"The Master" The History Channel - Japanese swordmaking
Julian Richards
"As we watch the process of Masahira forging and tempering his blade
we learn of some of the great Samurai heroes and legends? Miyamoto
Musashi, expert at fighting with two swords at once, who won his first
combat at 13 and claimed victory in over 60 duels; the tale of the 47
Ronin who chose death by their own swords to restore honour to their
murdered lord; and Akamatsu Mitsusuke, the ninja assassin of shogun
Yoshinori.
When completed we take our sword back to our Iaido Sensei, a seventh
dan expert swordsman, who will test for us its handling and
effectiveness. Impressed with the hand crafted and polished sword, he
will put the blade through its paces, pulling it from its scabbard and
rapidly slicing through a number of objects, demonstrating the awesome
sharpness and lethal power of the Katana.
Further to the practical sword making and martial art demonstrations
we will see some of the fabulous collections of ancient and modern
swords - many accorded a near mythical status - held both in Japan and
overseas."
What a cracking programme this was. There were some thoughts that
struck me regarding medieval European swordmaking from actually seeing
the Japanese masters at work.
We have discussed before how the Japanese swords have clay wrapped
over the false edge to facilitate edge hardening. I had speculated
that if European makers were edge hardening their blades then they
could not wrap over the edge as it had to be edge hardened too. The
previous explanations of the use of clay were incorrect. From them, I
got the impression that the clay was rather like play doh wrapped
around the blade. However the clay is very different and is more like
a paste and it is painted on with a brush. The patterns left from the
brush strokes were the signature of the individual maker. Some were
likened to clouds, others to flower petals. If that is the case then
the European sword maker would have no problem in using the same
technique as it would not require being supported by clay over the
false edge.
The dunking into the water was another thing. The swords were made
with a slight curve and when they entered the water, the differential
stresses in the metal produced the final curve. The skill of the maker
is in putting the sword in the water at the right speed and angle. For
a European making a straight sword, any sort of bending is unwanted. I
suppose that having two rapidly cooling edges prevented this but
perhaps a vertical insertion may have been necessary, perhaps?
The Japanese swords were polished by a specialist polisher rather than
the sword maker using techniques that were finicky to the extreme.
This produced an extremely polished blade that showed off the edge
hardening. The samurai had to take great care so that the blade did
not tarnish. Weren't European blades treated in an organic acid
(urine?)? That would make them not as shiny but more resilient to the
European climate.
My final point is about the whole process. The process was very
ritualised and purely hand made. Would not the European sword maker
have used water power for hammers, grinding and polishing?
If you go to the "History Channel" site and search for Masamune, you
can get to a small piece of video from the programme.
--
Julian Richards
medieval "at" richardsuk.f9.co.uk
Usenet is how from the comfort of your own living room, you can converse
with people that you would never want in your house.
THIS MESSAGE WAS POSTED FROM SOC.HISTORY.MEDIEVAL
Martin Reboul
"Julian Richards" <s...@sig.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fpi4q0laf2c6r2ltu...@4ax.com...
It's all very impressive, and I was astonished to see the quality and finish on
5 - 600 year old Japanese blades in the V&A and the BM recently (why couldn't
Triumph develop such technology I grumbled...)
The secret of a sword (or axe) is to have a flexible core and a hard edge, and
the key to this is in the tempering. The metallurgy and chemistry behind it is
enormously complex, ask Paul (sorry!), but essentially there are so many
variables, it became a matter of trial and error, ancient wisdom and empirical
(often secret) knowledge.
The ritual is part of the tradition of manufacturing a good blade - it is easy
to see why there are so many legends of 'magic swords' and the mystery and
secrecy that surrounds the manufacture of such things. Take for example 'pattern
welded' swords. The recipe sounds magical... take several pieces of iron from
different sources, beat them out together, twist them together, forge and hammer
weld them - using the elements of fire, air, water and earth.
Then there is the tempering, sharpening and polishing....
Now and then something exceptional turns up, whether through luck, experience or
careful design is a matter of conjecture... a blade that won't break before
others, a real beauty. Over time, the legend and the method become a recipe,
known only to few and jealously guarded.... and so it goes on.
The fact is, nice though those Samuri blades are, they wouldn't have been any
use aganst quality European plate armour from the late 14th/15/16th C, as they
were slashing and slicing weapons. No matter how carefully made and wielded,
steel cannot cut good steel, and that's it. It can crack over-tempered steel, or
low grade iron, and slice through bamboo armour and cloth to the bone, but no
more.
The heat treatments and dowsing in water, brine or blood are another part of the
legend of steel... very, very hard to do evenly and properly without
electrically heated cyanide salt baths, but they could do it. I have enormous
respect for the skill that medieval metal workers and smiths had, having tried
to duplicate their efforts myself for years, with far more sophisticated
equipment than they had.
One thing I alway wondered abot was why axe medieval axe blades almost always
had a 'decorative' hole in the middle of them - surely a weakpont and source of
potential stress fractures I thought.... until I started making them. If there
isn't one, the blade warps when heated to cherry red. In fact it somehow stress
relieves it, and also makes a nice whisling sound to impress people when swung
as a bonus.... more empirical learning!
