Likes Likes:  0
Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 92

Thread: A question for Karl Friday about swordsmanship.

  1. #76
    Dan Harden Guest

    Default

    Earl Writes

    Anyway, something occurred to me: it seems to me that the definition of sharp should be considered in a relative context. Let us assume, as is likely, that European weapons were never as sharp, in an absolute sense, as Japanese ones. However, there are many European period illustrations showing people using swords to cleave helms and skulls and lop off limbs. Even allowing for poetic license, I think that it is safe to assume that there is some truth to these illustrations and that swords had edges that could cut things.

    For example, in the late 14th century, a battle took place at Visby on the island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea. (I think its Gotland, anyway. Can't remember if it's Danish or Swedish, though). The dead were hastily buried in mass graves, some still in their armor. The excavation of these graves gave researchers much insight into the armor and weapons of the period.

    One thing they found was a preponderance of bladed-weapon wounds in the lower legs and at the junction of the neck and shoulder, indicating that these were favorite targets. Some bodies had one or both of their legs entirely lopped off, perhaps by two-handed swords (could have been glaives, who knows).

    Anyway, a blade is as sharp/strong as what it is up against. A European weapon may not be able to keep its edge against a harder blade (Japanese, Viking, Wootz, or other) but would probably have been servicable against a weapon with similar limitations; that is, within its context, and against the weapons and armor it was designed to face, it would have been "sharp".
    ***********************
    This is actually an interesting topic Earl.
    The European weapons were not routinely differentially tempered. There are no recorded methods that they used to do this that I am aware of, nor did the steel they used exhibit any sort variance in carbon between the edge and the body. This would obfuscate the contention of a differential tempering process.

    1. If we presume this was true in the majority of cases, then at what point did the ultimate yield of the weapon , and it's limitations, dictate technique? And..............

    2. Was the quality of the weapon a trade off for the avaliable technological limitations? Or, did the techniques drive the designers to "keep up," as was the supposed recorded case of the Japanese Ken?<

    3. Another topic is the discussion of edge geometry. A distinction I appear to be the only one talking about. People seem to talk about Blade geometry (a function of balance and a contributory factor in ultimate yield) but have not discussed the types of edge geometry as a design parameter and indicator of intended use.

    I find the whole discussion rather intriguing.
    Did
    Form (techniques)
    follow function (functional limitaion of the steels used)

    We have probably put everyone but us to sleep with all of this

    Dan

    [Edited by Dan Harden on 01-17-2001 at 10:28 PM]

  2. #77
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Colo Spgs, CO USA
    Posts
    377
    Likes (received)
    2

    Default

    I'm still awake Dan, it's been an informative thread. I haven't participated in this discussion much simply because edge geometry, blade steels and such are not really my areas of expertise. I'll defer to those of you who know what you're talking about.

    As far as whether form follows function or vice versa doesn't it go both ways to some extent? I mean certain techniques obviously developed as solutions to the limitations of the tools being used, but there are also cases where the tools determined the techniques, or the tools rather were developed as solutions that would facilitate certain technical advantages. Two examples of the latter might be the kuda yari of Owari Kan-ryu, and the longer tsuka's favored by some kenjutsu styles.

    Brently Keen

  3. #78
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Warwick,RI
    Posts
    421
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by Dan Harden






    We have probably put everyone but us to sleep with all of this

    Dan

    Definitely not! The sword forum continues to be a source of some of the most interesting and substantial discussion. Please keep going!
    Krzysztof M. Mathews
    http://www.firstgearterritories.com

    Every place around the world it seemed the same
    Can't hear the rhythm for the drums
    Everybody wants to look the other way
    When something wicked this way comes

    "Jeremiah Blues, Part 1"
    Sting-The Soul Cages

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois
    Posts
    1,114
    Likes (received)
    0

    Lightbulb

    Dear Ben:

    Frankly, I am really not very concerned with whether you resent my comments or not. I am not in the habit of providing either a vitae or a bib with my posts, nor citations for each declarative statement I make. Apparently you have chosen to examine Japanese culture from only one side of the Sea of Japan. As I say, your position and welcome to it. Given my apparent poverty of information, and your apparent investment in being "proved" right or wrong, perhaps you would be better served taking up your intellectual joust with someone who is so inclined. You may consider this my final word on the subject.

