre only really became prominent in anime in the 90s at which point you also have popular samurai anime like Rurouni Kenshin. If anything, fantasy anime only became really popular in the late 2000s with early isekai series like Zero no Tsukaima and the subsequent isekai boom. I don't think cyberpunk was that popular before the 90s with the exception of classics like Akira. Mecha anime was obviously the most popular genre and I guess some have European-inspired swords like the Mazinger Blade but that's obviously more sci-fi than fantasy and then you also have mecha anime with samurai-inspired designs like the RX-78-2 Gundam with its beam sabers (though that's arguably just lightsabers).
It's because we've romanticized firearms first and foremost. Bowie knives being a key exception. What do people talk about in the revolutionary war? The "American Rifleman", and how they were superior to the English Brown Bess muskets. Samuel Colt invented the first effective percussion revolvers. Eventually making the Single Action Army, which is recognizable by nearly anyone with the slightest knowledge of firearms. Heck, WWII the Garand - the best self loading rifle to start the war. Granted it got eclipsed by the STG44's larger mag cap of intermediate rounds. The M16/M4/AR-15 and AR-18 platforms are basically the starting point for nearly every major rifle that's not an AK variant. Yes there are exceptions to the rule, but as time has gone on, more rifles are basically moving to one of the two platforms as a point. All of that to say, the vast majority of conflict that has happened on American soil (with European participants), has happened after the invention of the firearms. Bladed weapons were always a backup or secondary item. Bowie knives got extra credit, because they are a useful survival/combat knife on the frontier. Big enough to baton wood, or break down a deer. But small enough to use for kitchen needs. Really an American Messer.
@@SlavicCelery This. Our culture was birthed in the era when every soldier had a rifle, and swords were reserved for cavalry and (some) officers, who both also used firearms as well. Guns are our swords, our spears. That said, in the country, folks love their knives. Doesn't even have to be a Bowie.
@@SlavicCelery I would even say specific guns are now romanticized in our culture. The Colt SAA, the Winchester 1873, the Kentucky Long Rifle, the 1911, the M1 Garand. These firearms have a status in American culture that is borderline mythology. Tales of heroic deeds on both the battlefield and the frontier. Then there is the mythology surrounding marksmen and gunslingers themselves. Where Japan has Miyamoto Musashi and the katana, America has James Butler "Wild Bill" Hickok and his Colt 1851 Navy revolvers. Europe has Johannes Liechtenauer and his medieval fencing techniques America has Jeff Cooper and The Modern Technique of the Pistol. Whether we in America like it or not, firearms, the skill of using them, and the people associated with all of that, are a part of this nation's culture and it really seems to have filled the same cultural void that swords did in other older cultures.
Something that gets overlooked all too often is the raw material people started with: In Europe, pattern welding was abandoned (except for decorative uses) once more and better iron ore deposits had become accessible and metallurgy had likewise improved, allowing to make larger pieces of steel with distinct characteristics in different parts. In Japan, they largely had to work with iron sands, which puts significant limitations on how to proceed. The katana certainly was a masterpiece: making a sword of that size from that type of raw material is exceptional. But that doesn't say anything about its qualities vis-a-vis other swords from other areas of the world.
the reason the katana is able to stand on equal ground to western swords is because of the design and how almost magical the forging process brought out the absolute best from the materials. the japanese managed to make swords of equal quality to that of the standard western sword with worse material. otherwise, you are right, it would not be much of a discussion
@@rosscoe3044 “of equal quality” is not accurate. The best Japanese alloys were inferior to even a typical European sword. The annealing and folding only helps to “shine a turd”. If the two swords clashed, the katana would look like aluminum foil afterwards, which many tests have shown. Against human flesh, yes both work. Saying equal quality is ridiculous.
@@FilmFlam-8008 and yet still many more tests were done that show the katana stands up perfectly well to western swords in terms of quality. also, for “cutting” people, the katana is better. they were swords with two different fighting styles in two different areas of the world. comparing them directly against one another is ludicrous, like was said in the video, it’s like comparing coke and pepsi. someone says this one tastes bad, someone says this one is healthier, another says this one is more sugar, etc. it’s never going to get anywhere, so just accept the conclusions from both videos and move along; that they were different but similar tools used in different parts of the world for slightly different things
@@rosscoe3044 nah, the highest quality katana is objectively worse than the highest quality longsword. The material is simply worse, you can apply the best manufacture process in the world and it still will be worse. The only "advantage" the katana has is better cutting power but that has nothing to do with the metal and everything to do with the shape (which also existed in Europe in the falchion or saber for example), also not really an advantage per se because you lose one edge, more like a sidegrade. If you tasked a very skilled European blacksmith to make you a sword in the shape of a katana but with European techniques and steel it would have been almost undoubtedly better than the Japanese one..
You bring up a key issue with Cerberusarm's discussion that I really appreciate: (1) The length of the swords. Not all longswords were 36" long, and not all "katana" were uchigatana. Throughout the history of Japan, katana varied in length - the preferred length shifted back and forth over hundreds of years. So an objective comparison of the weapons should have had both swords sporting the same blade length (within reason, let's say ~1in / 2.54cm). I love this response video; Skall, I feel like you prove your expertise and wisdom here.