Cheers
Martin.
David J. Starr
Weren't European blades treated in an organic acid
> (urine?)? That would make them not as shiny but more resilient to the
> European climate.
>
As late as the US civil war, soldiers would use sandpaper and emery
to take the issue "browning" off their rifles, leaving barrel and
fastenings bright and shiny for the show of it. Would not the same urge
to carry a showy weapon cause medieval smiths and/or soldiers to polish
sword blades to a high luster?
The Boston museum of Fine Arts has a few katana's on display. The
steel looks fine, smooth and lusterous, with a wicked edge. Just
sitting in a display case they look very sharp and very deadly.
David Starr
Martin Reboul
"David J. Starr" <dstarr...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:4owod.8553$sX5.4450@trndny05...
Do you also get a terrible urge to get them out of the case and try them out? I
know I do, they almost 'beg' for it!
Before the days of sniping and creeping around in camouflage, armies were made
to be seen and look impressive to terrify the enemy - a lot of psychology went
into it. The tall helmets of the Guards and the cut and colour of Napoleonic era
uniforms were designed to make them look as big and impressive as possible, yet
nothing intimidates quite like a glittering array of gleaming weapons, they
always look so much *sharper* and more deadly when highly polished and flashing
in the sunlight. Look how many descriptions of armies mention words like
gleaming, glittering and flashing....
Cheers
Martin
Julian Richards
<martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net> wrote:
>The secret of a sword (or axe) is to have a flexible core and a hard edge, and
>the key to this is in the tempering. The metallurgy and chemistry behind it is
>enormously complex, ask Paul (sorry!), but essentially there are so many
>variables, it became a matter of trial and error, ancient wisdom and empirical
>(often secret) knowledge.
Masamune the greatest swordsmith said that he learned many trade
secrets from his teachers and then added a few of his own. he also
wondered if he had reached the peak of the sword or that the
technology would improve. He would have loved alloy steels such as
Hardox.
>The ritual is part of the tradition of manufacturing a good blade - it is easy
>to see why there are so many legends of 'magic swords' and the mystery and
>secrecy that surrounds the manufacture of such things. Take for example 'pattern
>welded' swords. The recipe sounds magical... take several pieces of iron from
>different sources, beat them out together, twist them together, forge and hammer
>weld them - using the elements of fire, air, water and earth.
>Then there is the tempering, sharpening and polishing....
>
>Now and then something exceptional turns up, whether through luck, experience or
>careful design is a matter of conjecture... a blade that won't break before
>others, a real beauty.
In the programme, one of the best modern swordsmiths said that on
average he threw away 6 complete swords for every one he kept.
Julian Richards
For a "Meet the Ancestors" special with my namesake, one of the other
Julian Richards, a modern blacksmith made a Saxon pattern welded sword
(twisting iron and steel like candytwist and hammering it flat). When
treated in an "organic acid", I suspect stuff that he made himself,
the blade was dark, slightly green. It was expected that the twisted
pattern would show but instead there was a marbled finish. Such
patterns led to Viking swords getting names such as "Adder".
The finish is necessary because a long campaign in European weather
could wreck bare steel.
Alex
> "David J. Starr" <dstarr...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:4owod.8553$sX5.4450@trndny05...
> > Julian Richards wrote:
> > Weren't European blades treated in an organic acid
> > > (urine?)? That would make them not as shiny but more resilient to the
> > > European climate.
> > >
> >
> > As late as the US civil war, soldiers would use sandpaper and emery
> > to take the issue "browning" off their rifles, leaving barrel and
> > fastenings bright and shiny for the show of it. Would not the same urge
> > to carry a showy weapon cause medieval smiths and/or soldiers to polish
> > sword blades to a high luster?
> > The Boston museum of Fine Arts has a few katana's on display. The
> > steel looks fine, smooth and lusterous, with a wicked edge. Just
> > sitting in a display case they look very sharp and very deadly.
>
> Do you also get a terrible urge to get them out of the case and try them out? I
> know I do, they almost 'beg' for it!
Martin, you are soooooooo bloodthirsty! :-)
Well, I was more than once in the Fine Arts (and there are more than just
"few" swords there) but did not feel any urge to take them out and behead
some of museum's personnel (after all, it is not them who set the absurd
admission fees).
And, as far as I'm concerned, tsubo's (sp) are usually more interesting
than the blades.
Martin Reboul
"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f8e58188.04112...@posting.google.com...
> "Martin Reboul" <martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:<ltzod.3$9%6...@newsfe3-win.ntli.net>...
> > "David J. Starr" <dstarr...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> > news:4owod.8553$sX5.4450@trndny05...
> > > Julian Richards wrote:
> > > Weren't European blades treated in an organic acid
> > > > (urine?)? That would make them not as shiny but more resilient to the
> > > > European climate.
> > > >
> > >
> > > As late as the US civil war, soldiers would use sandpaper and emery
> > > to take the issue "browning" off their rifles, leaving barrel and
> > > fastenings bright and shiny for the show of it. Would not the same urge
> > > to carry a showy weapon cause medieval smiths and/or soldiers to polish
> > > sword blades to a high luster?