    Best Wishes,
    Bruce W Sims
    http://www.midwesthapkido.com
    Bruce W Sims
    www.midwesthapkido.com

  5. #80
    ben johanson Guest

    Default

    Bruce,

    And here is my final word...

    You obviously had no intention of discussing this issue from the getgo, because as soon as you encountered a strong argument against your views you folded and started attacking me instead of continuing the discussion. And since you seem to have no interest in actually reading my posts and understanding the point I'm trying to convey, I'll only say one last thing: e-budo is a discussion forum. If you have no desire to discuss a topic, then DON'T BRING IT UP!

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Palo Alto, Ca, USA
    Posts
    1,324
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    Dan:

    I am still wide awake, Dan. Give us all you've got on edge geometries, their relationship to available sword materials and forging methods and how you think the whole mix dictated technique. I know that swordsmanship is supposed to be "spiritual", but when it comes to cutting something, you gotta have science, even if it comes from practical experience and not the lab.
    Earl Hartman

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois
    Posts
    1,114
    Likes (received)
    0

    Lightbulb Lets try this again....

    "...Sorry, Folks. I need to back up to the sword/spear thing...."

    About two pages back I asked after those comments regarding the role of spears relative sword use and would still like to pursue this. The spear tips exhumed in Japan were uniformly iron as produced in Korea but it doesn't seem that anyone has pursued the metalurgy on this. Is this just a case of the sword bumping the spear out of the limelight? :-) I also remember citing a book on AIkido and Chinese weapons during an excellent discussion that started with commentary on stainless steel swords (I still have the copy I ran off- great material) but I don't know that anyone responded to that either.

    I also am intrigued by the references to blunt trauma in battle reports. As many of you are aware use of stone swords and knives are well recorded in Korean history and I don't think this was a function of their razor edges. (What occurs to me is the repeated patterns in which battle implements for inflicting blunt trauma seem to be the weapon of choice for cultures in which the taking of hostages exceeded the need to kill an opponent out-right, but thats another issue.) Referencing that form-after-function comment made earlier, I wouldn't mind hearing opinions on at what point in development cleaving a head or severing a leg exceeds simply bursting the skull or fracturing a femur.

    Where I am taking this is that there is also the matter of armour as well and early reports indicate that emigres to Japan (c 500 AD) wore "iron armour" which leaves me wondering how European development went to metal plate and Japanese armour the other direction. As far as I can see the developement of the sword simply went from a dull club to a steel razor in both cultures, yes?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce W Sims
    http://www.midwesthapkido.com
    Bruce W Sims
    www.midwesthapkido.com

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    161
    Likes (received)
    4

    Default Re: Lets try this again....

    Originally posted by glad2bhere

    Where I am taking this is that there is also the matter of armour as well and early reports indicate that emigres to Japan (c 500 AD) wore "iron armour" which leaves me wondering how European development went to metal plate and Japanese armour the other direction. As far as I can see the developement of the sword simply went from a dull club to a steel razor in both cultures, yes?
    The earliest armors introduced into Japan (the keiko, or kakeyoroi that are believed to be the direct ancestor of the samurai's oyoroi) were lamellar and were *probably* composed of mostly iron lamellae--I say "probably" because we know about the earliest of these armors mostly from haniwa figurines, rather than actual surviving samples. But some soldiers of the kofun (tomb) period used a plate armor cuirass, called a tanko or mijikayoroi, that is believed to be a native development. Tanko were made of either leather or iron. Later samurai armors were made up of combinations of iron and leather lamallae.

    The reason why the Japanese never developed plate armor is most likely that they simply didn't need it. Plate armor was reintroduced into medieval Europe as an improvement on chain mail (which among other things was vulnerable to arrows and crossbow bolts). But plate would have offered the Japanese very little--if any--improvement over the lamellar designs they had been using since prehistoric times. In fact, there are a lot of advantages to lamellar armor over plate, including the better strength-to-weight ratio and ease of repair of the lamellar type.