When he talked about the length it also reminded me of romans. The short gladius was useless if not used with a shield. But with the ability to close in with a shield its far better to have a short, mobile and effective weapon over a long one. The Zulu had the same idea and made their shields larger and their spears shorter
@The Crazy Amateur Runner the weird thing is that, japan just did not had shields. They had some clunky wooden boards shields at some point, but they never developed there past that
@@affegpus4195 Those were mostly static shields, in a similar way to pavise or mantlet (or something in between). They did used shields in Yamato period, before change big changes in society, economy and military tactics. Yet, I found two illustrations depicting square bucklers being used in later periods i.pinimg.com/originals/32/86/b0/3286b0611a6486382fa701397acb287c.jpg i.pinimg.com/originals/52/ff/fc/52fffcbc2c7ea5ecaa3fe8354032a09f.jpg
@@affegpus4195 You can use biased adjectives like 'clunky' to discredit shields all you like, but most shields of the day are made of wood. Ironically, if they were made of metal, they weould be far more 'clunky'
The interesting thing is that the wide and straight blade of the gladius suggests a good cutting and bad stabbing sword, but the legions used it primarily for stabbing from shield walls.
@@affegpus4195 it's just simply not true that shields weren't used in Japan. In fact tate and tedate shields were used in Japan just as long and just as widely spread as in Europe. However samurai tended not to use them, being primarily horse archers, even so there was use of pistol and shield from horseback by samurai in the edo period. And these shields weren't just clunky wooden boards. They had quite a variety of shields, using wood, iron/steel and bamboo among other things.
Honestly, I like both weapons each having their use, like all weapons. But I’ll be blunt in saying that the one Skall is clearly flexing in the video is really cool too. Very simple, yet effective in what it’s designed to do, which is cut foes to ribbons. I really find the whole katana vs longsword argument to be silly and pointless, due to both being good swords with their own strengths.
Totally agreed. As Skall flat-out said, there's so many parameters it's ridiculous, and all they needed to change the reach gap was... a longer katana. I do wish the budget to mid-range European-style makers would bring their game up, to do the job properly. I don't feel that asking for a mid-range European sword that just does it right, simplistically is too much to ask. Either way, I wouldn't put a preference on either one. It's just an argument that doesn't need to exist. Debate, sure, but not argument. And why not share techniques, et cetera instead of just mindless argument?
"I've trained for years to overcome the reach disadvantage!" "While you've been doing that I've been training as well and am now a better all around fighter." "Well damn."
That sounds so much like a discussion on a GURPS character building: "I've bought up 'dealing with longer reach weapons' technique, so my character can more easily deal with opponents with longer weapons!" "DUDE you could have spent those points on raising your sword skill, it would both raise your hit chances and your defences!"
Yeah, that's a badass sword there. I still like the katana since that's what I trained with in Japan and it just 'feels' right to me, but the Messer is an awesome sword.
@@Laneous14 I mean honestly this whole debate can be summed up by that sword. A large knife is a large knife! At the end of the day, what do they do? They all cut things. Done. No knife that was made for practical purposes is bad at cutting/ doing its job, and neither is a large knife, or “grossmesser”/ sword.
@Laneous14 ... what's so terrific about facts? 2000 years ago the world was flat as a fact. Today it's spherical as a fact. Back then Osiris being the all-seeing mangod was a fact, today it's absolutely recognised as a myth [Fact.] Facts are about as certain as your feelings around them bro. Don't let them brainwash you!
@@DailyCorvid the belief that the earth was flat actually is much older than that. It was before the European city states existed when people were still largely nomadic that humans believed that en masse. It was the very early Greeks that sought to prove that the earth was not in fact flat and they did, easily. The Chinese also did the same thing. If I was to give the flat Earth a date as to when it was a common belief it would be before 2000 BC.
Excellent video Skal, one of your best ! This was masterfully put together with excellent commentary, respectful and insightful critique, great use of clips from previous videos, movie references/clips and historical references/photos that added value as well as enjoyment...you're a stella content maker ! Since watching Shogun (the Richard Chamberlain mini-series) at age 10 I've always had a love for all things Japanese...including ofc the katana :) Funnily enough I think it was watching your channel (and Shad's) that cured me of my "belief" that the Katana was "the greatest sword ever made" ;) and watching you two over the years talking about slashing vs. thrusting, armoured vs non-armoured, weight vs. maneuverability, single-edged vs double edged, the benefits of cross-guards, reach, technique etc. kinda forced me to re-evaluate things and give long swords (and other blades) their due. All that said, katanas are still amazing weapons and very cool...but so is your Kriegmesser 🙂👍 [Edited to correct spelling mistake]
i used to teach sword fighting back in the days for english civil war/medievil reanactors for over 15 yrs an i got to say you covered it really well and have to agree with you both. Both the swords and fighting styles have there own advantages and disadvantages. Is one better than the other no there just a different devlopment of the same thing. And neither can cut through concrete or steel girders like the films show us. My favorite Sword is a 42 inch cavalry swept hilt rapier for speed / length / weight/ and flexability it ticks all the boxes
Man, I love both of these swords with all of my nerdy heart, but I kind of want to see either of them compared to the Scottish claymore. It is my all-time favorite medieval/ancient weapon. Fun fact, it is also one of if not THE largest swords actually used in battle.