> > > The Boston museum of Fine Arts has a few katana's on display. The
> > > steel looks fine, smooth and lusterous, with a wicked edge. Just
> > > sitting in a display case they look very sharp and very deadly.
> >
> > Do you also get a terrible urge to get them out of the case and try them
out? I
> > know I do, they almost 'beg' for it!
>
> Martin, you are soooooooo bloodthirsty! :-)
I only meant swish them about a bit, not try them out on prisoners... really
Alex!
> Well, I was more than once in the Fine Arts (and there are more than just
> "few" swords there) but did not feel any urge to take them out and behead
> some of museum's personnel (after all, it is not them who set the absurd
> admission fees).
Free admission at the BM and V&A - that would be 'gratuitous'.
I really wanted just to hold one and see how it felt, and see how sharp it
was...
maybe with a slik scarf.... or a tourist or two perhaps, no more than that...
> And, as far as I'm concerned, tsubo's (sp) are usually more interesting
> than the blades.
Well, I'd have had a look at those too.
Cheers
Martin
Alex
> "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f8e58188.04112...@posting.google.com...
> > "Martin Reboul" <martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net> wrote in message
> news:<ltzod.3$9%6...@newsfe3-win.ntli.net>...
> > > "David J. Starr" <dstarr...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> > > news:4owod.8553$sX5.4450@trndny05...
> > > > Julian Richards wrote:
> > > > Weren't European blades treated in an organic acid
> > > > > (urine?)? That would make them not as shiny but more resilient to the
> > > > > European climate.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > As late as the US civil war, soldiers would use sandpaper and emery
> > > > to take the issue "browning" off their rifles, leaving barrel and
> > > > fastenings bright and shiny for the show of it. Would not the same urge
> > > > to carry a showy weapon cause medieval smiths and/or soldiers to polish
> > > > sword blades to a high luster?
> > > > The Boston museum of Fine Arts has a few katana's on display. The
> > > > steel looks fine, smooth and lusterous, with a wicked edge. Just
> > > > sitting in a display case they look very sharp and very deadly.
> > >
> > > Do you also get a terrible urge to get them out of the case and try them
> out? I
> > > know I do, they almost 'beg' for it!
> >
> > Martin, you are soooooooo bloodthirsty! :-)
>
> I only meant swish them about a bit, not try them out on prisoners... really
> Alex!
Hah! This is an usual exuse: I just wanted to swish them about and then there
was that prisoner nearby..... he was not a very good person anyway.....
>
>
> > Well, I was more than once in the Fine Arts (and there are more than just
> > "few" swords there) but did not feel any urge to take them out and behead
> > some of museum's personnel (after all, it is not them who set the absurd
> > admission fees).
>
> Free admission at the BM and V&A - that would be 'gratuitous'.
I know. One of the few things I really enjoyed in London. _Three_ things to
think about it: free admission into the BM, very good beer, and very good
covers on the Pratchett's books (in the US they are mostly done by the
people with obviously not up to the level sense of humor)....
>
> I really wanted just to hold one and see how it felt,
.... to find out if it can be sold for any sizeable profit....
>and see how sharp it
> was...
> maybe with a slik scarf.... or a tourist or two perhaps, no more than that...
Aha! So I _was_ correct after all!!!!!
>
> > And, as far as I'm concerned, tsubo's (sp) are usually more interesting
> > than the blades.
>
> Well, I'd have had a look at those too.
Before or after you ....er.... encountered those unfortunate tourists?
ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk
martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net (Martin Reboul) wrote:
> but they could do it. I
The use of brine or urine for tempering has good reason, even before
modern baths. Pure water tends to form a steam layer along the blade
which slows cooling. Urine might have had a nitriding effect, but I
don.t think any research has been done on that. I have come across
recipes calling for the use of urine, from a goat fed on fennel.
Ken Young
ken...@cix.co.uk
Maternity is a matter of fact
Paternity is a matter of opinion
David J. Starr
> Do you also get a terrible urge to get them out of the case and try them out? I
> know I do, they almost 'beg' for it!
>
Well, yes. But let be real, these are real museum pieces, probably
irreplacable. I don't expect to be able to practice slashing at pels
with one, lest I dull the edge, or leave a finger print etching its way
into the fine steel blade.
David Starr
Martin Reboul
Actually, I was curious about that. Although the blade I had a very close look
at was over 400 years old, it looked almost brand new and freshly polished, no
trace of oxidisation or pitting. I know such things were very precious and must
have been carefully looked after, but I found it hard to believe. Perhaps they
have some 'stainless' quality?
Cheers
Martin
Martin Reboul
<ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote in message
news:co0cl8$i1s$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk...
> In article <Cnvod.327$2r....@newsfe3-win.ntli.net>,
> martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net (Martin Reboul) wrote:
>
> > but they could do it. I
>
> The use of brine or urine for tempering has good reason, even before
> modern baths. Pure water tends to form a steam layer along the blade
> which slows cooling. Urine might have had a nitriding effect, but I
> don.t think any research has been done on that. I have come across
> recipes calling for the use of urine, from a goat fed on fennel.
High nitrate, sure enough!
Julian Richards
wrote:
>In article <Cnvod.327$2r....@newsfe3-win.ntli.net>,
>martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net (Martin Reboul) wrote:
>
>> but they could do it. I
>
> The use of brine or urine for tempering has good reason, even before
>modern baths. Pure water tends to form a steam layer along the blade
>which slows cooling. Urine might have had a nitriding effect, but I
>don.t think any research has been done on that. I have come across
>recipes calling for the use of urine, from a goat fed on fennel.
One Japanese swordmaker put iron pellets into feed for geese. He then
collected the solids from the goose (crap, for want of a better word)
and repeated the process several times. Then the iron was suitable for
sword making.
Kel Rekuta
Julian Richards wrote:
>
> One Japanese swordmaker put iron pellets into feed for geese. He then
> collected the solids from the goose (crap, for want of a better word)
> and repeated the process several times. Then the iron was suitable for
> sword making.
>
>
Sounds like another myth like "four million folds" in Japanese
swordmaking. How much iron could a goose tolerate in their digestive
tract? 5%? 10% Do you have any idea how big a pile of goose scat you'd
have to collect to recover a useful bloom of iron? How much fuel would
be consumed to smelt it? A blade might require three to four pounds of
highly refined steel. That's a huge pile of crap to smelt.
Did you know that Japanese iron was smelted from sand with trace iron?
Unlike European iron ore, Japanese iron was very low quality and needed
significantly more effort and expense to create a useful product. That's
where the real labour investment was.
BTW, four million folds in a blade thickness would be effectively
homogenius. Think about it.
I love to see fine blades, whether Japanese, Chinese or European. I hate
to hear about the mythical qualities of Japanese steel based on a few
exceptional examples.
Kel
Frances Kemmish
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:55:20 -0500, Kel Rekuta <kre...@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Julian Richards wrote:
>>
>>
>>>One Japanese swordmaker put iron pellets into feed for geese. He then
>>>collected the solids from the goose (crap, for want of a better word)
>>>and repeated the process several times. Then the iron was suitable for
>>>sword making.
>>
>>Sounds like another myth like "four million folds" in Japanese
>>swordmaking. How much iron could a goose tolerate in their digestive
>>tract? 5%? 10% Do you have any idea how big a pile of goose scat you'd
>>have to collect to recover a useful bloom of iron? How much fuel would
>>be consumed to smelt it? A blade might require three to four pounds of
>>highly refined steel. That's a huge pile of crap to smelt.
>>
>>Did you know that Japanese iron was smelted from sand with trace iron?
>>Unlike European iron ore, Japanese iron was very low quality and needed
>>significantly more effort and expense to create a useful product. That's
>>where the real labour investment was.
>
>
> I saw it on the Internet so it must be true!
>
>
I remember Bob Gordon (Yale, Geology Dept) talking about this in our
Archaeometallurgy class. I thought it was a European, and I thought it
was supposed to be chickens that the iron was fed to. I don't remember
whop was supposed to have done it, though.
It was discussed in the same terms as the idea that Spanish iron from
horseshoes was purer because the pounding of the horses' hooves would
remove more slag.
Fran
Julian Richards
wrote:
>Julian Richards wrote:
>
>>
>> One Japanese swordmaker put iron pellets into feed for geese. He then
>> collected the solids from the goose (crap, for want of a better word)
>> and repeated the process several times. Then the iron was suitable for
>> sword making.
>
>Sounds like another myth like "four million folds" in Japanese
>swordmaking. How much iron could a goose tolerate in their digestive
>tract? 5%? 10% Do you have any idea how big a pile of goose scat you'd
>have to collect to recover a useful bloom of iron? How much fuel would
>be consumed to smelt it? A blade might require three to four pounds of
>highly refined steel. That's a huge pile of crap to smelt.
>
>Did you know that Japanese iron was smelted from sand with trace iron?
>Unlike European iron ore, Japanese iron was very low quality and needed
>significantly more effort and expense to create a useful product. That's
>where the real labour investment was.
I thought that the goose story was from ARMA but I can't find it now.
I saw it on the Internet so it must be true!
Martin Reboul
"William Black" <ab...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:co2r93$kii$1...@news.freedom2surf.net...
>
> "Martin Reboul" <martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net> wrote in message
>
> > Very impressive to see hands, legs and head lopped off with a deadly
> stroke, but
> > no use against a heavily armoured opponent, who needs a heavy, punching,
> > stabbing thrust to kill. A samurai blade would probably be too light to
> even jam
> > his armour, never mind concuss him with a blow to his helmet.
>
> Probably not a lot of use against some aristocratic thug with a rapier and
> dagger either.
>
> The rapier is a faster attacking weapon and the dagger gives you a parrying
> capacity that allows an active counter while your opponent is engaged.
The stab is quicker than the slash, true, with more reach... better be quick
though!
William Black
"Martin Reboul" <martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:n66pd.209$Q%5....@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Very impressive to see hands, legs and head lopped off with a deadly
stroke, but
> no use against a heavily armoured opponent, who needs a heavy, punching,
> stabbing thrust to kill. A samurai blade would probably be too light to
even jam
> his armour, never mind concuss him with a blow to his helmet.