    On the issue of sword sharpness: Kondo Yoshikazu, who is probably the leading authority on weapons history in Japan today, is quite adament that the razor sharpness of Japanese swords is a modern development adopted for swords kept for display as art objects. Swords meant for actual combat, he maintains, were never kept keenly sharp, because that kind of sharpening was of little practical value, made the edge prone to breaking and wore the sword out too fast. (We used to say the same thing about ski edges back when I used to do that kind of work: racers would often file their edges razor sharp, but that resulted in the need to re-sharpen them after almost every use, and wore the skis out very quickly; when we sharpened skis for regular recreational use, we never filed them past a 90 degree angle.)
    Karl Friday
    Dept. of History
    University of Georgia
    Athens, GA 30602

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Palo Alto, Ca, USA
    Posts
    1,324
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    Dr. Friday:

    Your comments about the fact that actual combat swords were not kept "razor sharp" as many assume, since this would render the edge too delicate for actual use seem to me to have a direct bearing on the subject of a thread I started, "Edge To Edge - Yes or No?". As a practitioner of Kashima Shin Ryu, I would greatly appreciate your views on this subject.
    Earl Hartman

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois
    Posts
    1,114
    Likes (received)
    0

    Lightbulb Ok, now how about we flip the coin over....

    Dear Mr. Friday:

    Eveything you say makes perfect sense when bumping the use of the sword against (no pun intended) the development of of the Japanese armour. Now moving back towards the use of the spear rather than the sword as the mainstay of battle. Can you see anything there that would have disposed the Japanese towards the kind of armour they developed rather than stay with whatever came across from the continent. The best I can come up with is the simple lack of sufficient quantities of iron to support continued use or manufacture, but that seems a bit too simplistic.

    Thanks for your time,

    Bruce
    Bruce W Sims
    www.midwesthapkido.com

  11. #86
    Dan Harden Guest

    Default

    Gentlemen

    Been mucking through the archives for a friend as I said. Found this beauty

    Dan

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    8
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Hello everyone!

    I know this is a very old thread, but it has very good content and has been put up as "sticky", albeit I think it's a little dated. Therefore I thought it would be good that some issues that were not considered here would be clarified. I don't know if these are already in other topics but as this is "sticky" I think they should be here too.

    As I said this is quite an old thread, so it is possible that Mr. Harden has already changed his opinions as I think some of them are dated, all respect to his knowledge on everything on the subject.

    I got the impression that Mr. Harden has a stereotype of european swords as having thick blade geometry to support the "dull" and "soft" edge. The thing is that blade geometry varied drastically during the middleages. There were a lot of very flat geometries designed for cutting flesh and light armor (leather, canvas) and thicker geometries to support the blade when thrusting through heavier armour (ie. maille). And everything between. The thicker geometries started becoming more popular when the thrust was favored to go through maille, although flatter geometries survived parallel to them. The shape of the blade also varied greatly, a good overview can be seen here:

    http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_properties.html

    I do believe Mr. Harden is fully aware of these points.

    The next thing is the sharpness issue. And this is where we disagree. I think that blade geometry is far more important than the actual sharpness of the edge when regarding cutting ability. This is of course not true with really dull blades (ie .5mm edge diameter). And this leads to the fact that maintaining razor sharpness with extreme hardness is not that necesseary. And I think that 45-55 HRC is quite enough for a sword. Heck, some cheapo woodcarving knives fare quite well being soft (yeah, you have to re-sharpen more often), so why not swords which oppose soft flesh (and okay, some quite hard bone). Yes, I understand that knives and swords have totally different characteristic needs, but you get the point.

    This is coming from a total armchair sword enthusiast, although I do some western sword arts.

    PS. Euro swords _can_ cut and you can even cut with an axe with a proper blade with proper technique.

  13. #88
    Michael Powell Guest

    Wink Boshido & Samuri

    [FONT=Palatino Linotype][B][I][SIZE=2]
    The traditional Japanese man of war was a mounted archer and from the start though he wore a Tachi Sword it had in fact been considered a backup weapon. The problem was that this proved none too effective against the many Chinese and Korean invasions which sent the Nihonji back to the drawing board. The result was Boshido, the way of flower viewing.

    The Japanese realized that they were smaller in stature, and disproportionately near-sighted, their inclination to be individualist made regimentation difficult and and their want of isolation made them slow er in technocracy.

    These points are the hallmarks of Boshido. Instead of immediately engaging an invader they would wait to see how the enemy deployed and focus on ciphering a weakness. They would attack at night, and take advantage on their tight net living quarters to creat mazes , wells and gated or fenced in housing and tiney alley-ways. E>go positions were smaller numbers were more practical and knowledge of the location was critical to mustering or excaping. Women learned Naginata which could be used for small scale crowd control sense women bind well and cooperate better. All of these factors made the long sword a heavenly gift and a source of national pride.