@@giggy7935 lol that's my point there so unrealistic yet reach is still massively important in more realistic fights it would matter even more cuase u can't just roll through attacks with a hammer bigger then u are
Heard something crazier than running into battle with a saber in the age of gunpowder, going into battle during WW2 carrying a Scottish broadsword longbow and at times playing the pipes.
As a German I wanna thank you for bringing up the "Kriegsmesser" (war knife). It's one of my favourite weapons that somehow rarely gets recognized because it always stands in the shodow of the more famous classical longsword. There are also "lange Messer" (long knives) that are fairly similar. Also, I appreciate your recognition of the various and advanced European fencing and sword fighting schools and styles. Sadly we Germans ourselves do a pretty bad job in conserving and promoting this cultural heritage (at least if you compare it to the Japanese people). And yeah, there are several mystical swords in European myths, like Gram (Balmung in the Nibelungen saga), the sword of Siegfried or Mimung the sword of the mystical blacksmith Wieland. Yet I think in Europe we never imagined these swords to have souls of their own like they did in Japan. They were merely really powerful tools that wielded some mystical power.
It's a good name because "Krieg" means war and if you go to war with one you're going to turn your opponent into a mess. ...Dangit. The joke works better with the Grossmesser because you can just say "It turns your opponent into a gross mess".
for the info in france the term for those messer is braquemard. wich for most people these days is just a slang word to talk about a gentleman sausage.
@@DailyCorvid yeah I've seen his videos. And hickok45 and demolition ranch and garand thumb and kentucky ballistics. I just really liked skall's unique style as well.
@@BaithNa guessing you don’t actually watch his show then? Tim is a raging centrist at this point, he’s got a ways to go before he’s a “hardcore republican”. Especially given his thoughts on fiscal policy.
@@BaithNa I moved from a super left wing state/ city to a super right wing state/ city and my quality of life improved immensely. I can no longer argue with the results. The modern day R build better communities.
This is my favorite Skal vid that he's put out in a while! Love the analysis of both blades, and could not agree more with the conclusion. User matters as much or more than the weapon
Sabres never gained the mysticism because they were just a sidearm, or decoration later... The musket that they carried along with the sabre was what gained the mysticism instead. America is gun culture; katanas didn't come until later as part of the Japanese culture trade. Remember, not only did we get katanas in Western culture - we also got Japanese cowboys.
your nation hasn't existed for long enough to have something directly comparable with the Japanese in mysticism, it's time and fable that create that mysticism. I see lots of people here saying the revolver was the American equivalent but samurai purchased from S&W and carried their revolvers quite a bit too
Technically true in that going around with a katana is more likely to get you into trouble for carrying a weapon than going around without any sword. But of course that's true of literally any sword.
I mean... NOW it is. But that's because it's archaic, and carrying a weapon gets you attention anywhere. Even in America you may get some looks if you're open carrying, even if it's something reasonable like a pistol. Funnily enough for most self defense, I'd probably want someone to have a melee weapon rather than something that can cause a bunch of collateral. But walking around with a big knife might actually be less socially acceptable than having a pistol. Our standards are silly.
@@turtlesaredifferentfromtor6745 I don't think i've ever seen anyone treating it like trash... All i see is over-glorification and near worship of it and the culture behind it. It's definitely the most overhyped sword and culture, entirely without equal. Although to be fair, nowadays it tends to be more "well at least it's not *worse* than a longsword, r-right guys...?" rather than outright praise for it, so maybe it's changing.
It's good to see someone not take this topic too seriously. Also someone who is in a relative position of authority on the topic to have a level and mature head. I applaud you sir! Nice Lessons in this video to apply to every aspect of life 😁.
I fought with a short Messer and Buckler against a relatively new person with a longsword recently. I managed to close and get hits a bunch of times, then I stopped and suggested that they try to thrust more whenever they had their point near me and to try to follow-up rather than stop after a single cut. It got *a lot* harder after that, and they landed a lot more on me than I did on them from then on. Reach advantage is big!
I like single edge short weapons because in modern situations it’s unlikely we will both have swords or have space to wield them. However I think learning fencing clearly adds skill to any martial artist toolbox.
6:21 The problem with sabers is nothing to do with the blades themselves, but the time period of their rise in popularity. Gun technology was improving and by the 1800s, swords just couldn't compete. They were still a symbol of status back in the day, but now not even that... If you ran into battle sword first, it would only be remarkable if you lived to tell the tale.
It's also important to remember that during the period in which american sabers saw development, america's national identity was rapidly shifting away from the classical colonial yankee identity to the more contemporary multicultural identity. in a world where cultures outside of the accepted norm are prioritized and idealized(sometimes even fetishized and demonized but that's another discussion) a classical european style saber holds a whole lot less value than lets say, a native american tomahawk. that's all conjecture of course, just figured i'd give my two cents.
The American saber is still actually a thing, but it is solely traditional and used for decorative purposes. I think it is important to note that only at the position of captain are you granted a saber as you are moving up rank (I may be wrong with that, but I am pretty sure it is captain), as such there are only so many made and was a symbol of rank rather than skill. Also they were not really used even when they were more viable, people carried them if they had to get into melee, but captains are not often on the front lines and duals were done with pistols rather than swords.
As an American, I'd say it depends upon when you grew up as to which sword was more romanticized. Sure, if you are younger you grew up with anime and hearing about the glory of the katana, but we older Americans (I'm in my early 50s) grew up with stories about Robin Hood, King Arthur, the Vikings, the Romans, etc., as well as LotR, Narnia, Conan, and so on that featured western swords, both real and fantastical, of various types. We'd all seen a "samurai" sword at one point or another, but they weren't nearly as familiar to us as western stuff.
There's too many videos on this godforsaken subject and at this point, it's not even about katanas vs longsword. It's just people talking about their feelings on the subject of katanas vs longswords, with some obligatory remarks about reach or some tatami cutting thrown in, all in service of then coming to no conclusion. Because this subject is radioactive enough that no one probably wants to take a risk of picking a side, just stay neutral every time.
Skall, I have been very critical of your reviews in the past, but this response video showed a different side of your ability to be objective and jovial. It genuinely made me see you in a different light and realize I have misjudged you. I recognize my error and offer sincere apologies. I am now a subscriber and looking forward to learning more about blades.
Good stuff. Weapons serve different tactical and strategic scenarios. They are similar, to the point that two of the same length would be nearly identical. When people have similar-enough equipment, victory is determined by skill level and battlefield flexibility. If I had to pick a difference out, it would be how katanas are designed more for maximum speed. That speaks to a “weapon matching a technique matching a tactic to accomplish a strategic objective”. The longsword seems more intentionally geared for flexibility for dealing with enemies in any kind of armor or general battlefield combat situation. But neither is better. Better depends on what people are trying to accomplish and how they plan to achieve that objective. Whatever weapon is most effective for a scenario is the best.
I have not tested these weapons with my hands so i only have visual information from the internet to learn from them. The first thing i see is that the european sword has long guards and a pommel which increases the possibility of parrying, as well as being more comfortable to thrust attacks. Katana is curved which makes it cut a little better, and since it does not have a pommel and long guards it is more agile (fast). Therefore, a claymore would be useful if you have no armor because it provides defensive sustain, problem is that in war the better you attack and/or the faster you are there are more chances that the enemy will be disabled and you will survive to avoid damage, in addition to that if you want to thrust, that's what pikes or spears are made for, a sword is an object whose sharp blade is long and is mainly designed to cut, not necessarily hit with the tip (except for rapier or fencing foil).So, katana is usually more famous than the european straight sword because it is more destructive. However the most devastating weapon in the world (sharp) is the axe.
I feel like the idea behind the katana was "How do we make a reliable weapon that does what it needs to *and* makes the noble samurai feel cool with nothing but crappy, low-grade iron". I think they succeeded well enough at that, otherwise why did the Japanese become so obsessed with them that they still carried them in WW2?
@@deth3021 Right. But making officer sabers didn't take the effort it did to make decent katanas, even in that time. Which made katanas much more valuable, at least in relative terms.
@@deth3021 My point was that while European officers also carried swords into WW2, the symbolic value of swords was much higher for the Japanese than for Europeans.
There's an account of a WW2 close quarters battle where a Japanese soldier split a Marine in two (vertically from the shoulder down) with his katana......clearly, they were effective swords in the right hands....even by WW2. And it's not really "obsession" but tradition. I'm a U.S. Marine veteran. That's like asking why Marines still are issued and trained on bayonets in modern times. You don't mess with tradition. Plus, there have been modern instances of actual bayonet charges still in Iraq and Afghanistan that won a firefight.
"European swords weren't romanticised in American movies" Speaking as an Englishman I have to disagree with him, I'm so sick of the amount of Robin Hood and King Arthur movies Hollywood pumps out every few years. The worst part is they always miss the actual point of those stories
My experience with both is limited, but I have always been more partial to the longsword in terms of aesthetic. I feel like the oversaturation of katanas in media growing up made the longsword stand out more when it would show up. Oddly enough given the original source, I kind of have Power Rangers to thank for that growing up, because more often than not any sword was more longsword-esque in appearance than katana like. That and Devil May Cry later on, Rebellion is just really cool looking. In my limited experience using them, I tend towards the longsword because I suck with swords that have a smaller guard.
I particularly like your comparison of cola to another soda like 7-up or mountain dew. This one works really well. They're both obviously sodas, but they seem very different. Until you realize that both cola and the 7-up contain similar citrus flavors, but are distinctly different in taste. I know a bit too deep for a silly comparison, but it works better than you'd think.
6:26 surprisingly Calvary sabers in the American civil war where often not sharp, basically dull. The Calvary was not often trained in their use and more often they would charge into battle with their pistols (six shot revolvers, for example the Colt muzzle-loaded cap & ball .44-caliber) or carbines.
I think it’s pretty limiting to say that a culture has to have ‘a sword’ as the defining edged weapon. The Nepalese have the Kukri, the Filipinos have the most versatile knife culture in history, and Americans have the Bowie knife. Native Americans had a multitude of knives, but they are most closely associated with the Tomahawk. It seems weird to claim that not having a defining cultural sword is weird.
I've always thought the katana and longsword have more in common with each other than they have differences. They really had similar purposes and strengths and weaknesses. The only real difference is the curve and the double edge. Otherwise they are basically the same weapon. Their fighting styles are even very similar.
And the rigidity, and the guard, and the length, even the hilt. So you know, practically everything that can be different between two swords, is different between a longsword and a katana.
@@lohto3 the length isn't, the variation in both already proves that in the video. The rigidity is also depending on which version of each you are referring to, there are much more rigid longswords. And yes, they have a different guard. If you think that they are that as different as two swords can be I would challenge you to find less similarities between a rapier and a dai-katana. If you actually think they are that different why did they perform the same function in their respective cultures?
Swords come in a lot of shapes, sizes and materials and are made for different uses. The longsword and katana is not an example of this. Compare them to the differences between a smallsword, odatchi, falx and khopesh. Longswords and katanas are pretty much the same sword. They have pretty much the same length of blade and handle which means similar reach and leverage. They have similar weight and balance. They are two handed but can be used in one hand, are made to cut and thrust, are hardened steel, are carried on the hip, are sidearms on the battlefield and they have minimal hand protection. The katana is barely curved. With a historically more common tsuba that is bigger than the ones on todays reproductions and considering that japanese people were a little smaller than europeans on average the katana is practically a kriegsmesser.
@@lohto3 You are judging the differences by largely aesthetic values. Instead look at how they were used. Most longsword techniques can be used effectively with a katana, and vice versa. Unlike a saber, which despite being a curved sword, used very different techniques to katanas or longswords.
Something that is often overlooked with modern reproductions... Back in the day Katana's were forged out of far inferior metal to medieval european counterparts. The japanese blacksmiths were not smelting the iron hot enough so were not getting proper steel. I also feel the longswords crossguard gives it a huge advantage.
idk who told you the japanese couldn’t ‘heat iron hot enough’ but that’s simply untrue. the island of japan, being an island, simply didn’t have much in the way of iron as a resource to begin with.
From what I heard, I think it was a chadiversity video, really not sure. The reason they folded the iron so many times was to remove imperfections and spread them evenly all along the blade. The katana's shape wasn't hammered in the sword. It was a consequence of the blade temper process that focused on the cutting side so the blade still had a soft spine that wouldn't snap.
@@OfficialVirilamis So considering steel is harder, and hardness matters, it is objectively a better weapon. Springsteel used for medieval swords was also more flexable makign for a far more durable weapon. Steel beets iron. Also all that folding of that imperfect iron... it makes a katana heavy. The very reason they had to layer it, fold it, sift through all the metal bits to looking for the different qualities of the metal and impurities in the metal is because... well their smelting techique was just imperfect. Modern replicas are made of steel which is well not allowing for an equal comparison in the least. And don't start on sharpness, european swords were razor sharps as well. Steel can be sharpened same as iron.
No one remember the noble warrior that stabbed a man to death at a safe distance with a pointy stick. I dare say movie makers such as Akira Kurosawa has a lot to do with katana popularity.
Durability is the only other factor that separates them, but that goes hand in hand with styles. If you’re generally more damage focused that means you intend to hit flesh in only a few strikes, so who cares if you can’t swing ‘as much.’
I think the thing is about pop culture is that the Katana manages to stay relevant in a modern context, most significantly in the cyberpunk genre. The longsword evokes a very European Medieval vibe, one that you can't really have outside of historical/ fantasy genres. You wouldn't bat an eyelid seeing a cybered up ninja with a trad-looking katana in the streets of neo-tokyo (insert favoured cyberpunk city here), but a longsword seems firmly lord of the rings or game of thrones, no matter which way you slice it.
It's honestly a fascinating phenomenon. Things like Blade Runner showed (from what I've heard) the fear of Japanese culture infiltrating American culture, which is how the Katana was piggybacked into cyberpunk. Now in the modern age, the Katana almost feels more fitting in cyberpunk than anything else, like in Cyberpunk 2077. But the longsword hasn't had a similar situation, so it's more like a representation of ancient history in modern stories, like a secret society that has existed for millennia using one, or Excalibur being brought back because it's needed like in Supernatural. It's very hard to apply the longsword to a non medieval setting, I can't imagine like any aesthetic it would fit in a modern or futuristic art style (besides maybe anime)
@@frazfrazfrazfraz I think it's because the longsword is something that is recognizable from our (The West's) past, while the katana has no such link. It also helps that katanas in Cyberpunk have been normalized over time. I suspect that if you were to put longswords in popular works of cyberpunk then over time they'd eventually reach similar levels of normalcy.
@@firewolfandrewb yeah thinking about it, I guess part of the problem is that longswords in modern stories are usually really basic and generic looking If there was a longsword that was embedded with technology like how some swords are embedded with jewels in stories, that would be sick as hell. Like imagine the carian knight sword from Elden Ring but instead it's like cyberpunk tech from Cyberpunk 2077, that could be awesome. I guess imagination can do a lot
Yes, I like both the Longsword and the Katana, since I am both a Viking (I say this lightly as we are not in the Viking times currently) and also am interested in Japan, you see. My interest in Japan started from watching Animes so I guess you could call me a Weeb in that respect, however I never believed that the Katana could cut through everything (I understood that this was for adding awesomeness). I liked Sutorenjira: Muko Hadan (Sword of the Stranger) in particular, thought that one was nice. So then where did my fascination for the Longsword come from? Well, after my father's father died and I was allowed to walk into his room because now that was my father's room respectfully, I think I was 15 years old at the time, and there was a Longsword on the wall that belonged to my father's father that had recently passed. You could say that it looked beautiful, shimmering from the sunlight of a rising sun that was reflecting from the wooden wall, so I asked my father if I could try the sword, and he said yeah just be careful because it had been there for a long time. So I was swinging the sword outside as a 15 year old, it was quite heavy for my skinny arms, but that is where my fascination for the Longsword began. Anyways, in my truthful opinion then I believe the Longsword can be stronger than the Katana if you are clashing swords. However you have to keep in mind that a skilled warrior will try to avoid damaging their own weapon (if you care for your weapon), and when you have that in mind then both swords are very serious beasts. If I had to choose one to use for my own protection in real life then I would go for the Longsword, however I can understand if you would choose a Katana as well as it is very nimble.
The thing about making a katana it's sacred. It's got its own set of of rituals and prayers. Where as with European weapons it's just another tool. So that probably only adds to the mystique and mysticism.
As a Welshwoman, Excalibur and Rhobymwn (Arthur's spear) have taken on an almost sacred status but we're not asking whether it's katana vs longsword. We're really asking Samurai vs Knight. I'd be interested in No-Dachi vs Claymore.
Hm, interesting... I think I'd be leaning toward the no-dachi there. It's typically lighter and more agile, yet still has plenty of mass for effective blocks / parries. The small guard is a bit of a disadvantage, but when using a two-handed sword the hands and forearms are exposed either way.
We do need to acknowledge that the "glorious nippon steel" meme is literally 20 years old now, and for *at least* the last 10, maybe 15 years, the "status quo" in the longsword vs katana conversation has been that long swords are better.
I'd say the most "iconic" American blade that I can think of off the top of my head other than the Civil War sabers is probably a blade that was made here in the South during the US Civil War and that would be the Bowie Knife. Bowie Knives were very feared in the war days and were more so made by actual artisans/blacksmiths of the time rather than being entirely mass produced, they were not given as a showpiece but an actual fighting blade. I think it's iconic, it's just mostly forgotten about.
@@sleepless9957 don't get me. The katana and longsword are good looking weapons but you gotta have room in order to swing the weapon. With a cutlass, you don't need much room and you have an easier to get closer to your opponent
my biggest gripe with this debate is that they compare a specific style of the sword to a nebulous term/family of swords. The Specific is the katana a sword from a single small island nation that had really ONE way of making the sword and that it can only be a katana if it is made that way while being compared to a family of swords from a continent with many countries with many different styles of making that kind of sword. A better comparison would be a katana vs. (insert particular sword from x place here).
You are right! An advantage is still there no matter how you compensate for it. People are also forgetting, your opponent is probably or did practice doing the same amount of compensation. Therefore like in Brave heart, you fight and win with your mind not brute strength
Imagine: an alive spear user walk around than see 2 ghost one with longsword other with katana argue that their weapon are better. Pretty hilarious if you ask me
Then one dude comes in with the zweihander and chops the spearhead off. My favorite swords are the Batard sword, the katana, the spanish rapeir, and the 9 ringed chinese sword that i forgot the nane of
one thing neither video touched on is how the swords perform vs the respective armour. being one of the major design considerations of a weapon is how it beats armour, I wonder how they compare, it seems a longsword being pointier would make it better for finding weak points in armour, and also the large cross guard for bashing someone in the head at close quarters, would seem to make the longsword better suited for fighting against plate armour or even mail? I don't know how the katana fares against plate armour, or traditional samurai armour?
Well, the katana _is_ a mystical, religious object in Japan. What impresses me about the entire Japanese sword culture is that it was a living, practical tradition for a couple of centuries after firearms started taking over the armed practices in the West. And the overall cool glamour of Japanese art and culture generally.
I do find it weird how much attention and in my opinion overrating there is of Japanese culture. In my circles there are maybe 5 people learning a different language and 4 are learning Japanese. There is way more fiction about Japanese Culture than for example Chinese culture, even though there is less to be found. People are also obsessed with Japanese food over other Asian cuisine. I mean everyone's favorite food is sushi yet its just rice and fish. Compare this to the amazingly spiced and flavored curry's and soups of the Asian cuisine and I just feel like most of it is fetishization of Japanese culture and or Japanophilia created by anime and the likes.
I don't think sabers have the same appeal for a great variety of reasons. main two are prolly it's the age of guns at that point, and also it's extremely unpopular in America rn to have anything remotely tied to colonialism. the cavalry Sabre is kinda a perfect symbol for western expansion to I'm not surprised it isn't very popular
Screw modern notions of colonialism. If it wasn't for colonialism, being it good or bad, all mixed race latinos wouldn't exist nowdays, we would never have been born. I owed my very own existance to Spanish colinialism and cultural interchange.
Worked a ren faire, used long swords , Falchions and others made by a good smith but his pride and joy was some Katana with obscene amount of folds in the metal. It weighed about a third more but he would demo it cutting cinderblocks or entire racks of flamberge and greatswords (He made a fortune making "Buster Swords" for FF7 fans 🤣) . Reproduction katanas are generally crap , even at 5k they don't even approach 1/5 the quality of a Masamune or Muramasa crafted blade . Few families in Japan have them and just holding one feels entirely different then modern ones (new ones are lighter , alot) .a proper comparison would be a short Nodachi vs longsword or shortsword or sabres vs katana . But both of u picked up a new sub , GREAT VID !!!! request for future vid , Axe comparisons , survival tool/chopper/axe tests and reviews , who made the best polearms , who had the WORST melee weapons in an era and finally, really bad weapons that someone used amazingly
One of the reasons why the katana is so mystified is the high significance in the Japanese culture and its deep foundations in art. The entire history of Japan in the understanding of the Japanese mythology is based around the katana. Also the katana is regarded much more an object of Art then the European sword was...especially in case of the Civil War Saber. While in Europe a sword was a weapon first and a piece of art second, the katana was a piece of art first and a weapon second. Also in Europe the "artpiece-status" of a sword mostly came from it being decorated and embalished with gold, engraving, etching and precious stones. The plain sword itself didn't have much artistic value without the decorations done, while in Japan the blade itself is understood as the work of art, and all the fittings/embellishments are only "dressing" the sword adiquatly while not being actually regarded as part of it. Further its important to mention that all the embellishment-techniques like engraving or gold-plating performed on European swords are all individual art-forms which are also used in other areas (f.e jewellery) which means that they are not quintessentially routed or connected to swordmaking itself. This as a result means that the processes which fulfill the purpose of transforming the plain "weapon-sword" into the embalished sword considered a gorgeous piece of art are in fact not even processes of swordmaking to begin with. So the art-status of a European sword doesn't arrise from swordmaking itself but rather from other crafts applied to the sword. In Japanese swords however the art-status of the sword solely arises from the swordmaking process. The cleanness and skill involved in the forging, the skill involved in the creation of the hamon and the overall understanding of the cultural significance and history of the katana expressed through the blade are considered the work of art. And I think this enormous appreciation for something that on the outside seems so plain and simple as a blade is what makes the katana so appreciated and mystified in western pop-culture. Also the fact that only to the trained and experienced eye the true beauty and artfullness of the katana is layed open adds to its legandary status. At the end I would like to mention that I actual like the longsword more than the katana, lol. They have their very own hidden beauty and cultural meaning which is not to be underestimated. I just tried to express my thoughts based on my very limited knowledge of the Japanese sword. Thanks for reading
The katana is more of a display of power (showcases your status as a samurai), and something to use when that poor farmer disrespected you (probably unintentionally). Its mystified because the samurai's status is presented by the swords, not because it was their main weapon. In reality, if you intend to use a longsword against a samurai, you'd be disappointed to find out that theres now a musket ball inside your torso.
both are equal in their own way,long swords are designed to be a jack of all trades weapon and is useful for everything while katanas were kinda specifically designed for cut and slash based warfare,its more specialized but really isnt that much better each were designed for a different war culture and stack up pretty well
@@erebusvonmori8050 It's probably because the long sword is associated with knights while the katana is associated with samurai. Images from the days where pretty much all single person weapons were muscle powered and the wielders of those weapons were the kings of the battlefield (in some cases, literally). Where these guys trained heavily in the use of said weapon. Historical accuracy as to what those warriors would actually use as their primary weapon on the battle aside, of course. It's the depiction in media that forms people's perception. The sabre, meanwhile, is associated with cavalry and officers (including naval ones) during the days of gunpowder. You think more of a guy waving his sword urging his men to charge, and then maybe getting to knock aside a bayonet before running its owner through.
@@Emrirwastakento be exact, op said „double edge because spare edge if blunted“, and the responder said „double edge because sword has to sides, so why not two edges“ Both seem to forget backhand slashes
When I 1st watched the video I thought of Tachi too(they were even twice the length of katanas) as katana are last in the line of Japanese swords dynasty.
I feel like the "we don't have a sword of our own" despite sabers existing is in part because those weapons came from Europe. Europe has millenia of martial history and swords gallore, from the Roman gladius ("the sword that conquered the world"), to the scottish claymore. Meanwhile sabers were widely used in Europe by the time of the american revolution and American sabers don't seem to have any notable distinctions from European ones. Added to that is that the USA never really existed in the time that there still was an air of mysticism surrounding warriors. Knights and samurai are both rooted in a pre-industrial era when warfare was an art, while the USA mostly got its thing going in an era where warfare became an industrialized, and therefor less magical-feeling practice. When you think of the samurai, it evokes this image (partially designed by propaganda) of the wandering swordsman with an unbendable will and an approach to life that stems from their martial training. When you think of a knight, many people will first think of the chivalrous knight errant or perhaps the Arthurian legends. When you think of a saber, you think of an officer in the napoleonic wars, or the American civil war. It's this mystified idea of the past that people in the USA seem to lack due to the nature and timeline of their nation. So, instead of being content with what they do have, they'll take something that's not theirs and call it their own to fill the void.
We didn't need the Saber to be our cultural sword... our cultural "sword" is the the Colt Peacemaker (or perhaps just guns in general). It occupies, in our history, the role that Longswords occupied to Western Europeans and the role that Katana occupied to the Japanese.
There were systems that stayed with Odachi even after the bans put in place by the Shogunate. Iirc, in one of the surviving ones, the preferred blade length for dealing with the sub 28” blades allowed by the Shogunate was ~ 36”.
Ah yes the most ubiquitous weapon of the samurai, the katana.. wait, no, the Yari was the most commonly used weapon. Oh well we'll look at the Longsword the most... what? Pike, billhooks, and broadspear were the most common. Well crap.😂😂😂 Love your stuff skall.
Wouldn't a Tachi be a better comparison? Closer time frame to the Longsword and more a battle sword than a Katana. On another train of thought I wonder how many Sabre vs Katan fights happened during WW2?
Sabre at one point was the thing that proper sword collectors really want and have an aura of mysticism surrounding them too. Western sabre were a real popular thing in the 60s and 70s with much of the spaghetti western doing shows about rapier combat like Zoro and what newcomers to the sword collecting world did not know the difference between an actual French Rapier vs a straight-edged sabre that's used by cavalrymen during the 1700s-1800s. However, that did not stop the trend. In fact at one point during the Meiji Restoration, they did kick out the Katanas for awhile after the Satsuma Rebellion and unlike previous Sakoku, the Japanese used the sabre system but instead of using western-style blade, they instead took the Japanese katana-style blade and married it to the sabre hilt while also narrowing the thick blade to a sabre blade thickness but retaining the making methods of the katanas and these new "katana sabres" were given to officers once they graduate from the military academy but those who have parents or grandparents who were ex-Samurai can still use their family katanas as their side piece. This was in fact issued to as deep as the 1920s before the whole "Bushido" system came back and the Army started rolling out the cheaply but still solidly made Gunto which are thicker than the Katana and less ornately made to tackle heavy combat better. Also, the Katana was actually made with that length in mind because they had long sabres before and felt the pinch of it during the Mongolian invasion attempt and had to alter. So when Kublai tried to invade Japan, the Samurais of the Kamakura period was still using long-ass blades which they called it the Tachi. It was quite long at about 80cm which for a blade is VERY long and when the Mongols came onto shore, they had their shorter Turko-Mongol Sabre and they could swing it more effectively and cut deeper with lesser strength needed due to the lack of extra momentum needed for the blade to sink into flesh. The Japanese were in fact struggling with their Tachi and soon, Samurais that did raids on Mongol ships soon felt that it was too cumbersome too and thus those who survived went back to shore, cut or snap off some length of their Tachi and created a shorter sword about the same length of the Turko-Mongol Sabre at approx 30-40cm and realized that the Mongols were right as it did not compromise anything and instead gave them extreme mobility, lighter weight and cuts better due to close to no waste of momentum. Thus even against a long sword, a Katana might not lose as the whole concept of it was to be made to forgo the long length and combat it back.
Despite the mythology, the allure towards Japanese swords is warranted. It aligns with the recognition that culturally Japan seeks in a way no other culture does to perfect each task. Professions are quasi spiritual in that way. And because the Shinto religion perceives spirit in all, even inanimate things, it renders Japanese swords/cooking knives/ baseball bats/vcr's/fucking rocks...way more interesting than anything created out of a system that values profit over integrity, value, or spirit.
I have an answer to this: 6:16 sabers are the chess kids, they're quiet and are very tactical yet wait for their opponent to strike, while longswords and katanas are like the two rival "gangs" in the schoolyard beefing over who is better when deep down some if not most share some opinions about each other.
Honestly though a full plate armoured knight with a bardeche or a halberd was the best thing you could have back then can take a lot of hits while being able to deliver powerful hits and has a huge range advantage with some close range help
the way i see it is that they are 2 different solutions to the same problem; we need a weapon that have some distance but is still "easy" to use in tight surroundings. and the solutions is based on how the areas of combat in the different society's was designed, and what materials was available and in what quantity's.