Probably not a lot of use against some aristocratic thug with a rapier and
dagger either.
The rapier is a faster attacking weapon and the dagger gives you a parrying
capacity that allows an active counter while your opponent is engaged.
--
William Black
------------------
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords
is no basis for a system of government
Martin Reboul
"Kel Rekuta" <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:41A484B...@sympatico.ca...
>
>
> Julian Richards wrote:
>
> >
> > One Japanese swordmaker put iron pellets into feed for geese. He then
> > collected the solids from the goose (crap, for want of a better word)
> > and repeated the process several times. Then the iron was suitable for
> > sword making.
> >
> >
>
> Sounds like another myth like "four million folds" in Japanese
> swordmaking. How much iron could a goose tolerate in their digestive
> tract? 5%? 10% Do you have any idea how big a pile of goose scat you'd
> have to collect to recover a useful bloom of iron? How much fuel would
> be consumed to smelt it? A blade might require three to four pounds of
> highly refined steel. That's a huge pile of crap to smelt.
>
> Did you know that Japanese iron was smelted from sand with trace iron?
> Unlike European iron ore, Japanese iron was very low quality and needed
> significantly more effort and expense to create a useful product. That's
> where the real labour investment was.
>
> BTW, four million folds in a blade thickness would be effectively
> homogenius. Think about it.
Not necessarily. Say you have a bar, fold it along its length and hammer weld
it, then do it again and again... you only have to do it twenty two times to
have four million layers, but the impurities between the last few folded welds
will effectively sandwich 'streaks' of steel through the structure with
different carbon levels... a 'fat' one down the middle, with thinner ones either
side etc.
To ensure purity and a homogeneously pure blade, this folding would be very
sound practice ( I can't remember how many times it was done end to end, as well
as 'down the middle'?).
This sort of matallurgy is a very, very complicated business, and I can't say I
fully understand it (where's Paul when you need him!?), but all I can say is,
they must have got it right? It would make great sense if they began with impure
iron, as heating to weld temperature in a blown fire would gradually drive out
the impurities, and by folding and folding you are exposing more and more of the
internal structure to the heat and oxidising fire, and blowing off impurities.
> I love to see fine blades, whether Japanese, Chinese or European. I hate
> to hear about the mythical qualities of Japanese steel based on a few
> exceptional examples.
I think this 'myth' is partly based on the way they were used, and their basic
design. These are lightweight blades compared with European medieval swords,
made for dealing with un- or lightly-armoured foes. As a result they were
viciously sharp and curved, made for speed and slashing, easily capable of
chopping though any bit of flesh or bone they hit.
Very impressive to see hands, legs and head lopped off with a deadly stroke, but
no use against a heavily armoured opponent, who needs a heavy, punching,
stabbing thrust to kill. A samurai blade would probably be too light to even jam
his armour, never mind concuss him with a blow to his helmet.
They were and are beautifully made, and marvellously designed for their purpose,
but so were good quality European swords. Different purposes however, there
really is no comparison, nor any point in comparison, it's like comparing a
Ferrari with a Tiger tank, and saying "which is best?".
I think these sort of notions come from watching fanciful things like
Highlander, where blades cut through concrete and spark like angle grinders when
they connect. Then of course one blade slices through the other like butter, or
shatters it... not really on with quality weapons!
Cheers
Martin
Julian Richards
<martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net> wrote:
>> Probably not a lot of use against some aristocratic thug with a rapier and
>> dagger either.
>>
>> The rapier is a faster attacking weapon and the dagger gives you a parrying
>> capacity that allows an active counter while your opponent is engaged.
>
>The stab is quicker than the slash, true, with more reach... better be quick
>though!
Miyamoto Musashi developed his two sword technique after watching two
Portuguese sailors fighting with swords and daggers.
Tron
"Julian Richards" <s...@sig.co.uk> skrev i melding
news:s0gcq05q637gebemm...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:59:48 GMT, "Martin Reboul"
> <martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net> wrote:
>
>>> Probably not a lot of use against some aristocratic thug with a rapier
>>> and
>>> dagger either.
>>>
>>> The rapier is a faster attacking weapon and the dagger gives you a
>>> parrying
>>> capacity that allows an active counter while your opponent is engaged.
>>
>>The stab is quicker than the slash, true, with more reach... better be
>>quick
>>though!
As if the katana wasn't used for stabbing ..... tch ....
>
> Miyamoto Musashi developed his two sword technique after watching two
> Portuguese sailors fighting with swords and daggers.
The two handed sword technique had been alive and well in Japan for 150
years when Musashi was born, e.g. as part of the Tenshin Shoden Katori
Shinto Ryu school of fencing, founded in 1447. Although MM is not known to
have been a member of any school, he did visit the Katori Shrine in his
quest to perfect his own skill.
When people are going about with two swords in their belt, it probably
doesn't take much time nor imagination before someone comes up with the idea
to use them together. That they were waiting around for the Portuguese
sounds a bit .... just so.
T
Tron
"Martin Reboul" <martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net> skrev i melding
news:n66pd.209$Q%
>
> Very impressive to see hands, legs and head lopped off with a deadly
> stroke, but
> no use against a heavily armoured opponent, who needs a heavy, punching,
> stabbing thrust to kill. A samurai blade would probably be too light to
> even jam
> his armour, never mind concuss him with a blow to his helmet.
Like the rapier in Europe, the katana became widespread _after_ the time of
the great wars and field battles. On the battlefield, the Japanese, like any
sensible infantry, used archery and various pole arms, above all the yari or
lance, resorting to swords as auxiliary, certainly secondary weapons. There
were sojutsu (spear work) schools in the hundreds in Japan, and sojutsu,
tellingly, is one of the Japanese martial arts that have not developed a
"Way" form (to use that wee bit of misinformation). It simply isn't
"sporting". Apart form the lance, they used the usual multitude of halberd-,
billhook- and glaive-like variations, with or without spikes and barbs for
use against mounted soldiers. Best known seems to be the Naginata, which
also was taught in various schools, and is practised a sport like kendo even
today.
"Mystique" is rarely a match for common sense, even in the Far East.
T
William Black
"Tron" <tron...@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:aTzpd.9660$rh1.2...@news2.e.nsc.no...
> Like the rapier in Europe, the katana became widespread _after_ the time
of
> the great wars and field battles.
You mean there are no big battles in Europe after 1600?
The sword was never a European battle fighting weapon for anyone but a few
Spaniards who died reasonably quickly after pike tactics came along.
--
---
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe
Barbeques on fire by chalets past the headland
I've seen the gift shops glitter in the darkness off Newborough
All this will pass like ice-cream on the beach
Time for tea
Tron
"William Black" <ab...@hotmail.com> skrev i melding
news:co7tcm$vus$2...@news.freedom2surf.net...
>
> "Tron" <tron...@frisurf.no> wrote in message
> news:aTzpd.9660$rh1.2...@news2.e.nsc.no...
>
>> Like the rapier in Europe, the katana became widespread _after_ the time
> of
>> the great wars and field battles.
>
> You mean there are no big battles in Europe after 1600?
Do you think that is what I mean? Honestly?
>
> The sword was never a European battle fighting weapon for anyone but a few
> Spaniards who died reasonably quickly after pike tactics came along.
I may have sacrificed precision in the interest of brevity. As far as I
know, before guns became the standard weapon, infantry everywhere, including
Japan, used pole arms as their main weaponry. The sword was never a battle
fighting weapon anywhere - I'll take your word for the Spanish - making the
problem "a katana wouldn't work against a European Knight in armour"
spurious.
In Japan the carrying of swords became common during the relatively peaceful
years under the Tokugawa shogunate. After 1600, Japan saw the development of
kendo, the flourish of sword fighting schools and the development of sword
fighting techniques against opponents without armour, which is different
from older, battlefield oriented styles.
In Europe, as far as I know, the carrying of swords became widespread, e.g.
as part of dress also among non-noble bourgeoisie, after the advent of guns
and the subsequent reduction of the importance of armour; Europe saw the
flourishing of fencing schools, duelling, and the development of sword
fighting techniques against opponents without armour, which is different
from older, battlefield oriented styles.
MVH,
Tron
William Black
>
> "William Black" <ab...@hotmail.com> skrev i melding
> news:co7tcm$vus$2...@news.freedom2surf.net...
> >
> > "Tron" <tron...@frisurf.no> wrote in message
> > news:aTzpd.9660$rh1.2...@news2.e.nsc.no...
> >
> >> Like the rapier in Europe, the katana became widespread _after_ the
time
> > of
> >> the great wars and field battles.
> >
> > You mean there are no big battles in Europe after 1600?
>
> Do you think that is what I mean? Honestly?
No, but I can never resist a cheap shot...
This is Usenet after all...
> In Europe, as far as I know, the carrying of swords became widespread,
e.g.
> as part of dress also among non-noble bourgeoisie, after the advent of
guns
> and the subsequent reduction of the importance of armour;
Well it's not quite as simple as that.
And this is about England, where people seem to have carried swords more
than on the continent. Indeed there are ambassadorial letters complaining
you can't tell the merchant from the gentleman in the street because all
wear swords and the 'middling classes' are horribly arrogant towards
foreigners. (So no change there then...)
In England the wearing of swords by commoners seems to have become normal in
the second half of the fifteenth century, probably because there was a
civil war going on most of the time and English people were unused to
'overmighty subjects' going around throwing their weight about.
Common ownership of longbows meant that the aforementioned overmighty
subjects got perforated if they tried anything really nasty but a longbow
isn't something you carry around as a matter of routine for dealing with
every bold bad barron you happen across, so people seem to have started
carrying swords.
About 1600 the rapier comes along, and it's lethal. A slashing sword will
give you a nasty cut in a brawl, but as a rule won't kill you unless
someone cuts you in half, a rapier tends to give people puncture wounds in
the torso; and you die...
It's a bit like the wild west, with a six gun you're a nuisance, but if
someone started handing out Uzi SMGs the slaughter would be ghastly.
People stopped carrying swords except for the rich who carried short pointed
things called 'small swords' that were much more male jewellery than
anything else. Soldiers carried what they'd always carried, a bloody big
sword.
