Foil versus katana?

[danl999]

I fell in love with the zatoichi movie and TV series, and bought a replica of the straight katana he uses. I tried to get some info on using it in the iaido forum, and found what you'd expect, just a bunch of anger that I wanted to know how to use it, but wasn't interested in japanese martial arts philosophy. I actually got kicked off.

I had much better luck in the medieval forum, they have all kinds of advice on what a sword can and can't do, but I can't ask too many questions there, I'll wear them out. I'll be happy if they give me advice on how to swing the sword so that it can cut paper and candles, and maybe wood.

So if anyone here has the time, I'm curious about different swords, and which one is "better". I'm not really interested in fighting, but I would like to know the truth about which swords would actually prevail in a fight. I'm also curious about what a french foil can do, can you cut candles in half, paper in the air, and so on, like in old movies? I understand it's dangerous, I'm just asking what it can do. And in that respect, it's probably less dangerous to cut things with a resilient foil than with a hard sword?

I'm thinking, a fencing master would probably stand just as good of a chance as the best japanese sword master, in a real fight. Maybe it's even an advantage. I remember from studying kali that sometimes a lot of little cuts is coinsidered a goal, since the person would not be able to fight after a while. I can't see how a katana user could stop someone from nicking their arms and legs over and over again, without being able to get close enough to do anything about it.

Any opinions on one versus the other? I know it must be an old heated argument, but I never heard an intelligent discussion of it.

Also, what about heavy medieval swords? Wouldn't a foil pretty much be so fast that the heavier sword wouldn't stand a chance in a one on one match?

Why are there still different types of swords, other than history? For instance, no one makes transistor radios anymore, they're all VLSI. Computers don't use relays for logic anymore, it would be silly. Why didn't the best sword emerge over time and become the standard? Looking on the web, I saw there were even variations on the foil, some thicker, some wire thin. Why so many?

I still like the katana I bought, I'm just curious about the whole thing.

[Schiavona]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but a foil really isn't a real weapon. It never was. Foils were developed as training tools for court, or small, swords and later for dueling swords (epees). [flames on!] Foils are very much like shinai. The Japanese swords were all "battle swords", while European fencing weapons came from civil or dueling swords. It is really better to try to compare katanas with Medieval European swords or later broadswords and this really isn't the forum for that!

[WhipLash]

i dunno abt the sword u have, but the jap art of iaido, which uses the curved katana, has basically 4 katas, or foundation movements. the draw, the cut, the blood wiping, and the reshealth. all moves are based on these 4 katas. there are proper techniques and alot of mental prep involved before a disciple can even hold a sword, so your "short-cut" mentality probably offended them. after all almost everything is tradition and culture to them. there is no way u can learn all this without getting a master to teach u.

as for the ol foil vs katana question, i think the foil would be very fast, but the katana can cut the foil into half! no way to decide which is "better"

[JackSparrow]

Originally Posted by danl999

So if anyone here has the time, I'm curious about different swords, and which one is "better". I'm not really interested in fighting, but I would like to know the truth about which swords would actually prevail in a fight. I'm also curious about what a french foil can do, can you cut candles in half, paper in the air, and so on, like in old movies? I understand it's dangerous, I'm just asking what it can do. And in that respect, it's probably less dangerous to cut things with a resilient foil than with a hard sword?

You're not going to cut anything with a foil. With foil you use the point to thrust. Slashing is more the domain of Sabre, but still don't expect to be cutting too many candles in half (why you would want to is beyond me). To be frank with you, you can't learn to use any weapon off a forum. You need to find yourself a teacher or coach. From my limited knowledge (practically non-existent), of the katanna, they start you of with a boken (wooden sword), untill they are sure you're not going to kill yourself and then you graduate on to the real thing. If you don't have the patience for that, then you probably shouldn't be using one anyway.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by danl999

(I)f anyone here has the time, I'm curious about different swords, and which one is "better". ... Any opinions on one versus the other? I know it must be an old heated argument, but I never heard an intelligent discussion of it.

Heck of a topic for your intro to the boards here. Well-written and intelligent, so you get points for that. Otherwise I'd assume the classic "Which Weapon Is Better" angle is nothing more than standard trolling.

I'm still not sure it's not. I've known some very creative trolls ...

[Victor]

Originally Posted by WhipLash

i dunno abt the sword u have, but the jap art of iaido ...

A reminder about your choice of shorthand: "Jap" is offensive. Don't use it, no matter how innocently you intend its use.

[WhipLash]

serious? i always thought that jap is short form of japanese... like america is short for united states of america? i'll be careful...thanks!

[Victor]

Seriously.

[Rabid Monk]

This is an interesting thread.
The consensus seems to be that if you want to learn a sword, a master is the way to go.
I fully agree. Coaches/masters/whatevers can correct your form and provide structured practices to help you work on areasthat are weak.
But just wanting to learn the sword without learning the underlying credos is a poor way to go. In effect, these credos are the weapon. It's use and applications all derive from the culture and beliefs that underly it.

As for your question about why so many swords:
The sabre is a descendant of the cutlass, modified to suit the purposes of the sport of fencing. (ie. not kill the competitors).
Epee is descended from the small sword (dueling weapon), which descended from the rapier.
Foil (the best weapon, but I'm biased) started out as a training tool for the small sword, but has evolved into it's own right. The skill learned in foil cover the basics of all fencing sword, and can readily be transferred. This is why most clubs start beginners with foils.

P.S. Katana would destroy someone with a fencig sword. Even the broadswords of the day didn't have much chance against a well-handled katana. Much to their dismay, Europpean knights who encountered samurai fount that the katana had little difficulty in cutting through a broadsword.

[Inquartata]

Take the foil by the foible of the blade and try to bean the katana user with the guard. That's about the only chance you'd stand against him. Better still, throw the foil at him and run away.

Same with a ( fencing ) sabre. An epee with a sharpened point might be a bit different, if you could surprise the opponent with a lunge. As I understand it classical kenjutsu does not cope well with fast, linear point attacks from a weapon which can disengage quickly.

After you wade through all of the arguments, it usually comes down to which swordsman is more skilled with his chosen arm ( given a useful kind of sword, which a foil is not ). Assuming equal skill, it then comes down to luck and/or endurance. IMO if there were really a sword superior by virtue of its design or style of use to all others, it would have been adopted by all warriors and armies who ever encountered it, and we would not even have this "which would win" question to discuss....

[CvilleFencer]

The short answer is that no one sword is completely superior to the other. They are all tools designed to do a job. Just as their are different wrenches in the toolbox their are different swords. The rapier (epee) is arguable one of the best swords ever designed for killing and unarmored opponent in a one on one situation since it gives you economy of motion, extreme lethality (the thrust is much more deadly that the slash for the amount of force you must use and the exposure to counterattack) and protection from attack.

The Katana is a battle sword designed to cut through armor of different types. It was also a bit of a secondary weapon at the time of war. Bows and polearms (tachi & naginata) were far more common on the battlefield but the katana was a badge of rank and the mark of a Japanese knight. It was only in a time of hundreds of years of peace that a lot of the mythos, philosophy and sword schools that have made the katana and samurai famous came about. The fun part is that they never developed a new sword, even though they were only doing drills and fighting unarmored people at the point.

Historically from what little bit we know, it seems that every samurai who picked a fight with a Portuguese sailor using rapier and dagger got his *** handed to him, but since most of these guys were not battlefield experienced warriors and the sailors were it is no real surprise. It is kind of like a guy who has never been in a fight in his life but has studied martial arts at the local stripmall throwing down with a combat veteran using the SCARS system. The other guy will look better even as he is getting his legs broken, eyes gouged out and throat crushed. He would probably also be ahead on points since everything the SCARS fighter is doing to him is "against the rules" of the sport that martial arts guy is judging things buy.

In a more modern context, the sports derived from the respective martial arts of European renaissance and Japanese swordsmanship, Fencing and Kendo have met a few times just in an attempt to settle his question. Points wise the fencer wins almost every time. Of course shortly after he scored his point the kendoka whacks him in the head.

[CvilleFencer]

Originally Posted by Rabid Monk

This is an interesting thread.
P.S. Katana would destroy someone with a fencig sword. Even the broadswords of the day didn't have much chance against a well-handled katana. Much to their dismay, Europpean knights who encountered samurai fount that the katana had little difficulty in cutting through a broadsword.

