There is a saying in special forces (I talk about Russia here, but I think it’s general thing): unarmed combat can occur only if you manage to lose your firearm, sidearm, knife, spade, flask and everything else AND meet the same kind of idiot from the opposite side :-)
Bruce Jedi Lee Just take a few swings, it’s actually quite dangerous and in any case better than bare hands :-) And you can always throw it in your opponents face :-)
@@alexmashkin863 the lowest lvl in the army (US army in my case) is taught hand to hand combat but this training is how to survive and hold down your opponent long enough for your buddy to come over and put a bullet in his brain
N3V3R FORGOTT3N Yes, they teach basics of hand-to-hand in Russia for similar purposes :-) Special forces are trained in hand-to-hand extensively because it’s good for physicality, coordination and overall confidence. But situations where you actually have to use it in combat are very rare :-)
Daniel Elseth Are you getting your information from Terrible Writing Advice or something? Gratuitous Lurking And the prophecies, and chosen ones, and post apocalyptic-ness, and dystopias, and love dodecahedrons, and Mary Sues!
@Dragons Rim Well, we don't learn much about the civil war in germany^^ Or anything at all if I remember correctly. I guess you learn what happend in your country first. Even the american revolution wasn't much of a topic. We were too busy studying the french revolution for almost a year^^
Brem Curt The arrow to the knee was an infamously oft-repeated voice line from Skyrim guards and people thought it an odd thing to say. Until someone pointed out how that is a euphemism for getting married. Where my joke comes in, you see. That being the implication of marrying the fingered guard.
And same would apply to Damascene blades. And why? Because their steel (or iron) was in fact crap. Folding takes huge amount of time and work so you will do it only if you really must.
Every blacksmith folds and hammers steel, over and over again. You could cut any sort of wrought-iron item in half and start counting folds. Legendary Damascene and Katanas involved very specific forging and folding techniques. Controlled carbon content was added to Damascene/Wootz ingots by wrapping them in "special" plant leaves during forging, Katanas instead used "special" muds and clays (ceramics and oils). Certain mines produced steels with useful impurities (like Vanadium, Tungsten, etc). Maybe Celtic-folded blades were similarly developed or maybe they were just simple forging ... unfortunately we just don't know (yet).
@@Zorisura Yet, for some odd reason, they don't exactly apply much of their technological know-hows in weaponry in this day and age, favoring more on efficiency on basically everything else but warfare for some odd reason, despite that they still have a very well equipped army (its just that what you see the Japanese military use are basically the same as the US... most of the time).
@@simonspacek3670 Authentic Damascus Steel was made of high carbon Wootz Steel, which means its closer to a superplastic then pure stainless steel. Its not made of "crap iron", its a different material altogether...
- Hahaha you can't handle a sword by the blade, you'll cut yourself + Have you tried it? - No, but I'm right and you're wrong because [insert invalid reasons here]
@@Burn_Angel Or I had one where I had explained why it was a legit technique and how it worked. They simply retorted with mockery and the clucking Spongebob meme.
@@ianfinrir8724 Gloves can't protect you against the sharp blade though, it cuts through them really easy. The gloves are for psychological effect, as you don't feel the blade digging into your fingers. Well, unless you meant metal gauntlets, I'm pretty sure that that could actually protect you.
@@Burn_Angel ı mean it can protect you but that depens on what its made from how T H I C C it is and the quality something like wool obviously wouldn't protect you that much but a really hard leather from a T H I C C leathered animal would protect you
You left out the biggest Whopper. The biggest misconception about swords is that they were the main weapon, when in reality, usually a sword was a backup weapon, a sidearm. Your main weapon would be a lance, halbard, pike, spear... or a ranged weapon (bow, crossbow). If you were fighting in a unit, on the battlefield, you'd be using what everyone else was using, and your halbard would look the same as everyone else's. Your sword would be your own and it could look however you wanted it to look. Of course, you wouldn't carry your lance with you if you were headed down to the pub to have a few beers with your friends. The sword was a utilitarian weapon, a sidearm, a dueling weapon, but in battle it was mostly a backup weapon. Exceptions of course exist (Roman Legionaries did throw spears, but were mostly about their swords)
Yes, this is true when talking situations where you find yourself as a part of a larger fighting force. In that case, swords are secondary because their effective range would allow the enemy force to get way too close to you, and it would simply not be practical to have tons of military who all bear swords as their main weapons. It removes a huge part of the advantage that fighting in a group gives. However, on an individual scale, a sword is almost always the primary weapon. For anyone who are not meant to fight alongside many allies, the sword is in many cases the primary weapon, as it allows for maneuverability, agility, a good basic defense, and its reach gives you an acceptable safe distance when fighting few opponents - and it can be carried anywhere you want to go, be it on foot or horseback. In such case, a bow would be secondary in many cases, and will only be useful if you already have the advantage of distance.
Today, the TH-cam algorithm gods desired to recommend me a video of Teddy Roosevelt getting pissed off at katanas for 17 minutes. Thank you, TH-cam algorithm gods.
I'll always remember the first time a friend of mine bought a real, sharpened Japanese katana. And he wanted to prove that his katana was sharper than an 11th century viking sword that I owned, which was also real, and very sharp. Long story short, I ended up proving that both swords were equally sharp. The look on his face was priceless, and ended up winning a hundred dollar bet.
I'll never understand why people will think Katanas are "better" it's a piece of steel sharpened to a fine edge. You know kind of like a European sword. Might have some impurities or slightly different metal make up. But in the end its sharp price of steel. Its gonna cut
Altsek Dulo Atually, they’re a lot of anime with european swords and chevalery (*hum hum SAO hum hum*) but that true what we see more katanas swords. Meh, whatever, that’s cool !
Atlas and Dropkicker. Lol, yea there's some without katanas. Still, 99% of the time if there's a sword, it's probably gonna be a katana. And if it's a weird weapon, chances are it's some ninja thing. You never see swordbreakers, flails, goddendags, or any of the other weirdness that's not ninja. I love SAO and berserk btw. Goblin Slayer was pretty good too. Very non-weeby. Can't think of others though. It's quite understandable, anime is japanese. But that's the reason why all these kids think the katana is superior. It has god mode PR campaign going on with all that anime and shirt.
@@sosig6445 Even on a 1v1 a spear is a swordsman’s worst nightmare. The spear outreaches the sword and is in every way as nimble as a sword, if not even more so because of better leverage due to the long pole. In fact spears are notorious for being fast and having powerful thrusts.
Yes, yes. Lets waste some resources and manpower for making a sword shaped steel bar to bludgeon people to death with. Oh whats that? they actually had blunt weapons back then? what is this "mace" thingie?
Weeb: Western tecniques lack the sophistication and and versatility of eastern fighting styles Knight: *grabs sword by the blade and uses it as a mace to take down an enemy, then proceeds to disarm another with a swift movement* Weeb:n-nani?
oh, and another thing: during a saber lock (sword vs sword) between a Samurai and a Knight, the Samurai would try to break your guard. The Knight will break your knees with a kick, then cut you open
"Hurr durr katanas were better because they have hamon lines and were folded." I run into these people all the time. I never understood them either. Great vid as always Shad.
Ian Finrir Well not necessarily a byproduct, more of a step in the hardening process. A hamon line is made by applying clay to the spine of the blade before heat treating. So that when the blade is quenched the edge hardens more than the spine. This is done because of the forge welded structure of the blade, and for less flex in the blade.
At first glance, I thought the middle sword at 9:35 said "horseshit." I would definitely have named my most trusted weapon Horseshit. To hear the legends of great warriors felled by Stylphede the Great's Mighty Horseshit...
Anywhere else notice the medieval pictures of people getting their hands and half their face chopped off with only mildly disappointed looks on their face you'd expect them to be screaming there head off but no they're just looking at them with a angry look on their face
people in that time period didn't have a lot to look forward to besides the maritals and springtime, plus they used chamberpots and dumped them out into the street, unless they had a pipe they could shit down which also emptied onto the street, so towns and cities literally smelled like shit, which probably contaminated their wells. Plus they didn't really know about proper body disposal and containment, so they probably had their graveyards polluting their wells, too. And they didn't have a lot of clothes, or a lot of water to bathe in, so everyone smelled like body odor unless they could afford flowers or perfume and then they smelled like that and body odor. In short, everything was filthy and smelled terrible.
I do get tired of people saying how Asia and the Middle East had all the good stuff,while Western Europeans were "uncivilized pelt-wearing axe draggers".(quote from Skyrim)
And the "uncivilized pelt-wearing axe draggers" managed to crush everyone under their boot and take over the world, pretty shameful for the mighty and civilized eh?
People especially tend to underestimate Europe from the 12th century on. The middle-age lasts 1000 years, it's silly to imagine that such a long period wouldn't see majors changes and differences between eras. For example, only the few first centuries could be considered as a "dark age". There is two main "medieval renaissances" and I think it's generally correct (though not perfect) to separate the middle-age in three main periods (until the Carolingian renaissance in the 9th century, until the 12th century's renaissance, and the rest). It's in the last part for example that glasses or the full mechanical clock were invented, that Europeans began to build cathedrals (first buildings in the world taller than the great pyramid of Giza), and many other things such as firearms appeared. That period truly deserves more respect.
xenotypos Agreed, even using logical guesswork the whole medieval Asia and Middle East were better argument doesn't make much sense. Europe had centuries of infighting and their own variety of feudal society to get really good at making weapons and armor. I actually should go digging for an episode on their bows too. Those would be harder to find examples of, but there has to be texts discussing how the compensated for better armor in the area of ranged weapons. Accuracy of course would be vital, but I imagine there were also bows and arrows specifically designed to have a better chance of piercing weak spots in armor, and ones meant more for crowd control against large groups of less armored troops. I know there were eventually portable crossbows too, but still. Honestly thanks to AC Origins I've thought a little more about bows than I usually do lately.
The Chinese developed black powder, but the Europeans developed black powder weapons... St Roger Bacon worked with black powder, though it's unsure how he got a hold of it. Asia's martials arts were useless when Round- up with guns.
Kevin Sullivan-> Hmmm to be fair it's not exactly true, the cannon was invented in China (and a bit later independantly in Europe, it seems), and the handcannon was also invented in China (used by the Mongols for example). Europeans invented in the middle-age: also the cannon (but later), and the arquebus (though it could be considered that the middle-age ended in the middle of the 15th century right when it became a common weapon). But on a side note, the black powder was just discovered by chance, nothing was really "developed": a Chinese alchemist thought he was creating an elixir of immortality (lol). As any alchemist, he didn't know at all what he was doing since he had no notion of chemistry. And bam, black powder. When people understood that they could create a "reaction" by mixing some particular stuff, it began to be improved everywhere: middle-east, far east and Europe.
Looking at it from a logical and objective point of view - throughout Europe, there was constant warfare between pretty diverse groups using pretty diverse tactics and equipment. If a weapon was widely used, it was widely used for a reason.
It’s also comparing sword development for an entire continent to that of a single country. 40-something countries fighting themselves and each other will figure weapons out better than one country mostly fighting itself.
@@pretzelbomb6105 the he did that was to debunk weeboos thinking that japanese sword could cut an european armor and against a Knight even though katanas were made to cut you cannot cut armor can you thats why european swords were less about the cut and yes about the stab and the samurai were lightly armored wicth is why katanas were about to cut but a european sword could easily win against a samurai by stabbing Somewhere vital like a hearth the respiratory system
@@agentj3627 i am not native English i am from a largely forgetten country Portugal and can you understand what i writted yes then you dont need to point out uselless thing to the damm argument
I once went to a museum, and the guard pointed out the imprint of a musket ball on a renaissance period breastplate, and asked me: "See that? You know what that is?" I said "Battle damage?" He said " Nope. Quality check. If it broke, the whole cart would be sent back." I was impressed.
Probably because it was ineffective against those without armor,not by ineffective,like ineffective,European swords having an option between being effective on cutting flesh by using a normal stance or sword holding,while against armor,you half sword or use a mordhau grip was probably why they were never changed Because it was easier to kill those without armor with a sword than with a club But there were warhammers at the time Its like a spear,its anti charge but lacks effectiveness when used as a weapon of offense Not saying clubs are bad or any form of blunt weaponry,theres a reason why the poleaxe was one of the most powerful weapon used in battle
@@lucybronkema6486 In the NOVA Secrets of the Viking Sword, John Clement of ARMA demonstrates with an utterly dull bastard sword how it could cut through an 8" tatami roll; the cut was a wee bit ragged, but all the way through. If it had been sharp, there would have been no effective difference between the bastard sword cut or the preceding katana cut.