Europe saw the
> flourishing of fencing schools, duelling, and the development of sword
> fighting techniques against opponents without armour, which is different
> from older, battlefield oriented styles.
Interestingly the rise of the fencing school, and the registration of 'The
Masters of Defence' (the English fencing master's guild) doesn't come along
until about 1550, almost at the end of this period, and the rise of the
Italian fencing masters like Jeronimo and Capo Ferro isn't until almost
1600.
It was the Italian fencing masters with their new lethal styles that seem to
have stopped people carrying swords...
Around this time the English homicide rate goes down from about 10 in
100,000 to around 4.5 in 100,000, where it stayed for almost four hundred
years (it's going up at the moment, people are starting to go armed again)
Tron
"William Black" <ab...@hotmail.com> skrev i melding
news:coafb7$m38$1...@news.freedom2surf.net...
>
> "Tron" <tron...@frisurf.no> wrote in message
> news:CR0qd.9897$rh1.2...@news2.e.nsc.no...
>>
>> "William Black" <ab...@hotmail.com> skrev i melding
>> news:co7tcm$vus$2...@news.freedom2surf.net...
>> >
>> > "Tron" <tron...@frisurf.no> wrote in message
>> > news:aTzpd.9660$rh1.2...@news2.e.nsc.no...
>> >
>> >> Like the rapier in Europe, the katana became widespread _after_ the
> time
>> > of
>> >> the great wars and field battles.
>> >
>> > You mean there are no big battles in Europe after 1600?
>>
>> Do you think that is what I mean? Honestly?
>
> No, but I can never resist a cheap shot...
>
> This is Usenet after all...
Well, we settled one point. On Usenet. Not bad.
That done, I can't escape the feeling that there is no real disagreement
here.
>
>> In Europe, as far as I know, the carrying of swords became widespread,
> e.g.
>> as part of dress also among non-noble bourgeoisie, after the advent of
> guns
>> and the subsequent reduction of the importance of armour;
>
> Well it's not quite as simple as that.
As a commonplace, few things are. As I said, it is a matter of weighing
precision against volume.
So thanks for your elucidations.
As a general historical subject, one can observe developments in the
practice of fencing - in extent and in content - with the decline of the
utility of armour. The decline of the utility of armour may have various
reasons; in Japan it was peace, in Europe I'd speculate on the advent of
guns, but reasons, as you pointed out, are complex.
But something must have happened when, as you put it, "about 1600 the rapier
comes along". Do things like that just come along? Why not before? etc.
My main point, again, is simply that it is a mistaken notion that Japanese
armies took to the field with the katana as the main infantry weapon. "The
katana won't work against european armour" might be true enough, but that
doesn't - as such and by itself - imply anything for the outcome of a
hypothetical clash between Japanese and European armies, as long as guns are
kept outside the equation. Not to speculate on any outcome, but if Europeans
proved better than Japanese, then not because of the katana.
MVH,
Tron
Julian Richards
<ab...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>And this is about England, where people seem to have carried swords more
>than on the continent. Indeed there are ambassadorial letters complaining
>you can't tell the merchant from the gentleman in the street because all
>wear swords and the 'middling classes' are horribly arrogant towards
>foreigners. (So no change there then...)
One foreigner in Elizabethan times complained that to walk about at
midday one had to go as if armed for war.
William Black
, "about 1600 the rapier
> comes along". Do things like that just come along? Why not before? etc.
The evolution of the small sword from the 'espada de robera' or 'sword of
the robe', meaning sword worn with ordinary clothing and not armour, is
complex and extends over a couple of hundred years.
Oakeshott's 'European Weapons and Armour' is good on the later part of this
but he ignores the English 'back sword' that many modern comentators think
is a vital part of the evolution of personal weapons.
Tron
"William Black" <ab...@hotmail.com> skrev i melding
news:coatot$qd0$1...@news.freedom2surf.net...
>
/..../sword worn with ordinary clothing and not armour /.../.
No armour. Who'd have thought.
T
Patrick Powers
>
> >
> > One Japanese swordmaker put iron pellets into feed for geese. He then
> > collected the solids from the goose (crap, for want of a better word)
> > and repeated the process several times. Then the iron was suitable for
> > sword making.
> >
> >
>
> Sounds like another myth like "four million folds" in Japanese
> swordmaking.
That is in all likelyhood a mistranslation of four million layers or
strata, which is acheived with 22 folds.
> How much iron could a goose tolerate in their digestive
> tract? 5%? 10% Do you have any idea how big a pile of goose scat you'd
> have to collect to recover a useful bloom of iron?
If 10% then ten times the volume. Not that much. Then you wash the
poop with water and filter out the iron.
> How much fuel would
> be consumed to smelt it?
Exactly the same amount of iron.
> A blade might require three to four pounds of
> highly refined steel. That's a huge pile of crap to smelt.
>
> Did you know that Japanese iron was smelted from sand with trace iron?
> Unlike European iron ore, Japanese iron was very low quality and needed
> significantly more effort and expense to create a useful product. That's
> where the real labour investment was.
>
> BTW, four million folds in a blade thickness would be effectively
> homogenius. Think about it.