Yeah in what historical contect? Your favorite anime cartoon? European knights never encountered samurai on that battlefield except in the SCA and that hardly count.

[jm_f]

Japanese martial arts are all about instilling discipline and learning philosophy that's why in Japan, young people prefer to just play western sports as a hobby instead of their martial arts. And if you go to a dojo in Japan, you're more likely to find students that are from America/Europe rather than local Japanese. This is why you won't get anything about using a katana in a real fight from them.

You're correct that a foil would be so fast compared to the heavier medieval swords. When guns became widespread the heavy armor was rendered obsolete. This lead to the heavy swords also becoming obsolete, being replaced by the rapier. Along with the rapier, it's unique method of using it also came into prominence and became what we know now as fencing. This is based in piercing the vital organs of the opponent to quickly end the fight.

There wasn't a standard size/width for the rapier. This is why you'll find varying sizes of it. It usually depends on the wielder on how he wanted it to be, though there were times when governments tried to impose a standard length.

As said the fencing swords were never used in real war but just in duels. This is because as I've already said they came about when guns were already around, so in real battles guns were used and the sword was more of a secondary weapon.

On the other hand, the Japanese katana was used for war. But battles with swords in medieval Japan was with swordsmen breaking out of formation and finding someone on the opposing side to duel with. Complete with servants to carry the heads of defeated foes as trophies.

The katana was the result of centuries of evolution of the sword. They started with straight blades similar to Imperial Chinese. The curve came about to help improve the slashing, similar to the use of a belly part of the blade in a modern knife.

The secret with the katana's effectiveness was that cutting with it is done with the slash. This allows the the part of the blade in contact with the target to be always moving, similar to a sawing motion. You can try this on a piece of meat, try cutting by placing the balde above and pushing down. Then try cutting by running the blade on its whole length against the meat. On a really sharp knife there would be a big difference on how fast the meat gets cut. You might say "so what sabers were also used by slashing how come they're not as famous as katanas?". Well, the difference is that European blades were heftier and not as sharp, this is because they expected enemies in armor as opposed to the Japanese who usually just were robes. Also, because the katana was made with cutting in mind it's actually a lot more fragile than what you see in movies.

I don't think there's ever been anyone to try to pit a fencing sword against a katana so no comments about this. I'm of the opinion that they'll both get killed.

Just noticed you mentioned Kali. There's an old picture of one of the old masters when he was just 17 I believe. In the picture he was holding a fencing blade that looked like a saber and on his other hand a knife. I can't help but wonder how fighting with that would look like, Kali by nature already eschews a speed oriented fighting style. Using a light fencing blade as opposed to the more traditional (and heavy bolo/machete) would increase the speed even more. Btw, I'm talking about Floro Villabrille.

[jm_f]

Originally Posted by JackSparrow

You're not going to cut anything with a foil. With foil you use the point to thrust. Slashing is more the domain of Sabre, but still don't expect to be cutting too many candles in half (why you would want to is beyond me). To be frank with you, you can't learn to use any weapon off a forum. You need to find yourself a teacher or coach. From my limited knowledge (practically non-existent), of the katanna, they start you of with a boken (wooden sword), untill they are sure you're not going to kill yourself and then you graduate on to the real thing. If you don't have the patience for that, then you probably shouldn't be using one anyway.

But if I were to end up in a fight, I wouldn't hesitate to use a foil in a slashing motion. At the speed it's going, it's gonna make deep bruises and hurt bad. It actually reminds me of a sjambok, a cattle prod in Africa that became adopted as a weapon.

[Inquartata]

The measure of a weapon in a fight, though, is not whether or not it "hurts" but whether it disables the opponent---ends the fight, in other words. No whipping with a foil is going to do that. If anything, it is only likely to make the opponent angrier and escalate things. And he's probably not just going to stand there and let you do it...

You will still be better off running if the opponent is better armed.