"Oi Greg I'm thinking about making a weapon almost every soldier will use. What should it be?" "Oh well, Idk mate. What about a... sword? It's this long knife thing." "A long knife? Alright then. Since we need this to kill people why don't we make it easy to swing and sharp?" "What are you dense? Why would we want that? Make it super dull and heavy. I mean look at the guy who made armor, he made it so you can't move at all while wearing that suit of metal so that our soldiers will be sitting ducks that die of heat stroke." "Oh you're right mate. What were we thinking?" *and so it was that every battle in Europe was decided by armies of immobile soldiers who wore 50 ton metal suits and wielded glorified clubs that couldn't cut through anything and yet they weren't immediately conquered by the surrounding nations in Africa and the Middle East because my anime said that a katana can cut through anything and everything and despite the supreme power of the katana Japan never successfully invaded anywhere either*
That's what I love about you, Shad, is that you can tell me/us (regular viewers) that what we're about to see won't be any new information, but I watch it anyway.
The renaissance had also a lot to do with many misconception. This period is full of books that claim that everything between the antique and the renaissance was on a stone age level. Hell, even the name itself is dismissing everything that came after the antique.
I think the biggest myth about medieval European swords is that they were a primary weapon in warfare. It really seems like for most of history, shields, polearms, and ranged weapons were all much more important than swords, but somehow the sword is still the most popular weapon.
Mostly because through paintings and documents we found from the medieval period we were seeing depiction of knight wearing swords. The thing is, swords were more a symbol for knighthood than an actual overall weapon. Also overally speaking, they make for a nice sidearm that is pretty much the best pick if you wish for a weapon that can be of really good use in a wide variety of situation, even against armored opponent (which is why I precise the sword as a SIDEARM), you would prefer to have your sword in your hand if you break or loose your mace in combat than your barefists against an armored opponent, and it was generally better than an axe or mace against unarmored people as it was more deadly. So the sword was a thing of common use, but as I stated, mostly depicted as the knight weapon because it was considered a symbol of authority, of skill and craftmanship. I don't know it seems that the idea of the sword was that it was a much more "civilised" and mastercrafted weapon than a mace or a hammer that might be considered as being more develloped version of weapons that a peasant can always manage to replicate in some way (in wood, with stone...) while a good sword or any piece of sharp weapons needed still a certain degree of craftmanship.
DaaaahWhoosh As far as I know we have no proof in any fashion on the popularity of swords in older eras. Today it's because of the ridiculous prevalence of swords in movies, tv-shows games, books and the like, but the middle-ages, renaissance, migration era etc? We simply don't know. For some of the later eras we can reasonably assume it is due to the relative ease of carrying, acquiring and training with swords. While in the migration era swords were ludicrously expensive, after the invention of crucible steel the cost of good swords plummeted. At its all-time low a simple soldier could buy several swords for a few months salary. It could also be because of the prevalence of swords in knightly art. Knights use swords=swords are awesome. Or something along those lines. If course this is all based on assumptions, and as such should be taken with a grain of salt. Please correct me if a made any mistakes. Have a good one. Bye
The sword was a great sidearm, built for single combat and defense. The reason that polearms saw more prominence it warring states and periods was their reach. Wars are without a doubt a massive free-for-all clusterfuck. Sure there were tactics and positioning, but when the infantry charged, they were basically ramming themselves straight to the enemy. If one had reach, they would be able to intercept the enemy way before they even came close enough to use swords. The importance of the sword in warfare was what happenned AFTER the charge of spearmen and pikemen left them barehanded or dead.
This is how TH-cam is meant to be! I was letting autoplay do it's thing and this video started playing and I was going move on but hearing how enthusiastic this guy was about this topic I watched on. Good job dude, you just earned yourself a new subscriber.
I was in prison for a long time and witnessed a lot of fighting with various weapons. Here's the deal, if a weapon is ineffective, you just don't use it. Europeans would not have gone through the process of sourcing materials and making blades if they weren't effective combat weapons.
To the untrained eye, Savate looks interchangeable with Muai Thai. This French martial art was developed by sailors and pirates to be done on uneven surfaces while wearing one- to two-inch heels. It came out of classical pugilism, and later integrated swordsticks. It's also got a brutal history and is BADASS. I recommend learning about it.
The Savate taught today is probably not the same as the Savate used historically. There's really not a whole lot of treatises available. And it's never really possible to properly teach or learn a martial art from books alone.
The main difference between Savate and regular kickboxing is that you can *only* use your feet in Savate, there's no knee strikes or anything like that
100% true European sword facts: -All swords are made from petrified snakes. -All swords are projectile weapons meant to be fired with a bow. -All sword hilts are made from discarded foreskins. -Greatswords aren't man-made, they are the toothpicks of giants fished out giant dumpsters. -You can't throw away a sword, it will always find a way back home. -The word sword is actually an ancient forgotten swear word that came from people saying "the s word" and it eventually combined to become 'sword'. In the future they'll be called fwords. -If a knight is lost in the desert, a sword can be eaten before starvation kicks in. -Scabbards were only invented because swords weren't getting enough sleep.
Andy Semple I was also told that swords were at one point used as surfboards when King Arthur sailed his army across to mongolia and used excalibur to surf a sea of fire towards the president of space after a dragon god tore the continents apart fifteen years prior, is that true?
ad. 1: It is fine to bring peasants with pitchforks against cavalry if the pitchforks are long enough :) ad. 2: it is fine to bring cavalry against tanks if they are armed with anti-tank weapons :)
If you mean the Polish cavalry against German tanks, than you are wrong. They only used horses to move around battlefield (Germans just used motorbikes, instead of horses) but actually used some heavy anti-tank rifle.
@@TheProstig Well lets face it Polish cavalry lost because horse can be shot only once or twice and motor bike can be shot multiple times without ceasing function. I am not saying polish army wasnt good or anything but it was kind of outdated. In its prime it was force to be reckoned with (battle of Vienna and so on). But war machines and techniques went through rapid evolution since WW1 and Polish army simply wasnt able to keep up (and not only them to be honest).
@@martinbudinsky8912 I don't recall it too much, but I think, the cavalry was actually pretty good and effective, it was just German propaganda, that denoted them. I think they lost because of numerical advantage of Germans, the effect of surprise (even thought not quite) and at the end Russians attacking from the other side. Yes, they weren't technically as advanced as Germans and they didn't really have tanks, but I believe, they managed fairly well.
I remember being VERY surprised when I heard the normal weight of medieval sword being as low as it was, the first time... you always get this feeling that they were heavy from.. I dunno movies or whatnot..
It's mostly because a weighty blow feels more satisfying and entertaining. Deliberately heavy weapons and exaggerated sound effects are far more exciting than reality.
I will not lie, the Katana is my favorite type of sword. Its design, its usage and the insane amount of work needed to craft it makes it a thing of beauty. Yet, that does not mean I can't appreciate the genius design, versatility and general coolness of the European swords. Why do we have to pick a side? Can't we all just admire the awesome invention that is the sword, be it a Longsword, Katana, Viking Sword, Scimitar, Sabre, Jian, Kilij, Spatha or Kopis?
Also, Iaidō is really cool and, although there may have been unsheathing strikes for other kinds of swords, the katana is just so perfect for that kind of attack
Short sword is the best sword. Why? Because in todays age where big swords and guns are either non-concealable, illegal, or hard to come by, it's concealable and longer than a knife! Carrying a sword at all is a crime.. if you're caught with it. It's better and easier and more effective to get a gun license.
I've actually got a friend i play D&D with who,when he DMs, will not let anyone use heavy armor without severe penalties due to "weight" and claim that large swords like longswords, don't cut, they just use their weight to cleave through, but they have no edge and just plow through like a club
Some medieval sword smith: * Spends their entire live making swords and makes some of the best in the world * People 700 years later: Omg their swords sucked!?!11!
The curve in a *katana* is just for redirecting the blade Nothing else A curve from a Middle eastern curved sword was more influenced by their curve then a katana’s.
Well swords are pretty much like pistols nowadays. A self defence weapon, or a sidearm for a soldier. A hammer or an axe would be like a rifle, or an SMG.
Smith: "Oh. I also sold this big iron suit to some of my other customers. If any of them bother you, here's a spikey ball on a stick. I've also thought about attaching the ball to a chain." Knight: "Dude, who hurt you?"
There's an argument that I used to hear about how Knights are cumbersome-immobile brutes in battle and therefore suck. It always made me laugh because I imagine someone with that mindset going up against one in a fight (Considering even conditions) and learning far too late that a lot of knights were required to be able to perform gymnastics in full-plate.
This is a combination of bad movies and well... bad movies. Tournament armor was indeed heavier than what most wore in combat but even then the weight was evenly distributed. Yeah it sounds like a lot to be carrying 60-90 lbs of something around but wearing and carrying are very different. That same knight would most certainly be quicker and more nimble without the armor, but to say that he is a lumbering oaf while in it is just unfettered ignorance.
@@yunofun About that tournament armour, I remember Matt Easton doing a video where he was looking at the tournament helmet of one of the Henry's, I thought it was the fifth, but I could be wrong. Turns out his helmet had a removable front of a thickness comparable to a WWI tank.
Actually plate mail was designed to be as mobile as possible while still being covered in steel. Especially since they also rode on horseback with their armor donned.
Yup. Europeans were smart and worked continuously to develop armor that was strong and still flexible enough to allow free movement. Their armor really is a beauty to see being made.
I think some of these myths stem from a lack of understanding of the engineering of both weapons. The katana is designed to be as durable as humanly possible. There's a reason for this. For a weapon, it uses a whole lot of steel; and at that time, Japan had relatively little steel, and what they had, was not the best quality. Most soldiers would use bamboo armor, and spears; Samurai were a bit more rare. You know the european system; Japan had soldiers and samurai, while Europe had footmen and knights. The Katana was designed as a samurai weapon; they were typically mounted, thus the blade's curve (similar to the sabre,) and most of their opponents, being armored in bamboo, would go down to the katana fairly easily. (That said, the katana's short range made it a sidearm. The Samurai would rely first on the bow, then on the spear.) The knight's sword wasn't designed as much around durability, because it didn't have to be. It was better quality steel. It was more durable as is. That may have been one of the reasons behind these myths- the katana had all these cool smithing techniques to hold its edge, and these people may be assuming that without it, the blades would dull quickly. That's not the case with European swords, provided you're not swinging it into full plate.
Most Katanas only have a hardened edge, the back is left un-hardened. partly because of limitations, but also because it helps to deal with flexing on impact. They would someimes warp and become bent after awkward blows. They weren't intended to strike other swords anyway, you aimed to use footwork and dodge blows rather than sword on sword. Nothing against the katana, mind you. For Japan, it was definitely the best sword that encapsulated everything they needed from an edged weapon, using amazing forging talent, even from lesser quality steel ore they made top notch weapons.
Not really. Have you heard of Berserk, Vinland Saga, or various other manga which use Western weapons? I'm pretty sure Shad himself made a video on an anime which had realistic medieval armed combat.
Happy to hear someone spreading some informed content. Japanese steel was pretty crummy too, in addition to it not getting hot enough. Which is why they had to fold it so much to make it functional.
To be fair, they are still really cool swords. It's impressive that they were able to make swords up to that quality with the smelting methods they had access to. They're definitely not as good as some of their fans think they are, though
This is good to a point (no pun intended...well maybe a little), but their folding technique was very impressive. But as you said, they had to develop an advanced tempering technique to compensate for a poor smelting technique.
Japanese steel was the equivalent to pig iron, and was the worst quality. The many folding technique wasn't some 'mystical art' to make the sword amazing, it was a necessity to make the sword barely usable.
While this is true, we can't neglect that the act of folding also gives the Japanese Katana different properties in terms of rigidity, and the way the swords bend sidewards is different to a blade that is cast from a single solid piece.
@@Real_MisterSir it is just not true. the sword that is forged from solid piece of steel is as strong (or even stronger more bendy) then the one is forged from many pieces and folded many times.
The blade probably just made an indent in his skin since he was pressing it so hard. If you don't know what I mean, just take a butter knife or something and do what he did for a few seconds and you'll see
I remember watching a show on the History Channel years ago (back when they actually attempted to do history-based programming) that was about the making of the movie "The Messenger". They had this history professor on who was talking about society and religion and so on during the time of Joan of Arc. He sounded pretty knowledgable. Then they walked him over to a table that had some of the weapons used in the movie. He picks one up and, I kid you not, the first sentences out of his mouth were "You have to remember that these are replicas. The real ones would weigh 10 to 15 pounds." I immediately turned off the show and fired off a nastygram to History Channel about the idiotic "professor". Anyone who has bothered to browse the stats of the weapons in the Wallace Collection knows that those statements are flat out inaccurate.
Al Myska “Hey Harold” “What?” “You know what we should bring to WAR, where our LIVES are on the line?” “What?” “10 to 15 pound blades” “... ... Brilliant!”
Yes, there have been 'rebated' swords and wooden wasters used in the medieval period, used for training and in tournaments to keep fatalities down among those expensive to train knights.
You don't need to defend yourselves nowadays. Just look at the states. Apparently guns are legal to defend yourself but gun crime is way higher than in Europe; as are murders. Legalising weapons for self-defense doesn't seem to be working there.
@@David-ud9ju making weapons illegal dosnt stop criminal activity, it just stops people from defending themselves with appropriate force. Look up how many lives a year are saved using guns.
@@David-ud9ju You obviously don't realize that violence doesn't magically go away just becuase times change. And no, the cops cannot be relied upon all of the time. The truth is, ultimately you are responsible for your own safety. Not the authorities, not the government, YOU!
Avarage idiot: I'm so good with the sword, when you were adventuring i was training with my sword i could take on a dozen guys with sword i'm a beast with the sword *BANG* sane person: I HAVE A HANDGUN IDIOT!!!
Veteran Adventurer: *covered in scars, tempered by years of experience, weapon basically an extension of their body at this point* Level 5 wizard : Haha, Fireball goes boom
I literally bought an old english longsword for one dollar at a garage sale. Now, granted it is rusty, dull, and bent like hell, it was still a great deal.
longswords aren't meant to bend. It should flex, also usually removing the rust isn't all that hard, then you just oil it every few months and you're good to go
My friend's dad actually baught a Walasashi from a garage sale. It is beautifully made, It's sharp as fuck, and he baught it for the price of a show sword. Shit move on behalf of the seller, because they thought it was a show sword, but he ended up selling a real sharpened wakasashi.
clear vinegar heated to about 50-70 c (if anyone can stand the smell) next boil water and put the sword in it in about 15min, after 15 min in hot water put linseed olie on some cloth and rub it in, dont touch the blade since the oile on your fingers will etch a bit in the blade
The steel the vikings used is from india is a myth. They actually found the smith that made then close to norberg in sweden. That area is rich in natural carbon rich iron there is a documentary avaliable in swedish 😉
@@sonofthebearking3335 as far es i know the famous +VLFBERH+T swords where manufactured in monastery in what today is the Rhineland in Germany. The crosses in the name show that the person signing it was a high ranking monastic specialist, since only monks with a rank equal to a bishop where allowed to use a cross in front of the name. But the name was turned into a trademark later.
I read that they made crucible steel on accident by putting bone ash into the melted metal thinking it would get the strength and powers of the animal and it worked so they kept doing it.
@@Alex-xt1rr That still leaves the question where the steel came from, because that wasn´t made in Rhineland, pretty sure from the isotope content. So I thought it interesting information that there was an exceptionally high quality ore mine in Norway at some time. It is widely agreed, that these swords disappeared when the raw product was no longer obtainable.
Excellent commentary at the end there about the force multiplication that the weapon brings, and the understanding that this creates a much more lethal warrior in a shorter period of time! It's one of the reasons I have respect for HEMA practitioners, they begin assuming the presence of the weapon, whereas other martial arts styles save weapons training for much later on in their training. From a true combative perspective, it makes absolutely no sense to fight unarmed if there is any sort of force multiplier available.
Most martial arts do it as it is easier to pick up the hand to hand part first, and less chance of screwing it up. ("whoops... I may have accidentally broken your jaw...")
one time i was talking about european sword martial art and a guy say that martial arts are asian, i interrupted him and just said "martial arts....martial...as in mars...the famous JAPANESE god of war"
@@danielloader3351 my what was more like "wait are you serious or sarcastic?" i know he is roman, mine was sarcasm like saying "how can you say that martial arts are asian when the name itself is european?" but i didn't know if you were sarcastic or not with the comment
Andrew Lones Having a philosophy degree myself I can reassure you that philosophy is actually the origin of what we now call modern “science”. It’s methodologies were developed by philosophers.
Very true on the Asian martial arts. Karate (lit. open hand) originated in Okinawa, an island off the coast of Japan where weapons were banned for anyone who wasn't a noble. Hence it got developed, and I can only assume other unarmed martial arts are similar.
Vathek unarmed martial arts are the basis of armed martial arts in Europe, specifically wrestling. Oh it isn't sport wrestling but the thing that will break your bones in a split second. Striking arts don't develop in armed places because, well, people can punch back with weapons. Striking arts in such places develop as sports, like Muay Thai (yes it was always a sport) or in places without many weapons like Okinawa.
Karate has a sister art in Kobudo, the weapons art of Okinawa. Things like the bo (basic staff), the sai (which was never a tool, but always a weapon since it's literally an iron truncheon), the tonfa (handles from grinding stones for grain), the Eiku (boat oar), the nunchaku (use to thresh grain or as a horse bridle depending on the source), the kama (general purpose sickle) are all ways around the "no weapons" laws the government forced on Okinawa for decades. Striking arts tend to develop when armor isn't something the typical person can expect to encounter. Hence why karate was developed (and in Europe you have savate and boxing coming up in similar contexts) while Japan developed jujutsu (and Europe has a seriously large number of wrestling styles).
Sorry for the Necro. Many unarmed martial arts developed either so early that they stood a chance, in a poor area, or for rebellion with minimal access to decent weapons
Marcellus muay Thai was always a sport ,but an older version of muay Thai, called muay boran,was a battle martial arts, used in the battle field when weapons were gone, and to keep it's culture alive they turned it into muay Thai with rules
And as I recall, Muay Boran has an armed aspect to it. After all, no one in their right mind enters into a full on battle in war without a weapon if they can help it. ESPECIALLY if they are infantry.
I'd like to point out that Asia cultures did not have a lack of understanding of force multipliers or weaponry, but rather had a huge history of government control on limiting weapon ownership. Japan had a great period of rounding up the weapons from peasants, Okinawans were denied any form of martial implement, China's various governments had restriction on weapon ownership, and most of the Monk temples were also denied the right to store arms (for a very real fear of their revolts). That's why unarmed hand to hand martial arts were more common in Asia than in Europe, but it's also because due to those same restrictions, weapons remained forbidden or restricted for a large group of the populace (not to mention unarmed fighting styles continued to be practiced by various groups essentially constantly).
name a war japan won against anyone other than themselves in ancient warfare... don't worry I'll wait lmao. They almost always got smashed, it was only after adopting western technology did they even stand a chance and they got one sneak attack in then got fucked harder than any country in history. Anime fans taking patriotic lines from the perspective of Japanese characters to heart too much imo.
@@drop0ut606 Well the Japanese won against the Mongol invader only because the fleet was washed away by the sea storm while Japanese army just waiting for the invasion that never happened. That's how the term "Kamikaze" was born.
As a weeb, I feel ofended. Even I can see there were lots of better warfare technology in the west than in Japan. As a matter of fact, their ships weren't even equipped properly with cannons when they invaded Korea, which is why Yi Sung Sin could defeat them at sea so effectively.
Here's a side-note for anyone who might have wondered why all medieval swords didn't have blunt sections at the base of the blade to make fingering the guard easier: sharp edges tend to stick to each-other, so if your sword blade is sharp at the base then it should - in theory - increase the probability that you'll be able to control your opponent's blade when a bind happens at your guard. This may be one reason why the decision was made, as there are many examples of swords with sharpened blades all the way to the base.
i love the misconception that medieval style swords were blunt and basically just sword shaped bludgeons. Just think about medieval weaponry for one moment, if you were trying to bludgeon someone other weapons existed for that. They were called hammers, and maces, and they were far heavier at the end for that specific purpose. A dull sword was a useless sword
Wait two-handed sword weighs up to 2kg?? I have no idea at all about swords but I guessed one-handed sword would be at least 2~3kg and two-handed one would be at least 4~5kg... Well actually it'd be only right for them to be lighter than I imagined
Seasoned reenactor here. I've handled quite a few swords in my time, among other weapons, and yes, it always surprises people how light all the weapons were compared to expectations, even war hammers and axes. The reasons I see are either the perception that they've got to be heavy, being metal and all, the popularization of the image of a totally ripped warrior wielding these blades enforcing that idea, D&D with its insane weight allocations on arms and armour, and the general notion that the weight does all the damage, so therefore, they'd make them as heavy as possible. Swords are swift and agile weapons, using leverage and cutting when not being thrusted. It's preferable to be able to slash effortlessly at your opponent and not get tired in the first few moments. If blunt force is called for, maces, hammers and mauls have you covered. It's funny when people spy my zweihander greatsword in my collection, and imagine it being like Guts' sword, only to see how swift and easy to handle it is. The same goes for them asking if I have a battle axe, and I show them a Dane Axe someone gifted me. You can see that they pictured this stupidly heavy thing with a giant head, and instead are treated to seeing a thin bladed, reasonably sized head on a surprisingly graceful and lithe weapon. They always forget that you used these things against humans that really didn't want a piece of metal being introduced into their anatomy, and will therefore duck, weave, and try to counter you. If you have to do a ridiculously telegraphed and slow power blow to move your weapon, they won't be there when it comes down, and will take their chance while you're off balance and carried forward by inertia. Makes sense, but people aren't used to considering all of it, so I don't berate, I just casually show and correct them.
Most blacksmiths would never want their name even associated with a poorly edged blade. That is in every culture. The sword was a work of art in every single instance. Even in war times when they had to make thousands the quality was good to very good and needed to be sharp, these were weapons. and needed to save or take lives.
I'll agree on the sharp part, but there are also always cheap knock-offs that are of lower quality. Not every sword was a work of art - it takes money for art, after all, and it isn't only the 1% buying swords.
Gamers CUBEIXXI They didnt make thousands of swords during wars before 17th century mate. Swords were very rare across the whole world until that point, when European tech reached improved industrial techniques. Only during the late Roman republic and early Roman empire swords were mass produced before the 17th century
It's a bit like looking at late WW2 German guns. Like, yeah the finishes weren't as nice, nor were the stocks, and some of the less useful features were omitted comepletely. But they weren't going to send people into the field with rifles and pistols that were unsafe or unusable for the operator.
@@nixian_zwaylus I think a spear or a mace would have been better options though. Both spears and maces were really common and easy to use weapons, and both were pretty easy to make (the only metalic part of a spear was the point, and the mace didn't even need good quality metal), so they were pretty cheap. That, and the fact that both weapons were really, REALLY effective at combat.
I recently discovered your channel through your medieval buildings analysis in youtube recommendations, and quickly found myself going on a binge through most of your videos. I'm wholly impressed at your wealth of knowledge and level of analysis. From bosses to baileys to MACHICOLATIONS, I've learned so much despite only having a passing interest in all these things. I look forward to using that knowledge whenever designing things in the future. Your sheer enthusiasm when picking apart castle designs is delightful and inspiring. Through your "meaning of Christmas" and "I was wrong" videos, I found myself floored by your insight and integrity. "Live in Truth", indeed! I'll gladly subscribe to such a fantastic channel. You deserve many more.
"Medieval swords are heavy clubs" DND trained me to think otherwise. People say this and I'm like "cant magehand lift a few weapons? Enough to fetch most of my party's weapons from the guards at once." DND is fairly accurate as a longsword is 2 lbs. Light enough for me to carry, so I always wanted one irl.
Fortunately that's been changed. Back in the day (2nd edition!), they were four pounds (2kg). Sabres were FIVE pounds (2.5kg?!), claymores and bastard swords were ten pounds (five kilos!), and two-handed swords were FIFTEEN pounds (just shy of a bowling ball!). Oddly, they did say rapiers and 'long swords' (what Shad would call arming swords, I guess) were the same weight.
@@andpeggy6048 The second edition Arms and Armaments guide did. Also taught me how much people liked leather armour better, and how prevalent studded leather armour was in the day too.
ChrisC Being in the West doesn't have much to do with it. The vast majority of traditional arts around the world has greatly diminished over the last 300 years or so - we just have more exposure to the small groups in the East that have held out compared to the ones here. HEMA is a _great_ example.
Sterling Muse yes but you have to also admit that there is MUCH more documentation of eastern style martial arts than Western. But yes, thank god for HEMA. Just wish there was a HEMA club near where I live.
thanks its just i didnt grow up on samurai and ninjas i growed up watching and reading lord of the rings the chronicles of Narnia stuff like that so i think knights in shining armer is more interesting and cool then sum over Powered over used samurai.
Timothy Watkins The media. The truly impressive thing about the samurai was their mentality and philosophy. But any person can find wisdom with experience and maturity.
the knights are just as interesting as the samurai knights have there own philosophy that is relly interesting, and the samurai and knights are a LOT more alike then you think.
it occured to me while watching this video, if a sword was just a blunt instrument for beaitng people to death, why the hell did anyone ever invent maces?
It's obvious medieval swordsmiths had no clue. Almost a thousand years after they made them many swords are still quite capable of killing an unarmoured man. Anything we make today has a 12 month warranty. The difference in craftsmanship is obvious... (Just in case it's not obvious, I'm being facetious - great video Shad).