No its not. That is the whole point.
Patrick Powers
> news:n66pd.209$Q%5....@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
>
> > Very impressive to see hands, legs and head lopped off with a deadly
> stroke, but
> > no use against a heavily armoured opponent, who needs a heavy, punching,
> > stabbing thrust to kill. A samurai blade would probably be too light to
> even jam
> > his armour, never mind concuss him with a blow to his helmet.
>
> Probably not a lot of use against some aristocratic thug with a rapier and
> dagger either.
>
> The rapier is a faster attacking weapon and the dagger gives you a parrying
> capacity that allows an active counter while your opponent is engaged.
Samuri carried two swords, short and long.
Patrick Powers
>
> Before the days of sniping and creeping around in camouflage, armies were made
> to be seen and look impressive to terrify the enemy - a lot of psychology went
> into it. The tall helmets of the Guards and the cut and colour of Napoleonic era
> uniforms were designed to make them look as big and impressive as possible, yet
> nothing intimidates quite like a glittering array of gleaming weapons, they
> always look so much *sharper* and more deadly when highly polished and flashing
> in the sunlight. Look how many descriptions of armies mention words like
> gleaming, glittering and flashing....
>
I don't see how those silly costumes would frighten anybody. They
were to impress women and to make the wearer highly visible were he to
run away.
I'd feel like a real ass fleeing a battlefield in a Coldstream Guards
outfit.
William Black
"Patrick Powers" <frisbie...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9511688f.04112...@posting.google.com...
But didn't fight with two until they saw some Portuguese doing it...
The second sword was for committing suicide when the politics became too
complicated for warrior aristocrats.
D. Spencer Hines
real ass -- no need to overdo it.
Besides, I sincerely doubt anyone would be so stupid as to let you have
a Coldstream Guards outfit to run away in.
So, not to worry.
Just find some relatively mundane way to make an ass of yourself -- I'm
sure you've got that part down pat.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor
"Patrick Powers" <frisbie...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9511688f.04112...@posting.google.com...
| "Martin Reboul" <martin...@SPAMFUKvirgin.net> wrote in message
Sheila J
> Oh, I'm confident you will find some FAR easier way of feeling like a
> real ass -- no need to overdo it.
>
> Besides, I sincerely doubt anyone would be so stupid as to let you have
> a Coldstream Guards outfit to run away in.
>
Ah, the Grenadier Guards are better anyways. Taller, larger and cuter.
It is in their QR & O's or something...
Tron
>
>>
>> Samuri carried two swords, short and long.
>
> But didn't fight with two until they saw some Portuguese doing it...
Is there some sort of source for this claim; as opposed to the differing
documented traditions of Japan?
>
> The second sword was for committing suicide when the politics became too
> complicated for warrior aristocrats.
The short sword was a shorter sword, to be used separately (e.g. indoors,
where the long sword was not worn), or with the long sword.
MVH,
T
Julian Richards
wrote:
>
>"William Black" <ab...@hotmail.com> skrev i melding
>news:cochjs$84m$1...@news.freedom2surf.net...
>>
>
>>>
>>> Samuri carried two swords, short and long.
>>
>> But didn't fight with two until they saw some Portuguese doing it...
>
>Is there some sort of source for this claim; as opposed to the differing
>documented traditions of Japan?
I pointed out that I had read (on the Internet so it must be true)
that a certain Japanese swordsman took the idea from seeing Portuguese
sailors fight with sword and main gauche but that is not to say that
other Japanese swordsmen did not develop it themselves.
Tron
> On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:29:17 +0100, "Tron" <tron...@frisurf.no>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"William Black" <ab...@hotmail.com> skrev i melding
>>news:cochjs$84m$1...@news.freedom2surf.net...
>>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Samuri carried two swords, short and long.
>>>
>>> But didn't fight with two until they saw some Portuguese doing it...
>>
>>Is there some sort of source for this claim; as opposed to the differing
>>documented traditions of Japan?
>
> I pointed out that I had read (on the Internet so it must be true)
" Hai, gomen nasai; so sorry, neh?" (Just finished reading "Shogun" the 27th
time).
I'll have to bow to that one, I guess.
> that a certain Japanese swordsman took the idea from seeing Portuguese
> sailors fight with sword and main gauche but that is not to say that
> other Japanese swordsmen did not develop it themselves.
It is not improbable that they picked up a trick or two - the rapier &
dagger combo has a wider repertoire than Ryoto.
T
W. Baker
: Julian Richards wrote:
: Kel
Do any of you recall the Jacob Bronowski science series some years ago. He
had a program on Japanese sword making. He made the point tht in an age
that didn't have the chemistry, the ritual, obviously developed over time
through trial and error, enabled the Japanese to produce their remarkable
swords.
This was a wonderful TV series and I often wonder why it is not repeated
every few yers so a new group of young peole can be inspired by it. I
know that it was one of the inspirations for my younger son, who is now
college professor and reseacher in biology. Stuff like this series and
the Kenneth Clark one on art history are great for young people. Even if
not perfect, they are so much better than he run of the mill.
End editorial:-)
Wendy Wisan Baker