[jdzik]

As has been mentioned by others, swords are designed for use in certain contexts. The best sword for a foot soldier going into battle against armored opponents is not going to be the best sword for a cavalry soldier charging at the infantry, for a dandy to wear on his belt for self defense in dark alleys, or for a weekend athlete who enjoys fencing but doesn't really want to hurt anyone. You need different types of swords for those different types of activities, and that's where the variation across the years came about.

As to the perpetual "which is the best sword" argument: it will ultimately come down to which sword is held by the best swordsman. And no, I don't believe there's such a thing as "equal skill," so that dodge won't work.

And the Katana was not the battlefield weapon of choice for a Samurai. That would be a naginata, a Japanese polearm that is basically a katana blade on the end of a bamboo shaft. Just like the best battlefield weapon for a European battlefield isn't going to be a sword, it's going to be a nice long pike. Distance helps a lot.

I've seen a person with only rudimentary training with Japanese weapons defeat his teacher when it was naginata against katana. (Or the training versions of both weapons - I've never seen a serious fight with real steel!) Sometimes, size does matter.

Joe

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by jdzik

I don't believe there's such a thing as "equal skill,"

I'm not so sure of this. Are you familiar with the story behind the Faulkner tale which became the movie "The Duellists"? Those two were pretty equally matched. Otherwise one of them would have been killed eventually. And certainly we seem to see a lot of fencing bouts that go to 14-14, and world rankings in which the same 2 or 3 people are constantly trading off for #1...

And the Katana was not the battlefield weapon of choice for a Samurai. That would be a naginata,

You took the words out of my mouth: though I'd have said "yari".

In fact, originally the defining weapon of the samurai was the bow. ( And later on, guns came to rule the battlefield just as in Europe, making the sword every bit as "secondary" there as for any European lancer, dragoon or infantryman. At that point, certainly during the Edo period, the katana was almost as much a weapon for civilian wear only as was the rapier in Europe. )

[Gav]

[Sigh]

Y'know there is a little button that says "Search" on it. Do a search. This topic has been covered before - a few times. And before we get onto it so has (choose your Fencing weapon Foil, Epee, Sabre and there precedents) against (Sword Type other).

Kudos to the thread started on his intelligent wording.

:

[Rabid Monk]

Originally Posted by CvilleFencer

Yeah in what historical contect? Your favorite anime cartoon? European knights never encountered samurai on that battlefield except in the SCA and that hardly count.

They didn't?
Damn, I thought they did.
My mistake then.
P.s. anime? I don't watch anime. Or television. Just an FYI.

[jBirch]

To clear up some inaccuracies:

There is no such thing as a "straight katana". It is either a Tachi (from the earlier period, came down from China) or, more likely a ninjato (a straight edged blade with a chisel point and a proper saya. Larger then a wakizashi and shorter then a katana).

The favoured weapon of the samurai was the bow. Remember, Samurai were Cavalry first, infantry second. After that, came the yari (the Naginata was for girls) then the daito, *THEN* the daito (katana) & shoto (wakizashi). Kind of like the modern artillery then machine gun then rifle then carbine then pistol.

The reason that a katana needs to be used with a cut and not a chop is that the really good blades (and hence the technique that everyone aspired to use) were made from Wortz (or Damascas or pattern welded or folded) metal that interleaved hard and soft metals together. This didn't trap "air" or anything like it. What it did was cause the softer metal to wear faster then the harder metal leaving a microscopic saw tooth edge (a serrated edge). The microstructure also absorbed more energy on impact and so could take more of a beating in combat.

Samurai wore armour and katanas were designed to go through it. A Spanish longsword is almost identical in performance (and manufacture) to a Japanese Katana. In fact, there are stories of Japense officers during the second world war chopping off barrells of machine guns using their swords.

The curve was a result of the heating/cooling process of the metals. Not primarily a deliberate design feature, though it turned out to be a handy coincidence.

Guns weren't seriously used until the end of the 19th century when Perry forced the gates open. Prior to that, they used Arquebuses and massed infantry. One shot, then a good charge would cut them down. With the introduction of the musket, cannon and the rifle, things changed.

Portugese sailors (with cutlasses and no/little armour) pretty much decimated samurai they were put against in brawls. In fact, they were more interested in the cultural customs (especially the Geisha) then some outmoded (and ineffective) knights.

Hope this helps.

James.