It's not that we couldn't make things more durable, it's just that we don't do it, since it's better for the economy, if you have to replace things every now and then.
@@TheApfelschale That´s exactly why medieval swordsmiths were totally clueless: Who needs a sword the quality like they made them then? They could have sold, like 20 times as many if they would just have made them the way modern cars are made: 2 years warranty, breaks around easter of the third year....
As a martial artist (12 years now in 5 different arts one being more modern military style I'm not nor have I served though I can say your assumption on arts and multipliers being 100% accurate when dealing with armed opposition (with exception of guns that's a whole different kind of self defense) regardless of their lack of training the first thing you are supposed to do is disarm or claim the weapon. As even an untrained stab or slash will likely do more lethal damage then any trained strike. However because many people knew this there was specific training to use agents weapons (easiest to defend agents s pole type weapons btw as tiny side note, fallowed by knifes then swords and axes (the pure force and awkwardness) then any from of ranged weapon) and in my experience disarming isn't very difficult BUT one large exception, armor it's much harder to target or place spacfic strikes or manipulating weight and joints of the body when someone is wearing armor and this is why I believe they weren't as prevalent in Europe as they where in Asia as we can see from many different historical documents the traditional samurai and Asian warriors would often (in comparison to europe) fought without armor or in minimal armor so disarming techniques and self defense for unarmed public or warriors where often taught also as a social form of self discipline do to its adoption into the culture. I hoped this helped support your thoughts or maybe even just gave more education to the matter keep making your videos I love them
Not that long ago, I thing it was in 2000 or something like that a book from 16th century was found in Germany. It is about 50 pages long or so and it is exclusively about disarming somebody in any armour, from linen tunic to full plate, with various weapons from dagger, through axe, machete or sword to spear or halberd. I never saw this book but I met guy studied from it. If is there older man, saying "hit me as good as you can" and smiling, excuse yourself. I still do not have any idea how he did this but it was painful.
good points and all but man, those parenthesis... if you have a parenthetical clause in a parenthetical clause you might want to re-structure the sentence.
my goodness thank you so much for making this! I've just recently achieved a sword (since it's quite an achievement am I right?) and was showing it to some guys at work and everyone was like "oh you have some chips in the blade you should buy a 10000$ katana instead and that would not have happened" And after this video I finally feel confirmed in my idea that no sword is invincible and everybody who says something different has never hit steel on steel. Thanks dude, may the swords be with you.
Any blade that sees action is going to get chipped and damaged. The reason why katanas don’t ever chip is because The katana worshipers would never dare try to use it.
I can hear from here the shattered dreams and moaning of weaboos from the darkest corners of multiple internet forums as reality penetrates their thick skulls... and it brings delight to my heart.
I think weeaboos in general prefer european swords too. look at any fantasy anime today and you won't see a single katana. katanas are pretty much the realm of historical pieces by this point.
Documentary "Oh yea that European long sword is a blunt one-handed sword that's better used as a club. Now this katana can cut through a steel sword, steel shield, and steel armor all in one swing." That, that right there is what happens when so called 'experts' talk about things they don't know. To be fair they might be experts in fantasy LARPing, but not in historical swords. Hell even at a young age I knew a sword couldn't cut metal armor, at best it might dent the armor but actually cut through it, only if it's costume armor which is basically tin foil.
Assuming the dude wearing the armor, who would presumably also be carrying their own weapon, just stood there and let you bang away at their face, yes.
But why, didn't you know that a katana can cut through space and time? And even through a pommel? And that when two katanas collide, they create an interdimensional explosion? ;D
Random person -“European swords are just dull clubs”
Me - “Those are some bold words for someone in stabbing range”
sharp clubs*
I mean, they're not wrong.
Assuming you meant sharp clubs, yeah. That's... what a sword IS.
Lol
@@PashaGamingYT Can you imagine using a club like a rapier
Oh crap its sans
There is a saying in special forces (I talk about Russia here, but I think it’s general thing): unarmed combat can occur only if you manage to lose your firearm, sidearm, knife, spade, flask and everything else AND meet the same kind of idiot from the opposite side :-)
a flask is useless, or at least almost
Bruce Jedi Lee Just take a few swings, it’s actually quite dangerous and in any case better than bare hands :-) And you can always throw it in your opponents face :-)
This comment deserves more likes
@@alexmashkin863 the lowest lvl in the army (US army in my case) is taught hand to hand combat but this training is how to survive and hold down your opponent long enough for your buddy to come over and put a bullet in his brain
N3V3R FORGOTT3N Yes, they teach basics of hand-to-hand in Russia for similar purposes :-) Special forces are trained in hand-to-hand extensively because it’s good for physicality, coordination and overall confidence. But situations where you actually have to use it in combat are very rare :-)
Come on, Shad, everyone knows a sword can cut through anything, as long as it moves along the plot of the story.
The power of friendship adds a joule multiplier
Which stands to nothing to the power of boners!
Don't forget the love triangle! *blam'd repeatedly*
Daniel Elseth
Are you getting your information from Terrible Writing Advice or something?
Gratuitous Lurking
And the prophecies, and chosen ones, and post apocalyptic-ness, and dystopias, and love dodecahedrons, and Mary Sues!
No sword can cut through plot armour!
None of these compare to someone I met who thought the medieval times were just a fantasy thing and didn’t actually happen
Its a similar conspiracy theory like vaccines cause autism (stupid)
Heck, Japan has more fantasy elements in it`s history, especially her early history
thats like the people who think world war II didnt happen like-
Let me guess: that was an american or at least someone who had nothing like the historical european middle age in his country?
@Dragons Rim Well, we don't learn much about the civil war in germany^^ Or anything at all if I remember correctly. I guess you learn what happend in your country first. Even the american revolution wasn't much of a topic. We were too busy studying the french revolution for almost a year^^
"finger the guard"
Random City Guard: Um
Ultramasterjedi I heard it too, I wanted to comment about it but, I did not want to be the first one to comment that and look like some horny fool
Ultramasterjedi Yours is funnier then then the comment i had in my head, so good job on that one
I used to finger the guard. But then I took an arrow to the knee.
Need to get into an Amazonian city?
"Use the ricasso!"
Brem Curt
The arrow to the knee was an infamously oft-repeated voice line from Skyrim guards and people thought it an odd thing to say.
Until someone pointed out how that is a euphemism for getting married.
Where my joke comes in, you see. That being the implication of marrying the fingered guard.
"European swords are dull"
"Halfswording is dumb, the sword will cut you"
Which one is it assbutts?
someones probably already said this but here's a little factoid, the celts were folding steel almost a thousand years before the Japanese were.
And same would apply to Damascene blades. And why? Because their steel (or iron) was in fact crap. Folding takes huge amount of time and work so you will do it only if you really must.
then in 2019 the most technologically advanced country is Japan...
Every blacksmith folds and hammers steel, over and over again. You could cut any sort of wrought-iron item in half and start counting folds.
Legendary Damascene and Katanas involved very specific forging and folding techniques. Controlled carbon content was added to Damascene/Wootz ingots by wrapping them in "special" plant leaves during forging, Katanas instead used "special" muds and clays (ceramics and oils). Certain mines produced steels with useful impurities (like Vanadium, Tungsten, etc). Maybe Celtic-folded blades were similarly developed or maybe they were just simple forging ... unfortunately we just don't know (yet).
@@Zorisura Yet, for some odd reason, they don't exactly apply much of their technological know-hows in weaponry in this day and age, favoring more on efficiency on basically everything else but warfare for some odd reason, despite that they still have a very well equipped army (its just that what you see the Japanese military use are basically the same as the US... most of the time).
@@simonspacek3670 Authentic Damascus Steel was made of high carbon Wootz Steel, which means its closer to a superplastic then pure stainless steel. Its not made of "crap iron", its a different material altogether...
I'm happy you actually mentioned half-swording . so many people think of half-swording as a joke or a meme.
- Hahaha you can't handle a sword by the blade, you'll cut yourself
+ Have you tried it?
- No, but I'm right and you're wrong because [insert invalid reasons here]
@@Burn_Angel Or I had one where I had explained why it was a legit technique and how it worked. They simply retorted with mockery and the clucking Spongebob meme.
Burn Angel That's why you wear gloves
@@ianfinrir8724 Gloves can't protect you against the sharp blade though, it cuts through them really easy.
The gloves are for psychological effect, as you don't feel the blade digging into your fingers.
Well, unless you meant metal gauntlets, I'm pretty sure that that could actually protect you.
@@Burn_Angel ı mean it can protect you but that depens on what its made from how T H I C C it is and the quality something like wool obviously wouldn't protect you that much but a really hard leather from a T H I C C leathered animal would protect you
4:51 A lot of medieval martial arts historical sources don't tell you this, but if you're going to finger the guard, you should buy him a drink first.
Well, unless he's randy
So this is what he meant by "an arrow to the knee"
😂
The Negotiator, pay the fine or let me join
Jay Champagne lol.
You left out the biggest Whopper. The biggest misconception about swords is that they were the main weapon, when in reality, usually a sword was a backup weapon, a sidearm. Your main weapon would be a lance, halbard, pike, spear... or a ranged weapon (bow, crossbow). If you were fighting in a unit, on the battlefield, you'd be using what everyone else was using, and your halbard would look the same as everyone else's. Your sword would be your own and it could look however you wanted it to look. Of course, you wouldn't carry your lance with you if you were headed down to the pub to have a few beers with your friends. The sword was a utilitarian weapon, a sidearm, a dueling weapon, but in battle it was mostly a backup weapon. Exceptions of course exist (Roman Legionaries did throw spears, but were mostly about their swords)
even a longsword?
Yes, this is true when talking situations where you find yourself as a part of a larger fighting force. In that case, swords are secondary because their effective range would allow the enemy force to get way too close to you, and it would simply not be practical to have tons of military who all bear swords as their main weapons. It removes a huge part of the advantage that fighting in a group gives.
However, on an individual scale, a sword is almost always the primary weapon. For anyone who are not meant to fight alongside many allies, the sword is in many cases the primary weapon, as it allows for maneuverability, agility, a good basic defense, and its reach gives you an acceptable safe distance when fighting few opponents - and it can be carried anywhere you want to go, be it on foot or horseback. In such case, a bow would be secondary in many cases, and will only be useful if you already have the advantage of distance.
Silkwesir longsword was a primary weapon
I mean, it just makes sense. Different tools for different tasks
Tell that to a Templar knight
Today, the TH-cam algorithm gods desired to recommend me a video of Teddy Roosevelt getting pissed off at katanas for 17 minutes. Thank you, TH-cam algorithm gods.
This comment made my day 😂
wtf
teddy roosevelt? lol
This comment made my day lol
(Ye laugh)
I'll always remember the first time a friend of mine bought a real, sharpened Japanese katana. And he wanted to prove that his katana was sharper than an 11th century viking sword that I owned, which was also real, and very sharp. Long story short, I ended up proving that both swords were equally sharp. The look on his face was priceless, and ended up winning a hundred dollar bet.
I'll never understand why people will think Katanas are "better" it's a piece of steel sharpened to a fine edge. You know kind of like a European sword. Might have some impurities or slightly different metal make up. But in the end its sharp price of steel. Its gonna cut
A katana is just a curved sword. Historical ones were folded steel because the steel quality was bad
This video should be called WHAT THE KATANA INDUSTRY DOESN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW!!!!!
WHAT THE KATANA *and anime* INDUSTRY DOESN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW!!!
Altsek Dulo Atually, they’re a lot of anime with european swords and chevalery (*hum hum SAO hum hum*) but that true what we see more katanas swords. Meh, whatever, that’s cool !
Atlas I would have used Berserk for my example... but you are technically correct...
Atlas and Dropkicker. Lol, yea there's some without katanas. Still, 99% of the time if there's a sword, it's probably gonna be a katana. And if it's a weird weapon, chances are it's some ninja thing. You never see swordbreakers, flails, goddendags, or any of the other weirdness that's not ninja. I love SAO and berserk btw. Goblin Slayer was pretty good too. Very non-weeby. Can't think of others though. It's quite understandable, anime is japanese. But that's the reason why all these kids think the katana is superior. It has god mode PR campaign going on with all that anime and shirt.
Lmao
Shadiversity: Knight
Skallagrim: Viking
Metatron: Samurai
And what of Lindybeige?
@@carltomacruz9138 Landsknecht
@@carltomacruz9138 Modern Marine?
Metatron is more of a legionary though.
@@Burn_Angel True
I play Dark Souls 3. Straight swords are better than katanas.
Fool, obviously the great club is the best
Clearly the ultra greats words are the best.
What if archery fits my play style more?
Bruh you guys are just casuls. True DS3 players use the broken straightsword
@@roberte.o.speedwagon5811 Zweihänder
"European sword is better!"
"Katana is better!"
Me: Laughs in Spear.
1v1 spear is shit
put them in formation and 100 spearman will slaughter a 100 swordsman
@@sosig6445 You need to be quite good to get past a skilled spear user.
@@sosig6445
Even on a 1v1 a spear is a swordsman’s worst nightmare.
The spear outreaches the sword and is in every way as nimble as a sword, if not even more so because of better leverage due to the long pole.
In fact spears are notorious for being fast and having powerful thrusts.
Me:laughs in gunsword
Yup
I thought swords were realy heavy, then i discovered that my cat is actually twice as heavy as an arming sword...
your cats fat
That’s a small cat
if you have a half grown adolescent cat. Arming swords were 1.5 to 3 .5 lbs, depending on when they were made, and who they were made for.
It seems heavier than it is because you have to support all the weight of the sword from the handle as opposed to it all being in your hand.
@@garyledford2901 Take your lbs and stick em up ur ass. It's kilos.
Yes, yes. Lets waste some resources and manpower for making a sword shaped steel bar to bludgeon people to death with. Oh whats that? they actually had blunt weapons back then? what is this "mace" thingie?
Well I heard maces were used for grinding down ingredients for food
YoungDaniel Sun No.
Yes yes... mortar and mace...
Rykehuss Mace? Friend. Here in the culture club, we call it
The Crozius Arcanum.
reasons swords were used:
peasants dont have armor
Weeb: Western tecniques lack the sophistication and and versatility of eastern fighting styles
Knight: *grabs sword by the blade and uses it as a mace to take down an enemy, then proceeds to disarm another with a swift movement*
Weeb:n-nani?
Samurai: *has flashy katana using techniques*
Knight: *has actually useful techniques*
Knight: Parry this you filthy casual
Let’s not forget
Knight: *unscrews pommel and tosses in opponent’s face*
Crusade knows no bounds
@@link_fd1729 time to end this fool rightly
oh, and another thing: during a saber lock (sword vs sword) between a Samurai and a Knight, the Samurai would try to break your guard. The Knight will break your knees with a kick, then cut you open
"Hurr durr katanas were better because they have hamon lines and were folded." I run into these people all the time. I never understood them either. Great vid as always Shad.
Gibbothy My understanding of the Hamon line was it was a byproduct of the hardening process and it was largely a maker's mark
Ian Finrir Well not necessarily a byproduct, more of a step in the hardening process. A hamon line is made by applying clay to the spine of the blade before heat treating. So that when the blade is quenched the edge hardens more than the spine. This is done because of the forge welded structure of the blade, and for less flex in the blade.
I cross a guy who said the katana was better than two handed swords and broadswords, my godness he was such an idiot, he must watch a lot of anime
Katanas look cooler. You can't argue with me on that. (Dontcallmeaweebidontevenwatchanime)
@Vicodyn yeah. If you want ceremonial, Katanas are good, if you want something works, use a sword.
This video was made for winning TH-cam comment section arguments
when people say that medieval swords are useless, I say to them: "if they are so useless, then why were they used?"
I think its a modern life trend to classify everything non-modern as complete trash and inferior to modern stuff in every way
@@unwithering5313 Except if it's Asian non-modern, because those dudes be mystic and elegant.
@@wombat4191 ikr🙄😂
You don’t do something for a straight millennium without becoming jolly good at it
I'd pay so much money to see someone try to swing a katana against a knight in full plate.
At first glance, I thought the middle sword at 9:35 said "horseshit." I would definitely have named my most trusted weapon Horseshit. To hear the legends of great warriors felled by Stylphede the Great's Mighty Horseshit...
Kinda like naming your sword Kindness or Fluffy Bunny...*Monty Python flashbacks*
Unfortunately, the vikings didn't adorn their swords with english. ;)
dude you just killed me xD
I just wanted you to know I had to laugh out loud to your comment. Know I want a sword just to name it that.
Swords are often named by their accomplishments in battle. The sword might've flung a horse's shit at it's rider or something.
The inability to properly liquify the ore is why the Japanese had to put so much work into forging a blade.
True
I’m just sitting here wondering if they mean all weebs in the comments bc I’m just sitting here like why ru attacking me bro
Anywhere else notice the medieval pictures of people getting their hands and half their face chopped off with only mildly disappointed looks on their face you'd expect them to be screaming there head off but no they're just looking at them with a angry look on their face
Medieval manuals were... odd
people in that time period didn't have a lot to look forward to besides the maritals and springtime, plus they used chamberpots and dumped them out into the street, unless they had a pipe they could shit down which also emptied onto the street, so towns and cities literally smelled like shit, which probably contaminated their wells. Plus they didn't really know about proper body disposal and containment, so they probably had their graveyards polluting their wells, too. And they didn't have a lot of clothes, or a lot of water to bathe in, so everyone smelled like body odor unless they could afford flowers or perfume and then they smelled like that and body odor.
In short, everything was filthy and smelled terrible.
Add to all that, the plague, and you get even more filth and terrible smells.
Just like how we have the most cheerful of faces nowadays in photographs. Kinda weird, don't you think, the whole "smiling for the flash" thing?
This has always puzzled me. It's as if they're saying, oh drat, and I had a dinner date!
The katana doesn't have a pomel, this makes it inferior.
easy fix glue an eagle head on the end of it
You don't really need a pommel to cut unarmed peasants apart, lol.
@@pwnmeisterage ofc you don't, but it's a must in order for you to end your opponent rightly
Than you can't unscrew the pomel to end your opponent rightly
thats because the Katana has no class
I do get tired of people saying how Asia and the Middle East had all the good stuff,while Western Europeans were "uncivilized pelt-wearing axe draggers".(quote from Skyrim)
And the "uncivilized pelt-wearing axe draggers" managed to crush everyone under their boot and take over the world, pretty shameful for the mighty and civilized eh?
People especially tend to underestimate Europe from the 12th century on. The middle-age lasts 1000 years, it's silly to imagine that such a long period wouldn't see majors changes and differences between eras. For example, only the few first centuries could be considered as a "dark age". There is two main "medieval renaissances" and I think it's generally correct (though not perfect) to separate the middle-age in three main periods (until the Carolingian renaissance in the 9th century, until the 12th century's renaissance, and the rest).
It's in the last part for example that glasses or the full mechanical clock were invented, that Europeans began to build cathedrals (first buildings in the world taller than the great pyramid of Giza), and many other things such as firearms appeared. That period truly deserves more respect.
xenotypos Agreed, even using logical guesswork the whole medieval Asia and Middle East were better argument doesn't make much sense. Europe had centuries of infighting and their own variety of feudal society to get really good at making weapons and armor. I actually should go digging for an episode on their bows too. Those would be harder to find examples of, but there has to be texts discussing how the compensated for better armor in the area of ranged weapons. Accuracy of course would be vital, but I imagine there were also bows and arrows specifically designed to have a better chance of piercing weak spots in armor, and ones meant more for crowd control against large groups of less armored troops. I know there were eventually portable crossbows too, but still. Honestly thanks to AC Origins I've thought a little more about bows than I usually do lately.
The Chinese developed black powder, but the Europeans developed black powder weapons... St Roger Bacon worked with black powder, though it's unsure how he got a hold of it. Asia's martials arts were useless when Round- up with guns.
Kevin Sullivan-> Hmmm to be fair it's not exactly true, the cannon was invented in China (and a bit later independantly in Europe, it seems), and the handcannon was also invented in China (used by the Mongols for example). Europeans invented in the middle-age: also the cannon (but later), and the arquebus (though it could be considered that the middle-age ended in the middle of the 15th century right when it became a common weapon).
But on a side note, the black powder was just discovered by chance, nothing was really "developed": a Chinese alchemist thought he was creating an elixir of immortality (lol). As any alchemist, he didn't know at all what he was doing since he had no notion of chemistry. And bam, black powder.
When people understood that they could create a "reaction" by mixing some particular stuff, it began to be improved everywhere: middle-east, far east and Europe.
Looking at it from a logical and objective point of view - throughout Europe, there was constant warfare between pretty diverse groups using pretty diverse tactics and equipment. If a weapon was widely used, it was widely used for a reason.
It’s also comparing sword development for an entire continent to that of a single country. 40-something countries fighting themselves and each other will figure weapons out better than one country mostly fighting itself.
@@pretzelbomb6105 the he did that was to debunk weeboos thinking that japanese sword could cut an european armor and against a Knight even though katanas were made to cut you cannot cut armor can you thats why european swords were less about the cut and yes about the stab and the samurai were lightly armored wicth is why katanas were about to cut but a european sword could easily win against a samurai by stabbing Somewhere vital like a hearth the respiratory system
@@dbriner-jo5tv Please learn to write proper sentences
@@agentj3627 i am not native English i am from a largely forgetten country Portugal and can you understand what i writted yes then you dont need to point out uselless thing to the damm argument
@@dbriner-jo5tv I'm from Portugal too, english isn't very hard, I'm sure you can learn it eventually
The passion of this guy about the durability of the proper European breast plate made me sub.
Georgio De Palouk a little obsessesd with breasts
partly this, partly his passion for all of this, partly your comment, made me sub :D
I once went to a museum, and the guard pointed out the imprint of a musket ball on a renaissance period breastplate, and asked me: "See that? You know what that is?" I said "Battle damage?" He said " Nope. Quality check. If it broke, the whole cart would be sent back." I was impressed.
@@paavobergmann4920 that's where the term "bulletproof" comes from by the way.
If any one claims theses lies as truth, i shalt throw my pommel at them.
thou shalt throw THINE pommel.
Yes! End them rightly!
Poldovico *Thy
You should throw a Dragon!
A dragon made of pommels!
If swords were made so blunt that they were basically as effective as clubs, why not just make clubs? Why were swords the weapon of choice?
Lispy Queer they look fucking sick thats why
Probably because it was ineffective against those without armor,not by ineffective,like ineffective,European swords having an option between being effective on cutting flesh by using a normal stance or sword holding,while against armor,you half sword or use a mordhau grip was probably why they were never changed
Because it was easier to kill those without armor with a sword than with a club
But there were warhammers at the time
Its like a spear,its anti charge but lacks effectiveness when used as a weapon of offense
Not saying clubs are bad or any form of blunt weaponry,theres a reason why the poleaxe was one of the most powerful weapon used in battle
Blunt swords still can cut. You can accidentally cut someone's face open accidentally with a wooden practice sword if you get it going fast enough
@@lucybronkema6486 In the NOVA Secrets of the Viking Sword, John Clement of ARMA demonstrates with an utterly dull bastard sword how it could cut through an 8" tatami roll; the cut was a wee bit ragged, but all the way through. If it had been sharp, there would have been no effective difference between the bastard sword cut or the preceding katana cut.
So that you can stab, thrust, slice & strike with it.....
"Oi Greg I'm thinking about making a weapon almost every soldier will use. What should it be?"
"Oh well, Idk mate. What about a... sword? It's this long knife thing."
"A long knife? Alright then. Since we need this to kill people why don't we make it easy to swing and sharp?"
"What are you dense? Why would we want that? Make it super dull and heavy. I mean look at the guy who made armor, he made it so you can't move at all while wearing that suit of metal so that our soldiers will be sitting ducks that die of heat stroke."
"Oh you're right mate. What were we thinking?"
*and so it was that every battle in Europe was decided by armies of immobile soldiers who wore 50 ton metal suits and wielded glorified clubs that couldn't cut through anything and yet they weren't immediately conquered by the surrounding nations in Africa and the Middle East because my anime said that a katana can cut through anything and everything and despite the supreme power of the katana Japan never successfully invaded anywhere either*
Also Japan did invade an conquer a good portion of asia
Tony D yeah and then they lost it in like half a decade
@@spartan5018 yep lol at least they had it for a while
im stealing this
@@tonyd1952 They conquered it with guns not swords but ok
That's what I love about you, Shad, is that you can tell me/us (regular viewers) that what we're about to see won't be any new information, but I watch it anyway.
The renaissance had also a lot to do with many misconception. This period is full of books that claim that everything between the antique and the renaissance was on a stone age level. Hell, even the name itself is dismissing everything that came after the antique.
I Like the Renaissance period, but I can't deny their bigotry against the medieval period. There was a lot.
I think the biggest myth about medieval European swords is that they were a primary weapon in warfare. It really seems like for most of history, shields, polearms, and ranged weapons were all much more important than swords, but somehow the sword is still the most popular weapon.
Civilian weapon. A bit like the way if you mention guns many/most people think about pistols even though rifles also exist.
Mostly because through paintings and documents we found from the medieval period we were seeing depiction of knight wearing swords.
The thing is, swords were more a symbol for knighthood than an actual overall weapon. Also overally speaking, they make for a nice sidearm that is pretty much the best pick if you wish for a weapon that can be of really good use in a wide variety of situation, even against armored opponent (which is why I precise the sword as a SIDEARM), you would prefer to have your sword in your hand if you break or loose your mace in combat than your barefists against an armored opponent, and it was generally better than an axe or mace against unarmored people as it was more deadly. So the sword was a thing of common use, but as I stated, mostly depicted as the knight weapon because it was considered a symbol of authority, of skill and craftmanship. I don't know it seems that the idea of the sword was that it was a much more "civilised" and mastercrafted weapon than a mace or a hammer that might be considered as being more develloped version of weapons that a peasant can always manage to replicate in some way (in wood, with stone...) while a good sword or any piece of sharp weapons needed still a certain degree of craftmanship.
DaaaahWhoosh It was due to it being a status symbol. Then again, so were axes.
DaaaahWhoosh
As far as I know we have no proof in any fashion on the popularity of swords in older eras. Today it's because of the ridiculous prevalence of swords in movies, tv-shows games, books and the like, but the middle-ages, renaissance, migration era etc? We simply don't know. For some of the later eras we can reasonably assume it is due to the relative ease of carrying, acquiring and training with swords. While in the migration era swords were ludicrously expensive, after the invention of crucible steel the cost of good swords plummeted. At its all-time low a simple soldier could buy several swords for a few months salary.
It could also be because of the prevalence of swords in knightly art. Knights use swords=swords are awesome. Or something along those lines.
If course this is all based on assumptions, and as such should be taken with a grain of salt. Please correct me if a made any mistakes.
Have a good one. Bye
The sword was a great sidearm, built for single combat and defense. The reason that polearms saw more prominence it warring states and periods was their reach. Wars are without a doubt a massive free-for-all clusterfuck. Sure there were tactics and positioning, but when the infantry charged, they were basically ramming themselves straight to the enemy. If one had reach, they would be able to intercept the enemy way before they even came close enough to use swords. The importance of the sword in warfare was what happenned AFTER the charge of spearmen and pikemen left them barehanded or dead.
Weeb: European swords can’t cut thru armor!
Me: Neither can katanas.
me: Yet i can do this with my sword *grips the blade and swings it like a pickaxe*
But...but the power of Friendship ?????
@@bluememe4652 *FOR THE GRACE FOR THE MIGHT OF THE LORD*
@@shroudthewolf1105 DEUS VAULT
If anything, Katanas would most likely be even worse than most non curved swords for going against armor... probably...
Exactly right. Central empires that disarm civilians tend to incentivize bear hand martial arts. I am from China
I only want bear hands if they will be bare bear hands because bear gloves sound uncomfortable.
C Alex bear hands are excellent until your bollocks get itchy.
You forgot the main advantage that the European swords have over katanas: you can unscrew the pommel of a European sword to end your opponent rightly.
this shit had me rolling 😂
This is how TH-cam is meant to be! I was letting autoplay do it's thing and this video started playing and I was going move on but hearing how enthusiastic this guy was about this topic I watched on. Good job dude, you just earned yourself a new subscriber.
I was in prison for a long time and witnessed a lot of fighting with various weapons. Here's the deal, if a weapon is ineffective, you just don't use it. Europeans would not have gone through the process of sourcing materials and making blades if they weren't effective combat weapons.
why where you in prison?
Makes sense.
To the untrained eye, Savate looks interchangeable with Muai Thai. This French martial art was developed by sailors and pirates to be done on uneven surfaces while wearing one- to two-inch heels. It came out of classical pugilism, and later integrated swordsticks.
It's also got a brutal history and is BADASS. I recommend learning about it.
Sebastien Plante thank you! European martial arts are so underapratiated
The Savate taught today is probably not the same as the Savate used historically. There's really not a whole lot of treatises available. And it's never really possible to properly teach or learn a martial art from books alone.
The main difference between Savate and regular kickboxing is that you can *only* use your feet in Savate, there's no knee strikes or anything like that
100% true European sword facts:
-All swords are made from petrified snakes.
-All swords are projectile weapons meant to be fired with a bow.
-All sword hilts are made from discarded foreskins.
-Greatswords aren't man-made, they are the toothpicks of giants fished out giant dumpsters.
-You can't throw away a sword, it will always find a way back home.
-The word sword is actually an ancient forgotten swear word that came from people saying "the s word" and it eventually combined to become 'sword'. In the future they'll be called fwords.
-If a knight is lost in the desert, a sword can be eaten before starvation kicks in.
-Scabbards were only invented because swords weren't getting enough sleep.
About your second point...
"I am the Bone of my Sword."
...also, about every other...
...that was funny. XD
Swords are meant to have unscrewable pommels so you can end him rightly
Why hasn’t my sword back?
Andy Semple I was also told that swords were at one point used as surfboards when King Arthur sailed his army across to mongolia and used excalibur to surf a sea of fire towards the president of space after a dragon god tore the continents apart fifteen years prior, is that true?
my thoughts exactly
Lessons from history
1. Don't bring sheep mounted peasants with pitchforks against cavalry.
2. Don't bring cavalry against tanks.
don't bring a sword to a gun oriented battlefield. (or bring a gun as well)
ad. 1: It is fine to bring peasants with pitchforks against cavalry if the pitchforks are long enough :)
ad. 2: it is fine to bring cavalry against tanks if they are armed with anti-tank weapons :)
If you mean the Polish cavalry against German tanks, than you are wrong. They only used horses to move around battlefield (Germans just used motorbikes, instead of horses) but actually used some heavy anti-tank rifle.
@@TheProstig Well lets face it Polish cavalry lost because horse can be shot only once or twice and motor bike can be shot multiple times without ceasing function. I am not saying polish army wasnt good or anything but it was kind of outdated. In its prime it was force to be reckoned with (battle of Vienna and so on). But war machines and techniques went through rapid evolution since WW1 and Polish army simply wasnt able to keep up (and not only them to be honest).
@@martinbudinsky8912 I don't recall it too much, but I think, the cavalry was actually pretty good and effective, it was just German propaganda, that denoted them. I think they lost because of numerical advantage of Germans, the effect of surprise (even thought not quite) and at the end Russians attacking from the other side. Yes, they weren't technically as advanced as Germans and they didn't really have tanks, but I believe, they managed fairly well.
"Never forget the maneuver of Stabbing The Face."
-Miyamoto Musashi, The Book of Five Rings
John Morey You must research this deeply
Anyone who says The Book of Five Rings is something like 90% philosophical never actually read the book.
Musashi referred to using the Wakizashi which was straighter than the Katana to stab the unlucky fucker.
I remember being VERY surprised when I heard the normal weight of medieval sword being as low as it was, the first time... you always get this feeling that they were heavy from.. I dunno movies or whatnot..
Being made of metal the thing that is heavy
It's mostly because a weighty blow feels more satisfying and entertaining. Deliberately heavy weapons and exaggerated sound effects are far more exciting than reality.
I have a sword myself, weighs about 6-7 pounds. I don't have any place to use it myself, so it's just a decoration.
@@dolphinboi-playmonsterranc9668 That probably twice heavy as it should be, still.
I will not lie, the Katana is my favorite type of sword. Its design, its usage and the insane amount of work needed to craft it makes it a thing of beauty.
Yet, that does not mean I can't appreciate the genius design, versatility and general coolness of the European swords. Why do we have to pick a side? Can't we all just admire the awesome invention that is the sword, be it a Longsword, Katana, Viking Sword, Scimitar, Sabre, Jian, Kilij, Spatha or Kopis?
+No One Fucking *THANK YOU!*
Also, Iaidō is really cool and, although there may have been unsheathing strikes for other kinds of swords, the katana is just so perfect for that kind of attack
No One ありがとう
Short sword is the best sword. Why? Because in todays age where big swords and guns are either non-concealable, illegal, or hard to come by, it's concealable and longer than a knife! Carrying a sword at all is a crime.. if you're caught with it. It's better and easier and more effective to get a gun license.
You seem like a proponent of the SWORDS! shirt. I too appreciate a well designed blade.
I've actually got a friend i play D&D with who,when he DMs, will not let anyone use heavy armor without severe penalties due to "weight" and claim that large swords like longswords, don't cut, they just use their weight to cleave through, but they have no edge and just plow through like a club
Show him this channel, or educate him yourself, for your sake and his.
Cut him with a sword, then beat him with a club and see if he gets the difference.
how about just don't play d&d-
Kick his ass
Tell him that Berserk is pure fiction?
Some medieval sword smith: * Spends their entire live making swords and makes some of the best in the world *
People 700 years later: Omg their swords sucked!?!11!
"bruh
Human Are Quite Idiot Isn’t It?
@Daniel Choupak yes Brothers get the heavy flamer
The virgin blunt sworder vs the shad sharp sworder
You see those warriors from Hammerfell? They have curved swords, CURVED, SWORDS!!
those were not katanas though, they were shamshir or scimitar (middle eastern) influenced swords.
Raven Branwen it's a skyrim reference.
@@doodoodoo3151 exactly what I'm talking about
The curve in a *katana* is just for redirecting the blade
Nothing else
A curve from a Middle eastern curved sword was more influenced by their curve then a katana’s.
:)
OF COURSE THE ARMORE IS GOOD AT STOPPING SWORDS!!! THAT IS WHAT IT IS LITTERALY DESIGNED FOR!!!😂😂😂
And maces and war hammers are designed to break it.
@Jim Milton But doesn't wearing chainmail and gambeson underneath the plate armour make effect of maces and warhammers limited ?
@@lapantony it really doens't. It just stops the mace from breaking your bones through armor
@@NiCoNiCoNiCola That's pretty much what I would call "making effect limited"
Well swords are pretty much like pistols nowadays. A self defence weapon, or a sidearm for a soldier. A hammer or an axe would be like a rifle, or an SMG.
Smith: There are many uses for swords, stabbing, cutting, slicing, beating... what trait do you want your sword to excel in?
European Soldier: Yes
Smith: "Oh. I also sold this big iron suit to some of my other customers. If any of them bother you, here's a spikey ball on a stick. I've also thought about attaching the ball to a chain."
Knight: "Dude, who hurt you?"
There's an argument that I used to hear about how Knights are cumbersome-immobile brutes in battle and therefore suck. It always made me laugh because I imagine someone with that mindset going up against one in a fight (Considering even conditions) and learning far too late that a lot of knights were required to be able to perform gymnastics in full-plate.
This is a combination of bad movies and well... bad movies.
Tournament armor was indeed heavier than what most wore in combat but even then the weight was evenly distributed.
Yeah it sounds like a lot to be carrying 60-90 lbs of something around but wearing and carrying are very different. That same knight would most certainly be quicker and more nimble without the armor, but to say that he is a lumbering oaf while in it is just unfettered ignorance.
if that would be in olympia i totaly would watch it
Full armor gymnastics
@@yunofun About that tournament armour, I remember Matt Easton doing a video where he was looking at the tournament helmet of one of the Henry's, I thought it was the fifth, but I could be wrong. Turns out his helmet had a removable front of a thickness comparable to a WWI tank.
Actually plate mail was designed to be as mobile as possible while still being covered in steel. Especially since they also rode on horseback with their armor donned.
Yup. Europeans were smart and worked continuously to develop armor that was strong and still flexible enough to allow free movement. Their armor really is a beauty to see being made.
On your last point about martial arts. First rule of unarmed combat:
Get armed, QUICK!
Or be a quick runner. :D
Or grovel
Any mans last line of defense!
I would just throw rocks
I'm actually more dangerous when unarmed than when using a bladed weapon, that's though the exception rather than the rule
I think some of these myths stem from a lack of understanding of the engineering of both weapons. The katana is designed to be as durable as humanly possible. There's a reason for this. For a weapon, it uses a whole lot of steel; and at that time, Japan had relatively little steel, and what they had, was not the best quality. Most soldiers would use bamboo armor, and spears; Samurai were a bit more rare.
You know the european system; Japan had soldiers and samurai, while Europe had footmen and knights. The Katana was designed as a samurai weapon; they were typically mounted, thus the blade's curve (similar to the sabre,) and most of their opponents, being armored in bamboo, would go down to the katana fairly easily. (That said, the katana's short range made it a sidearm. The Samurai would rely first on the bow, then on the spear.)
The knight's sword wasn't designed as much around durability, because it didn't have to be. It was better quality steel. It was more durable as is. That may have been one of the reasons behind these myths- the katana had all these cool smithing techniques to hold its edge, and these people may be assuming that without it, the blades would dull quickly. That's not the case with European swords, provided you're not swinging it into full plate.
Most Katanas only have a hardened edge, the back is left un-hardened. partly because of limitations, but also because it helps to deal with flexing on impact. They would someimes warp and become bent after awkward blows. They weren't intended to strike other swords anyway, you aimed to use footwork and dodge blows rather than sword on sword.
Nothing against the katana, mind you. For Japan, it was definitely the best sword that encapsulated everything they needed from an edged weapon, using amazing forging talent, even from lesser quality steel ore they made top notch weapons.
Katanas are frail
Bill lupin Isn't the Katana known for breaking? I heard blocking and parrying would make the blades would break faster
Japanese soldiers did not use bamboo for armor.
Jeffrey Gao yes they did. They did some almost magic stuff to make it actually good, but they did.
Man makes fun of weebs for 17 minutes (2017)
Perfect title. There are a few butthurt weebs in the comments
Uh NO BECAUSE ANIME IS GREAT AND YOU'RE WRONG AND YOU'RE A BAKA AND MY WAIFU IS NOT TRASH
Not really. Have you heard of Berserk, Vinland Saga, or various other manga which use Western weapons? I'm pretty sure Shad himself made a video on an anime which had realistic medieval armed combat.
@@dolphinboi-playmonsterranc9668 Woosh.
C O L O R I Z E D
Do people say stupid things about Dragons too?....
Brem Curt they do in fact
Dragons had blunt teach
Iain Hansen Exactly, some foolish people think they were sharp :P
i think you mean teev
some people think a two legged dragon-like creature is still a dragon..... IT'S A WYVERN, PEOPLE
Happy to hear someone spreading some informed content. Japanese steel was pretty crummy too, in addition to it not getting hot enough. Which is why they had to fold it so much to make it functional.
To be fair, they are still really cool swords. It's impressive that they were able to make swords up to that quality with the smelting methods they had access to.
They're definitely not as good as some of their fans think they are, though
This is good to a point (no pun intended...well maybe a little), but their folding technique was very impressive. But as you said, they had to develop an advanced tempering technique to compensate for a poor smelting technique.
Japanese steel was the equivalent to pig iron, and was the worst quality. The many folding technique wasn't some 'mystical art' to make the sword amazing, it was a necessity to make the sword barely usable.
While this is true, we can't neglect that the act of folding also gives the Japanese Katana different properties in terms of rigidity, and the way the swords bend sidewards is different to a blade that is cast from a single solid piece.
@@Real_MisterSir it is just not true. the sword that is forged from solid piece of steel is as strong (or even stronger more bendy) then the one is forged from many pieces and folded many times.
Ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster by your side, kid.
*OUT OF AMMO*
Knife-time?
*gets killed by a lightsaber*
@@kristopherruiz7644 gets killed by a vibrosword
* get killed bt space ship*
Unless you are a storm-trooper and can't hit shit
Local man yell at weebs.
Stupid profile pic
Same bro
@@koghs I thought your name was kenobi
@@ASmartNameForMe *GENERAL KENOBI*
@Guacamole Nigga Penis What a shame
4:10 you said no cut but we can clearly see a video cut there
Kuma Bear The knife is so sharp it cut through the video.
Obviously the work of one of those ancient japanese folding knife katanas.
Boi
The blade probably just made an indent in his skin since he was pressing it so hard. If you don't know what I mean, just take a butter knife or something and do what he did for a few seconds and you'll see
Asher Gricmans I'll be honest, I didn't realize what the OP was saying either at first
I remember watching a show on the History Channel years ago (back when they actually attempted to do history-based programming) that was about the making of the movie "The Messenger". They had this history professor on who was talking about society and religion and so on during the time of Joan of Arc. He sounded pretty knowledgable. Then they walked him over to a table that had some of the weapons used in the movie. He picks one up and, I kid you not, the first sentences out of his mouth were "You have to remember that these are replicas. The real ones would weigh 10 to 15 pounds." I immediately turned off the show and fired off a nastygram to History Channel about the idiotic "professor". Anyone who has bothered to browse the stats of the weapons in the Wallace Collection knows that those statements are flat out inaccurate.
You did well my child.
You did well...
Al Myska
“Hey Harold”
“What?”
“You know what we should bring to WAR, where our LIVES are on the line?”
“What?”
“10 to 15 pound blades”
“... ... Brilliant!”
Iowa Class that sounds like an “Oversimplified” quote. And I thank you for making that comment.
I dont know how dumb someone has to be to call a sword "blunt"
They're as useful as a... blunt sword. :)
What about the training sword without any sharp that can be called blunt blade
Yes, there have been 'rebated' swords and wooden wasters used in the medieval period, used for training and in tournaments to keep fatalities down among those expensive to train knights.
Some didn’t have edges or just vestigial edges, such as the estoc, because they are thrusting weapons by design.
Weebs and japanophiles? Let's see them fight napalm... Before it was invented... If the longsword doesn't work.
"swords and knives have been used in Europe for self defense for years!"
The British government: I'm gunna pretend i didn't see that
You don't need to defend yourselves nowadays. Just look at the states. Apparently guns are legal to defend yourself but gun crime is way higher than in Europe; as are murders. Legalising weapons for self-defense doesn't seem to be working there.
@@David-ud9ju making weapons illegal dosnt stop criminal activity, it just stops people from defending themselves with appropriate force. Look up how many lives a year are saved using guns.
@@David-ud9ju You obviously don't realize that violence doesn't magically go away just becuase times change. And no, the cops cannot be relied upon all of the time. The truth is, ultimately you are responsible for your own safety. Not the authorities, not the government, YOU!
14:00 Talks about effectively and lethality with a weapon vs unarmed.
*Looks at the Scene from Indiana Jones
fireweapons does not count as unarmed... But that was the mistake of the guy who brings a sword in a fight of guns
Avarage idiot: I'm so good with the sword,
when you were adventuring i was training with my sword
i could take on a dozen guys with sword
i'm a beast with the sword
*BANG*
sane person: I HAVE A HANDGUN IDIOT!!!
Veteran Adventurer: *covered in scars, tempered by years of experience, weapon basically an extension of their body at this point*
Level 5 wizard : Haha, Fireball goes boom
@@charlesboudreau5350 yeah fireball is the equivalent of a magical grenade
I literally bought an old english longsword for one dollar at a garage sale. Now, granted it is rusty, dull, and bent like hell, it was still a great deal.
longswords aren't meant to bend. It should flex, also usually removing the rust isn't all that hard, then you just oil it every few months and you're good to go
My friend's dad actually baught a Walasashi from a garage sale. It is beautifully made, It's sharp as fuck, and he baught it for the price of a show sword. Shit move on behalf of the seller, because they thought it was a show sword, but he ended up selling a real sharpened wakasashi.
Native_Beats _2016 wakizashi...
@@bourbon5983 better to find out sooner than later
clear vinegar heated to about 50-70 c (if anyone can stand the smell) next boil water and put the sword in it in about 15min, after 15 min in hot water put linseed olie on some cloth and rub it in, dont touch the blade since the oile on your fingers will etch a bit in the blade
"Europe had no Martial arts"
Wrestling, Fencing, Boxing, Bataireacht, Hopak, Glima, Pankration
Savate also.
The steel the vikings used is from india is a myth. They actually found the smith that made then close to norberg in sweden. That area is rich in natural carbon rich iron there is a documentary avaliable in swedish 😉
I think he's talking Specifically about the Ulfberth(?) Swords.
@@sonofthebearking3335 as far es i know the famous +VLFBERH+T swords where manufactured in monastery in what today is the Rhineland in Germany. The crosses in the name show that the person signing it was a high ranking monastic specialist, since only monks with a rank equal to a bishop where allowed to use a cross in front of the name. But the name was turned into a trademark later.
Yup, something else, the nazis buys steel from the sweddish on WW2
I read that they made crucible steel on accident by putting bone ash into the melted metal thinking it would get the strength and powers of the animal and it worked so they kept doing it.
@@Alex-xt1rr That still leaves the question where the steel came from, because that wasn´t made in Rhineland, pretty sure from the isotope content. So I thought it interesting information that there was an exceptionally high quality ore mine in Norway at some time. It is widely agreed, that these swords disappeared when the raw product was no longer obtainable.
Oh the ravages left by the 2000s History Channel documentaries... Thankfully we have HEMA and medievist youtubers now!
you should train!
Hema, isnt that a store
Excellent commentary at the end there about the force multiplication that the weapon brings, and the understanding that this creates a much more lethal warrior in a shorter period of time! It's one of the reasons I have respect for HEMA practitioners, they begin assuming the presence of the weapon, whereas other martial arts styles save weapons training for much later on in their training. From a true combative perspective, it makes absolutely no sense to fight unarmed if there is any sort of force multiplier available.
Most martial arts do it as it is easier to pick up the hand to hand part first, and less chance of screwing it up. ("whoops... I may have accidentally broken your jaw...")
I've said this before I'll say it again, the Katana is the most overrated sword in human history.
AGREED!
Finley! someone who has an IQ higher then two.
That’s very true, doesn’t make it ineffective or useless just very overrated.
The most overrated weapon*
Agreed
one time i was talking about european sword martial art and a guy say that martial arts are asian, i interrupted him and just said "martial arts....martial...as in mars...the famous JAPANESE god of war"
Mars is the Roman god of war
@@danielloader3351 wait...what?
@@deviousmile669 yep
@@danielloader3351 my what was more like "wait are you serious or sarcastic?" i know he is roman, mine was sarcasm like saying "how can you say that martial arts are asian when the name itself is european?" but i didn't know if you were sarcastic or not with the comment
Andrew Lones Having a philosophy degree myself I can reassure you that philosophy is actually the origin of what we now call modern “science”. It’s methodologies were developed by philosophers.
Very true on the Asian martial arts. Karate (lit. open hand) originated in Okinawa, an island off the coast of Japan where weapons were banned for anyone who wasn't a noble. Hence it got developed, and I can only assume other unarmed martial arts are similar.
Vathek unarmed martial arts are the basis of armed martial arts in Europe, specifically wrestling. Oh it isn't sport wrestling but the thing that will break your bones in a split second.
Striking arts don't develop in armed places because, well, people can punch back with weapons. Striking arts in such places develop as sports, like Muay Thai (yes it was always a sport) or in places without many weapons like Okinawa.
Karate has a sister art in Kobudo, the weapons art of Okinawa. Things like the bo (basic staff), the sai (which was never a tool, but always a weapon since it's literally an iron truncheon), the tonfa (handles from grinding stones for grain), the Eiku (boat oar), the nunchaku (use to thresh grain or as a horse bridle depending on the source), the kama (general purpose sickle) are all ways around the "no weapons" laws the government forced on Okinawa for decades.
Striking arts tend to develop when armor isn't something the typical person can expect to encounter. Hence why karate was developed (and in Europe you have savate and boxing coming up in similar contexts) while Japan developed jujutsu (and Europe has a seriously large number of wrestling styles).
Sorry for the Necro. Many unarmed martial arts developed either so early that they stood a chance, in a poor area, or for rebellion with minimal access to decent weapons
Marcellus muay Thai was always a sport ,but an older version of muay Thai, called muay boran,was a battle martial arts, used in the battle field when weapons were gone, and to keep it's culture alive they turned it into muay Thai with rules
And as I recall, Muay Boran has an armed aspect to it. After all, no one in their right mind enters into a full on battle in war without a weapon if they can help it. ESPECIALLY if they are infantry.
I'd like to point out that Asia cultures did not have a lack of understanding of force multipliers or weaponry, but rather had a huge history of government control on limiting weapon ownership. Japan had a great period of rounding up the weapons from peasants, Okinawans were denied any form of martial implement, China's various governments had restriction on weapon ownership, and most of the Monk temples were also denied the right to store arms (for a very real fear of their revolts).
That's why unarmed hand to hand martial arts were more common in Asia than in Europe, but it's also because due to those same restrictions, weapons remained forbidden or restricted for a large group of the populace (not to mention unarmed fighting styles continued to be practiced by various groups essentially constantly).
spring steel sword: can widstand more abuse than other types of steel
Darkness is that you? Did you get riencarnated as a sword?
WEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEBWEEB
Connimoran ok buddy
The only people who say the Japanese were the best fighting force/ craftsmen in world are weebz or people who are arrogant
name a war japan won against anyone other than themselves in ancient warfare... don't worry I'll wait lmao. They almost always got smashed, it was only after adopting western technology did they even stand a chance and they got one sneak attack in then got fucked harder than any country in history.
Anime fans taking patriotic lines from the perspective of Japanese characters to heart too much imo.
@@drop0ut606 Well the Japanese won against the Mongol invader only because the fleet was washed away by the sea storm while Japanese army just waiting for the invasion that never happened. That's how the term "Kamikaze" was born.
As a weeb, I feel ofended. Even I can see there were lots of better warfare technology in the west than in Japan.
As a matter of fact, their ships weren't even equipped properly with cannons when they invaded Korea, which is why Yi Sung Sin could defeat them at sea so effectively.
@@drop0ut606 they won that one bit against Russia is the sino Russo war or whatever it was called
@@drop0ut606 the russian war
Here's a side-note for anyone who might have wondered why all medieval swords didn't have blunt sections at the base of the blade to make fingering the guard easier: sharp edges tend to stick to each-other, so if your sword blade is sharp at the base then it should - in theory - increase the probability that you'll be able to control your opponent's blade when a bind happens at your guard. This may be one reason why the decision was made, as there are many examples of swords with sharpened blades all the way to the base.
All you peasants with your fancy swords.
I am a devoted butter knife warrior. 🔪
I'm a steak knife warrior.
A Butter Knife warrior, eh?
Please do consider switching from crappy metal to the amazing cutting edge that is serrated plastic
=__=🔪
Lorenzo Lodge I shall vanquish thou with my spoon
1v1 me mate i have a blunt fencing sword
Yes, yes... But what about DRAGONS?
Emanuele Corbellini
“What is it - dragons?”
Dragons = ace of trump
i love the misconception that medieval style swords were blunt and basically just sword shaped bludgeons. Just think about medieval weaponry for one moment, if you were trying to bludgeon someone other weapons existed for that. They were called hammers, and maces, and they were far heavier at the end for that specific purpose. A dull sword was a useless sword
Wait two-handed sword weighs up to 2kg??
I have no idea at all about swords but I guessed one-handed sword would be at least 2~3kg and two-handed one would be at least 4~5kg...
Well actually it'd be only right for them to be lighter than I imagined
Seasoned reenactor here. I've handled quite a few swords in my time, among other weapons, and yes, it always surprises people how light all the weapons were compared to expectations, even war hammers and axes.
The reasons I see are either the perception that they've got to be heavy, being metal and all, the popularization of the image of a totally ripped warrior wielding these blades enforcing that idea, D&D with its insane weight allocations on arms and armour, and the general notion that the weight does all the damage, so therefore, they'd make them as heavy as possible.
Swords are swift and agile weapons, using leverage and cutting when not being thrusted. It's preferable to be able to slash effortlessly at your opponent and not get tired in the first few moments. If blunt force is called for, maces, hammers and mauls have you covered.
It's funny when people spy my zweihander greatsword in my collection, and imagine it being like Guts' sword, only to see how swift and easy to handle it is. The same goes for them asking if I have a battle axe, and I show them a Dane Axe someone gifted me. You can see that they pictured this stupidly heavy thing with a giant head, and instead are treated to seeing a thin bladed, reasonably sized head on a surprisingly graceful and lithe weapon.
They always forget that you used these things against humans that really didn't want a piece of metal being introduced into their anatomy, and will therefore duck, weave, and try to counter you. If you have to do a ridiculously telegraphed and slow power blow to move your weapon, they won't be there when it comes down, and will take their chance while you're off balance and carried forward by inertia. Makes sense, but people aren't used to considering all of it, so I don't berate, I just casually show and correct them.
Indeed, it should feel easily workable, movable, nimble, in your hand.
Try not to picture swords from Skyrim. Regular swords are too long, and great swords are like, way too big. Like Claymore size.
You carry it 99% time at your mission, why made stupid hard to be with you.
why would one make a 5 kilogram knife with combat as its main intent?
Most blacksmiths would never want their name even associated with a poorly edged blade. That is in every culture. The sword was a work of art in every single instance. Even in war times when they had to make thousands the quality was good to very good and needed to be sharp, these were weapons. and needed to save or take lives.
I'll agree on the sharp part, but there are also always cheap knock-offs that are of lower quality. Not every sword was a work of art - it takes money for art, after all, and it isn't only the 1% buying swords.
Gamers CUBEIXXI They didnt make thousands of swords during wars before 17th century mate. Swords were very rare across the whole world until that point, when European tech reached improved industrial techniques. Only during the late Roman republic and early Roman empire swords were mass produced before the 17th century
@sterling muse those who didn't have enough money for a sword didn't buy a knock-off, the bought a knife or some other blade...
It's a bit like looking at late WW2 German guns. Like, yeah the finishes weren't as nice, nor were the stocks, and some of the less useful features were omitted comepletely. But they weren't going to send people into the field with rifles and pistols that were unsafe or unusable for the operator.
@@nixian_zwaylus I think a spear or a mace would have been better options though.
Both spears and maces were really common and easy to use weapons, and both were pretty easy to make (the only metalic part of a spear was the point, and the mace didn't even need good quality metal), so they were pretty cheap.
That, and the fact that both weapons were really, REALLY effective at combat.
I recently discovered your channel through your medieval buildings analysis in youtube recommendations, and quickly found myself going on a binge through most of your videos. I'm wholly impressed at your wealth of knowledge and level of analysis. From bosses to baileys to MACHICOLATIONS, I've learned so much despite only having a passing interest in all these things. I look forward to using that knowledge whenever designing things in the future.
Your sheer enthusiasm when picking apart castle designs is delightful and inspiring. Through your "meaning of Christmas" and "I was wrong" videos, I found myself floored by your insight and integrity. "Live in Truth", indeed!
I'll gladly subscribe to such a fantastic channel. You deserve many more.
"Medieval swords are heavy clubs"
DND trained me to think otherwise. People say this and I'm like "cant magehand lift a few weapons? Enough to fetch most of my party's weapons from the guards at once." DND is fairly accurate as a longsword is 2 lbs. Light enough for me to carry, so I always wanted one irl.
Fortunately that's been changed. Back in the day (2nd edition!), they were four pounds (2kg). Sabres were FIVE pounds (2.5kg?!), claymores and bastard swords were ten pounds (five kilos!), and two-handed swords were FIFTEEN pounds (just shy of a bowling ball!).
Oddly, they did say rapiers and 'long swords' (what Shad would call arming swords, I guess) were the same weight.
@@Qaianna did you say 15 pound sword?
@@andpeggy6048 The second edition Arms and Armaments guide did. Also taught me how much people liked leather armour better, and how prevalent studded leather armour was in the day too.
@@Qaianna
Leather was preferred when it comes to light engagements such as duels. Knights loved pairing their plate with chainmail and gambesons.
It's a shame the West has largely forgotten its traditional martial arts.
ChrisC Being in the West doesn't have much to do with it. The vast majority of traditional arts around the world has greatly diminished over the last 300 years or so - we just have more exposure to the small groups in the East that have held out compared to the ones here. HEMA is a _great_ example.
Sterling Muse yes but you have to also admit that there is MUCH more documentation of eastern style martial arts than Western. But yes, thank god for HEMA. Just wish there was a HEMA club near where I live.
Because we have a new one.
Marksmanship.
Eastern societies had restriction on who could have weapons so those without made martial arts
ChrisC we gonna pretend that boxing and wrestling don't exist?
can you do a video on why the knight is so underestimated and why the samurai is overestimated.
Timothy Watkins Anime!!!
Thats all I have to say :P
thanks its just i didnt grow up on samurai and ninjas i growed up watching and reading lord of the rings the chronicles of Narnia stuff like that so i think knights in shining armer is more interesting and cool then sum over Powered over used samurai.
Timothy Watkins The media. The truly impressive thing about the samurai was their mentality and philosophy. But any person can find wisdom with experience and maturity.
the knights are just as interesting as the samurai knights have there own philosophy that is relly interesting, and the samurai and knights are a LOT more alike then you think.
no they spend more time promoting the fantasy samurai and then that fantasy is miss understood and people think that a katana can cut through steel.
it occured to me while watching this video, if a sword was just a blunt instrument for beaitng people to death, why the hell did anyone ever invent maces?
Katana: Katana's are best!
Western Sword: No western sword is better!
Katana and Western Sword: Oh sh-
nice
Firearm: You might luckily deflect a single bullet but I dont think you can handle all of them.
Hand Grenade: If you see one near you, you're already dead.
APC: *Guess what fuckers?*
@@conni4518
Holy hand grenade from Antioch: LOL
It's obvious medieval swordsmiths had no clue. Almost a thousand years after they made them many swords are still quite capable of killing an unarmoured man. Anything we make today has a 12 month warranty. The difference in craftsmanship is obvious...
(Just in case it's not obvious, I'm being facetious - great video Shad).
a spoon is capable of killing an unarmoured man, if you're dedicated enough
It's not that we couldn't make things more durable, it's just that we don't do it, since it's better for the economy, if you have to replace things every now and then.
Translation: people buy more shit when the shit they need keeps breaking all the time.
@@TheApfelschale That´s exactly why medieval swordsmiths were totally clueless: Who needs a sword the quality like they made them then? They could have sold, like 20 times as many if they would just have made them the way modern cars are made: 2 years warranty, breaks around easter of the third year....
@@paavobergmann4920 if they'd break in the middle of a fight no one will buy
As a martial artist (12 years now in 5 different arts one being more modern military style I'm not nor have I served though I can say your assumption on arts and multipliers being 100% accurate when dealing with armed opposition (with exception of guns that's a whole different kind of self defense) regardless of their lack of training the first thing you are supposed to do is disarm or claim the weapon. As even an untrained stab or slash will likely do more lethal damage then any trained strike. However because many people knew this there was specific training to use agents weapons (easiest to defend agents s pole type weapons btw as tiny side note, fallowed by knifes then swords and axes (the pure force and awkwardness) then any from of ranged weapon) and in my experience disarming isn't very difficult BUT one large exception, armor it's much harder to target or place spacfic strikes or manipulating weight and joints of the body when someone is wearing armor and this is why I believe they weren't as prevalent in Europe as they where in Asia as we can see from many different historical documents the traditional samurai and Asian warriors would often (in comparison to europe) fought without armor or in minimal armor so disarming techniques and self defense for unarmed public or warriors where often taught also as a social form of self discipline do to its adoption into the culture. I hoped this helped support your thoughts or maybe even just gave more education to the matter keep making your videos I love them
Not that long ago, I thing it was in 2000 or something like that a book from 16th century was found in Germany. It is about 50 pages long or so and it is exclusively about disarming somebody in any armour, from linen tunic to full plate, with various weapons from dagger, through axe, machete or sword to spear or halberd. I never saw this book but I met guy studied from it. If is there older man, saying "hit me as good as you can" and smiling, excuse yourself. I still do not have any idea how he did this but it was painful.
good points and all but man, those parenthesis... if you have a parenthetical clause in a parenthetical clause you might want to re-structure the sentence.
The thumbnail makes me imagine a very insecure sword being haunted by criticism.
The longsword deserves the reputation of the katana.
my goodness thank you so much for making this! I've just recently achieved a sword (since it's quite an achievement am I right?) and was showing it to some guys at work and everyone was like "oh you have some chips in the blade you should buy a 10000$ katana instead and that would not have happened" And after this video I finally feel confirmed in my idea that no sword is invincible and everybody who says something different has never hit steel on steel. Thanks dude, may the swords be with you.
Go to Graz, Austria, and visit the "Landeszeughaus". See the condition of some of those blades. They have seen action, and it shows...
Any blade that sees action is going to get chipped and damaged. The reason why katanas don’t ever chip is because The katana worshipers would never dare try to use it.
Really informative! I learned more in a few minutes than a years worth of history channel. So many bad documentaries.
"My hero just got kidnapped!" "Oh no!" "I have to pay 10 million gold to get her out!" "What happened to all of your gold?"
I'm sick of that ad.
Blunt, Crude and Heavy!! That supposed to be me!!!
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Same.
I can hear from here the shattered dreams and moaning of weaboos from the darkest corners of multiple internet forums as reality penetrates their thick skulls... and it brings delight to my heart.
You hear that... it sounds like... magnificence.
I think weeaboos in general prefer european swords too. look at any fantasy anime today and you won't see a single katana. katanas are pretty much the realm of historical pieces by this point.
you are amazing and hilarious
Youri van Steeg then it's done it's job
Yessssss!!
Make these fools realise their ineptitude!!
The music you have playing in the back ground is just the best
Donovan Phoenix lol
Master of the Feast.
Documentary "Oh yea that European long sword is a blunt one-handed sword that's better used as a club. Now this katana can cut through a steel sword, steel shield, and steel armor all in one swing." That, that right there is what happens when so called 'experts' talk about things they don't know. To be fair they might be experts in fantasy LARPing, but not in historical swords. Hell even at a young age I knew a sword couldn't cut metal armor, at best it might dent the armor but actually cut through it, only if it's costume armor which is basically tin foil.
Invidious I mean if dents the armor and keep hitting it it may break
Assuming the dude wearing the armor, who would presumably also be carrying their own weapon, just stood there and let you bang away at their face, yes.
It's some buffon trying to be an expert in anything other than the very narrow field of their associates degree.
It's a wonder piercing swords started being more prominent over slashing with the rise of plate and scaled armor, huh?
But why, didn't you know that a katana can cut through space and time? And even through a pommel? And that when two katanas collide, they create an interdimensional explosion? ;D
“Finger the guard”
Shad - 2017
yes
Lol
lul
lol
Lol