OP
Nikolas P.
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #21
I would like to apologize in advance for steering this thread off-topic, but I have to defend my style, don't I?
I would not be, since I know a few swordsmen who practice European styles. It's true that a longer weapon provides more reach however, it is also inherently slower than a shorter weapon.
No offense intended, but that's an ignorant claim. The design of the katana was constantly evolving there was no absolute constant in metallurgical composition, length, shape, proportions, or any other trait. All you have to do to confirm this is examine one sword each from the Sengoku, Tokugawa, and Meiji periods.
My point was that it's pointless to compare the two, since neither was designed to combat the other.
Complementary skills of jiujutsu?? What are you on about? As the saying goes, "please get off my side, you're making it look bad."
(EDITED to correct my horrible grammar.)
The Pinata said:1.) Go try fighting with a weapon with more reach. Tall people have an even greater advantage with this. The Europeans and Japanese used different techniques in handling their blades, and neither was a slow technique. One would be surprised if they realized just how swift most knights were.
I would not be, since I know a few swordsmen who practice European styles. It's true that a longer weapon provides more reach however, it is also inherently slower than a shorter weapon.
The Pinata said:2.)The Katana after a certain point almost stopped changing completely. Not because it was a perfect design, but because their tradition told them to.
No offense intended, but that's an ignorant claim. The design of the katana was constantly evolving there was no absolute constant in metallurgical composition, length, shape, proportions, or any other trait. All you have to do to confirm this is examine one sword each from the Sengoku, Tokugawa, and Meiji periods.
The Pinata said:3.)You're final claim is that the plate armor wasn't native to Japan. Neither was the Katana native to Europe. It remains that in a fight between a Samurai and a Knight, the Knight would have a lot more advantages.
My point was that it's pointless to compare the two, since neither was designed to combat the other.
yentao said:Katana was faster and effecient to use the complimentary skills of jujitsu with it and its history of greatness will prove it why period. Shorter the blade the faster it wields and draw would you disagree? japanese made balance of being flexible and durable sword of Musamune will prove its quality up to now. Knightswords? I've seen one in museums rusting. The spanish was defeated by coconut knives or Lehe by unarmored natives who knows arnis.
Complementary skills of jiujutsu?? What are you on about? As the saying goes, "please get off my side, you're making it look bad."
(EDITED to correct my horrible grammar.)