    These same factors played their own part in the civil wars because in order to take posession of towns and villages they had to be cleared and checked which is primarily the work of the swordsmen.

    The misconception on this subject is the notion that Samuri is necessarily synonimus with warrior, when in fact samuri is related to samui or servent This includes postmen, road and bridge engineers, sanation workers and the usual lot of municipal workers and castle attendants.

    I mean to suggest that many great swordsman were not Samuri at all. Many were So Hei and Mu So: Radical Monks and Buddhist Activist who often clashed with local lords and even the shoguns.

    As for the Romantic era of the sword: this didn't occure until the two fold effect of Unification< and the new style Katana. The former lead to many attempted coups, raids on revolutionaries, intrigues and power plays and the masses of diseffected Ronin who often became indifferent to life and death shouting Devine Retrobution at the slightest offenceand again there were many wanna be bogeisha:the comparative to the american gunslinger trying to make a quick name for himself. The Katana which was not popular until the late 1500s was more comfortable to wear and evolved many new tricks to drawing an essential for the hired assaign and so essential for those intent to bring them to justice.

    One thing that time has not eraced is that swordsmanship is not a path in itself but even in the early Chu'an period or even Hindii and Buddhist fatherlands the sworh is known as part of a true path to enlightenment, hence theclassic argument jujitsu or Do?

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    6,227
    Likes (received)
    118

    Default

    Is it April Fools Day already? If not, then I don't understand the purpose of the above post.

    There are so many incorrect statements, and racist and sexist comments, that I can't even begin to express my contempt for the post. (And don't even get me started on the grammar and spelling.)

  15. #90
    Michael Powell Guest

    Angry Karl Friday Question

    [B][I]
    I have been trying to post this for two days and somehow have been blocked!

    What most of you have missed is a full history of Bushido. The origional Japanese man of war was a Mounted Archer who did in fact carry a Tachi-To as a backup but the successful invasions by the Chinese and Koreans forced them to rethink the whole idea of warfare and deployment.

    The theory went that Japanese men were inclined to be individualistic and hence regimentatio and formation drills were considered useless. they were more inclined to be nearsighted and so as in many movies they began to prefer night fighting. Smaller and even per man lighter in weight, infighting with a long sword of superior quality became natural,and this could be enhanced by the semi-gorrila approach of fighting within the confines of tight-net villages and maze-like mansions with wells,bridges, gates and fences that could easily loose the unfamiliar.

    This was all based on Boshido which comes from the idea of allowing the enemy to land and deploy and merely observe as if Flower Viewing, hence Boshido. Having observed they could then probe true weaknesses without having to compete in set peice battles unawear of what war machines they might be confronted with. Hence the first heyday of the longsword.

    During their Civil War Era, while the Longsword cannot be said to have ruled the feild, there was still the problem of clearing Villages, Castles and Mansionsand here again the Longsword ruled , espically sense resistance often continued untill it was clear that the Lord had been killed or committed seppaku.

    The Romantic heyday of the sword came after unification and hence had little to do with the Battlefeild. Unification led to Samuri Pink Slips and strife for the disaffectioned. It also led the Katana & to many intrigues, attempted coupes, revenge murders, top dog duels for prestigue and armed social advocates, many who were Buddhist Priests and Monks.

    On the latter point, note also that many martial arts schools were associated with monistaries and temples. This is all the more to be noted because the sword is considered part of a true path to Enlightenment throughout Asia and coupled with the Pen or Brush in Japan. Ad classic Literature and Philosophy and you have the true gentleman.

    Also East or West the noble duel is with swords because attack and defence are equal, height or weight, even relative vision is not an issue. The marriage of mind, body and spirit usually rule. And again the classic question Do or Jitsu, Buddhist and Toaist way or path or is it an aesthetic art.

    The other point to note here is that Samuri is a relatively modern term derived from the word for servant. Many swordsmen were not municipal and other government employees. They range from Kabuki-Mono and Bo-geisha to So Hei & Mu So.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. A sword grip question
    By Jerry Johnson in forum Sword Arts
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 13th October 2002, 15:26
  2. Question about some videos
    By Kevin73 in forum Aikido
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 4th June 2001, 03:42
  3. Built for swordsmanship?
    By Andy Mayer in forum Sword Arts
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 22nd December 2000, 17:50
  4. Question on Modern Methods
    By Keith Frederick in forum Fumio Manaka- Jissen Kobudo Jinenkan
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 5th December 2000, 14:34

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •