There's an anecdote, (probably made up, but still clever) about a German officer in The Great War declaring that the the centuries long debate between straight and curved swords had at last been settled...by the machine gun.
Lol It would be a German officer. But no this guy has a video about why officers dont carry swords no more and it's not cause they ineffective in combat (still to this day they are there a middle eastern man who hunted ISIS with a sword) but cause of snipers lol
@@randallwilkinson4453 agreed. I seriously think America could solve the gun violence problem by trading in guns for licenses to open carry swords. I would take that trade in a heartbeat. lol
As someone with an engineering background in regards to curved swords handling flex along the plane of the edge I can say that multiple effects of the geometry are assisting with resisting plastic deformation of the steel. First you noticed that the edge tends to be easier to align which helps to minimize the potential torque the steel receives. Second the curved shape minimizes the amount of blade in the target at any moment and maximizes pressure along the smallest or at least smaller arc of the edge. Last I'd point out many curved swords maintain more total metal from edge to spine from the center of percussion to the tip so having more steel total at the point of impact helps to absorb energy and resist bending both elastic and plastic deformation. This also pushes mass further forward and gives greater momentum for the same speed and force applied with the body. Many specialized thrust oriented swords become very narrow at the point or have a high degree of flexibility in temper so there is less metal to absorb stress and or bend elastically to avoid deformation and damage. The net results being a generally reduced ability to cut through resistive media and increased likelihood of blade damage with poor edge alignment. Lastly you referred to an arched bridge pointing out it's general ability to hold more weight than a straight surface... This isn't quite correct with an arched bridge the weight is being delivered at an angle through the material so it acts as though the material is thicker than it really is because the weight is supported through the arch shape to the ground. A closer similarity is seen in modern tank armor where angled plates are effectively thicker and the angle of the armor helps deflect impact rather than always absorbing the full force of enemy fire. Hope this helps and is of interest.
Yes, the parallel with curved bridges is not correct. It would apply only when your sabre would have been strenghtened with straight support spine (as classic school angle meter) :) Other points about dynamic aspect of loads mentioned in message higher seems correct to me. I think it all comes to point that when you need a sword which can withstand cutting it's much heavier then let's say epee or rapier and you coudn't parry fast enough in duel environment. Just try it against good epee fencer... :)
@@milkeer Id argue the parallel to a bridge is correct as noted it is effectively putting thicker and flatter geometry material along the spine of the sword which could bear a lot more load and reduce blade flexing or potential breakage, it also aids the swords edge therefore in delivering the energy into the target as opposed to flexion.
I'm reading a book called "The Last Full Measure: How Soldiers Die in Battle" by Michael Stephenson, and just came across a couple of different viewpoints on this very issue from contemporary sources. The first was an argument in favour of straight swords, from a French cavalry specialist named Grandmaison in the mid-eighteenth century: "A single thrust into the body with the point will kill a man, which frequently cannot be achieved with twenty cuts with the edge." On the other hand, this was the opinion of a Hungarian cavalry officer who was writing during the same era: "I know that straight swords deal a more deadly blow, but they are not nearly as effective in combat. If you need convincing, I will explain the mechanism of the two kinds of weapon. When he is at a full gallop and a cavalryman attacks his enemy with the point, he will inevitably pierce him. But he must stop and break off his part in the action, so as to pull the sword out. During an equivalent amount of time a dragoon with a curved saber will have wounded three or four enemy, without having to stop his horse or stop fighting. The enemy will not be mortally wounded, but at least they will be disabled, which is what we ought to look for in battle."
Puncture to be quickly lethal is limited to eye, heart, throat. Small protected moving targets. Anything else has delayed effects. A man with 30 seconds to live can still kill. Plus the vacuum of the body will suck the blade in. A massive cut is incapacitating with shock and blood loss. And will not stick. A cut returns naturally to guard on the follow through whereas a thrust leaves you open.
It's interesting to note that curved swords are overwhelmingly (though not exclusively) used by light cavalry and cultures that emphasized light cavalry. Most of the advantages you talked about in the video are especially important for light cavalry. For instance, the curve providing a more natural cutting motion means that your blade is less likely to be stuck in your target while you do a ride by attack.
@@CharliMorganMusic across some of his videos in the past, he has briefly mentioned that curves like a saber do a natural draw cut (like here), while curves like a falx do a natural push cut. ...Maybe look up his video on "wavy blades" - another edge design to add to it all.
@@CharliMorganMusic look up the Gurkha Kukri knife. one of the deadliest choppers because of its forward curve. forward curve = heavy chop. similar to an axe head which is forward from the handle
Physicist: The curve changes the vibrational mode of the metal stick, so that less of the force is lost to blade 'waves' about the point of impact. I think this kind of explains a number of points made (the cutting contact point, the strength, and the other one). Its interesting. I've fenced sabre all my life and never given this any thought.
The science for a curved blade energy focus is because of it being a tangent contact point rather than a parallel contact line, which would lead to greater impact pressure (force/area).
23:55 This is why I think the katana has a good thrust, because the force is pushing back against and being supported by the arch structure of the steel
Oh... This video is full of second meanings. Smile: ”We love deep penetrations” slight suspension "when it come to blades." "A curved blade helps focus the energy onto a smaller area and increase penetration, which is always good." Smiles
10:03 - you can also think; You're not removing the sword from the shealth. But rather, the sheath from the sword. i.e. Push the sheath forewards before drawing. Then, draw the sword by keeping the handle position fixed in front of you. And moving only the sheath backwards (exposing the sword). This reduces the distance you need to move the arm holding the sword (speeding up the draw, by clearing more of the sheath) ;)
To weigh in on the structural aspect of the curved blade: In the case of a basic cut, and setting aside the aspect of a curved blade's natural tendency to better align the edge on impact, a curved blade and a straight blade are approximately identical in strength. When looking at a typical arch, such as an arch bridge, for instance, we see a curved structure supported at both ends and a load over the center. That load is directed and distributed by the arch into both of the two supports in a manner that depends as exclusively as possible upon the compressive performance of the material from which the arch is made. Take away one support, as in the case of a sword held at one end, and we no longer have an arch. We are left with a system in which the curved shape has essentially lost its (structural) significance. There is no overall compression between the tip of a curved sword and the sword's hilt (while performing a standard cut with the center of the blade), and the material of the blade does not behave like the stones of an arch. The forces at play in a sword are the load upon the edge of the blade, the counteracting force at the hilt, and an additional torque supplied by the hand at the hilt in order to keep the system from rotating. (An arch needs to worry about little-to-no torque stresses as having supports on both sides of the load creates a symmetrical system that, thanks to the arch's nature, is all about compression.) With no force at the tip of the blade, and with torque therefore acting throughout the system, the blade experiences tension along the edge of the sword, and an equal amount of compression along the spine. These forces are the same regardless of whether the blade is curved or straight. It falls upon the dimensions, cross-section, and material properties of the blade to withstand these forces. TL;DR The parameters of this scenario are very different from those that allow an arch (bridge, roof, or what-have-you) to massively benefit from its curved shape. Therefore, two swords that are the same in every way other than curvature will have virtually identical blade strength when cutting. This does not, however, account for other differences between the dynamics of straight and curved swords, such as the natural angles of impact, edge alignment, etc., nor does it include cases outside of a squarely-aligned ideal-world cutting action.
Structural engineer here, and I agree. You MIGHT get some effects due to inertia, if the accelaration is large enough, which will cause the curved blades to behave like arches, but I think this effect would be negligible. Otherwise, straight swords and curved swords behave like cantilevers when struck and will have the same strength if they have the same cross section and material strength.
An old US Cavalry manual I read emphasized the curved blade's propensity to slice rather than chop. It made the point that swords are not axes. It also showed a high-wrist style of thrust, which I did not understand but then I am not a horseman. It also mentioned several of the issues you mentioned such as thrusting around shields and hooking arms and legs. Great job.
One of the things I love about your videos is that I can tell you've actually used many of the blades and do a lot of things right without thinking about it: centering the weight, rotating the torso for power & speed, etc. I can also tell you don't have that same experience with curved blades. When drawing a curved blade, step forward with the sword-side foot like you are doing a lunge instead of drawing that shoulder back. Drawing backwards like you are winding up for a baseball swing robs you of defense and time. Likewise, begin your thrust with edge down and rotate mid-thrust, away from the parry. Rotating before the parry gives your opponent an easier time. You can practice this with two suspended vertical strings. Thrust around the front string into the back one.
7 topics in (minus the ads) almost 30 minutes. THAT is content! Other channels do 10 topics in 3 minutes and spend the most time on the click bait thumbnail.
Agreed. I started as a hoplologist and moved into HEMA, before I became ill. The different uses and handling of single hand, hand/half, longsword, cut/thrust, chopping/slashing falchion types, and the later rapiers and small sword (not to mention the greatswords and true two handers, which I can't wield lol and they're really not that heavy, I think one of the heaviest TRULY used two handers was around six pounds or so?) fascinate me a great deal. I'll never be able to examine the intricacies physically, but I love studying it and reading about it. This is a great and fun channel
Really good video Mr Easton. One thing you didn't cover though was straight bladed swords with curved cutting edges. (I'm thinking Greek Ziphos and to a lesser extent early pattern imperial roman gladii). Although shorter in length than the blades you used as examples, is there a case that the "straight blade/curved edge" form is the best of both worlds? Be interested to hear what you think.
After the constant bombardement of RSL advertisements, I finally succumbed, and installed the game. Let me tell you, it is one of the worst things I have ever played. Even compared to other Gacha games, like Danmachi, Girls Frontline, or Genshin Impact, the monetisation is offensively aggressive. You start the game, and immediately have to close several windows of their cash shop "offers". The gameplay is bland, the "story" is barely existant, and the "champions" are just dolls, without any characterisation, back stories, or personal sidestories to explore. The worst thing, however, is the upgrade system. You have to grind yourself through the bland levels to level up your characters. But to progress beyond a certain point, you have to upgrade their "star rating", which you can only do by sacrificing other characters of an equal star rating, and you have to sacrifice as many of them as the number of stars the character you want to upgrade has. At higher star ratings, you will end up having to sacrifice dozens of characters to upgrade a single one, and each of the sacrifices also have to be upgraded first, unless you buy the higher end summoning crystals. And then, once you have upgraded your character, its level gets reset to 1, so you have to grind up its level all over again. Luckily, I resisted the urge to spend any cash on it, and deleted the game and my account after a week.
Before the Heian tachi, with a continuous curve through the tang, there was also the kenuki-gata tachi - which had a curved tang but straight or nearly straight blade - and the tang was offset at an angle which gave a further impression of a deeply curved blade. The ancestor of this sword, the warabite-to, had the same feature. These were short, single handed swords with a single edged blade which was usually completely straight, yet the grip was offset at an angle. I have always been curious as to how such swords would feel in the cut.
@@adamsaley9460 Raid is what's known to gamers as pay to win, basically a game with tons of microtransactions that effect you ability to play the game effectively
momerathe Gambling generally presupposes that you have a chance to win money in return. Maybe I’m just uninformed, but I’m not seeing that. Does RSL offer you a 5X payout if you win or something?
I knew about edge alignment and focusing force, but I didn't know there were more advantages, thanks for the info. I have some things to share. About the edge alignment. There might be more to what you said. Not only can you feel the alignment, but it also wants to be aligned. Shadiversity showed that when you support it in both ends, it rolls to being in line. When Jairus of All made God of War swords, swords on the ends of chains and the user spins, he talked about some rocket science in order for the blades to fly straight. I don't know how good of a job I'll do of explaining, but I'll try. There's an axis of rotation, and you want mass behind the axis of rotation in order to make the center of drag behind the line, so the mass trails behind. If the profile is shaped in such a way that the center of drag is behind the axis of rotation, the sword will to a degree self correct human error in edge alignment and maintain edge alignment when something tries to make it turn. The farther away the center of drag is from the axis of rotation, the greater the effect. Regardless of the center of drag, curves can put mass farther away from the axis of rotation to make them "wider". Wider blades will cut better than narrower blades with the same mass, POB, edge geometry, thickness, etc. I don't know if whoever is currently reading this understands why, so in case they don't, I'll explain. Think of a right triangle. At a constant height, the wider the triangle the more accute the angle of the base and hypotenuse. Imagine there's a sword hitting a target and it wants to turn, if it has enough energy to rotate the end of the sword x millimeters, how many degrees will the sword rotate? The wider the sword, the less degrees of rotation, the more the edge alignment is maintained, the less energy goes in the wrong direction, the more energy is exerted where it should be, the better the cut. Also, the wider the blade, the harder it is for the edge alignment to be thrown off by the target. When Skallagrim was testing a really wide longsword, the prinepe, he said it was very forgiving when you messed up the edge alignment. I think that it's because normally when you mess up the edge alignment, it rolls further out of alignment and doesn't cut very deep, but because this sword was very wide, it didn't get very much out of alignment and even though it lost some force going in the needed direction, it still had enough because of the acute edge geometry. Even if the edge geometry isn't super acute, wider swords will still be harder to throw off and more forgiving. Curved swords aren't all the same. For example, the kopesh will be "wider" but won't be self correcting. A katana will be self correcting and, but not as much as a shamshir. When you say that the profile causes the force to be focused, I agree. My first thought is that simply by visualizing it like your demonstration with the rolled up paper it's true, but with what I know about science, I agree that tests should be done to confirm it. I think Skallagrim has done some tests on that, probably not enough to satisfy science, but it's some evidence. As far as comparing a curved sword to an arched bridge, I don't think so, but I'm not an expert. If the arch tries to bend from the weight, it has to move out in order to maintain the length or compress and get shorter. Because it's supported on both ends, the connection supports it from moving out to maintain length, and the compressional strength of the material helps to prevent it from getting shorter. I would think both happen a little as no material is perfect, but I don't think it would be noticable. With a curved sword, there's nothing on each end of the blade supporting it from moving out to maintain length, the energy from the swing isn't isn't being applied in the direction that supports against that.
Civil engineer here: About your point that curved swords are stronger due to arch effects - this almost certainly isn't correct. Arches are used a lot in concrete construction, as concrete is strong in compression but weak in tension. An arch bridge works by directing loads directly to the supports on both sides of the banks directly under compression and there is little to no tension in the system. The foundations of the arch also press sideways into the abutments, creating a form of negative moment that provides additional stability (similar to how the string on a bow pulls the two ends together - bow shafts actually work like an arch!), and if the foundation can’t take this horizontal load, the arch can collapse. Arches are generally effective with other materials, and are a very stable form. However an arch only works if it is supported on both sides, with a sword it is only supported at the grip, which prevents any benefits of the arched form. The only way a curved blade would have any advantage from arching action would be if the tip was also supported, and both ends were prevented from sliding apart from one another. One possible reason for curved swords being more stable would be because they are single edged blades (would also apply to straight single edge blades). With a single edged blade the spine of the blade tends to be (but is not always) thicker. The spine of the blade takes compression forces during impact, and tends to undergo an effect similar to lateral torsional buckling. A cross sections ability to resist against this is primarily due to it’s stiffness, and the thickness of a “plate” (blade) effects the stiffness to the power of 3, so a plate/blade that is twice as thick is 8 times stiffer (2^3 = 8). This is also why flexing of the blade to the side is significantly higher than in the direction of the blade, as the stiffness in this axis is for most blades several orders of magnitude higher, but they can flex in both directions.
As a non-engineer (a non-anything, really) I was also thinking this during the video. "An arch is strong because it's supported at both ends!" I thought. So anyway thanks for vindicating my instincts and making me feel like a genius.
As an aerospace engineer there's a subject shared both in my field and civil that'd be fairly useful in studying properties of blades: slender element, plate and shell stability analysis. I wish I saw this video/comment earlier. I'll say though that the curved blade, as a cantilever rotation-restrained slender profile beam, has some advantage in that the blade, if curved away from target, is statically stable in rotation, given the contact point of the force is behind the centerline (in relation to the cutting motion), which might reduce the chance of buckling and local failure. For a straight blade it is ever so slightly unstable, and very unstable for a blade curved forward.
On the subject of curved swords structural strength. Not to say, that your point is wrong entirely, however, the architectural arch comparison is definitely flawed. The structural strength of the arch is stemming from the forces being evenly distributed and redirected into the supporting structure (foundations). This will not be the case in a sword, because the ends are not supported in the same way nor direction. Furthermore, while an arch is capable of supporting high distributed load, it's resistance to impact is less impressive. Curved swords still might or might not be stronger for different reasons (mass distribution, less taper, maybe angle of impact or whatnot; But also remember you own point about the forces being concentrated in a smaller area, which might in fact make it easier to damage the blade);
You can instead just model it like a curved cantilever beam. In that case, the end that's gripped acts as the force concentration point. If we assume that the blade is perfectly made with no imperfections throughout the blade, then the greatest point of focus is where the grip meets the blade or the support. The curve is still very beneficial when you make some basic assumptions.
Correct. The curve might mean that more (relative to a straight blade with the same amount of material) material is supporting the load on impact. Think about sloped armor on modern vehicles, where this principle is used.
As far as it goes "area moment of inertia", curved beams do have some advantage in deflection resilience on parallel axis over straight ones when considering same conditions (Materials, cross section etc)... That is problably the main point that Matt couldnt explain properly.
I would be interested in expanding this inquiry to include straight and curved pole weapons. How does the curve of a glave, for example, alter its use and usefulness compared to a 'regular' spear. What are the trade-offs associated with trying to combine thrust and cut functions for weapons such as bills, halberds, and poleaxes. What contexts dictated the shape, use, and tactics for these weapons.
For a warm up, so to speak, pretty much everything he said here applies to those as well in some ways. Exception being about scabbards, for what I hope are obvious reasons. There is more of course, just as there is more to curved swords vs straight swords than these 6 points, but just starting with the how exactly these points apply to weapons with longer handles should be already good food for thought.
Also works in the other direction if you're using a glaive or something like that. You really don't want your blade dragging on that horse (alive, dead, wounded or carrying a body in either of those 3 stages) passing by your side.
@@louisvictor3473 yeah, a blade like a halberd, shotel, or kukri can trap/trip but note that cavalry nearly always have backswept blades so that you aren’t violently dismounted (or have your arm broken, or both/worse) when you make a slash at a solid target while at full gallop, I believe that was Hans’ point.
@@louisvictor3473 good point, that's probably why there are so many hooks on these weapons. But especially with the Glaive you have a curved blade on one side so that you can give a rider a cut without the weapon being torn out of your hand.
Mechanical engineer here! I haven't done the maths, but my intuition is that *for the same cross-section*, the curve of the blade won't make too much difference to its bending stiffness. The comparison to bridges is missing a key point - bridges are supported at both ends. Swords are usually only supported from one end. Additionally, arch bridges get their strength by redirecting the load into compressive forces in the structure. That's great for materials like stone or concrete that are strong in compression but weak in tension, but steel is more or less equally strong in tension and compression. It's certainly possible to build a steel arch, but it's equally possible to build a steel truss or suspension bridge. All of which is to say: I don't think that arch bridges are a good analogy for curved swords. Having said that, from the examples in the video, it looks like curved swords tend to be taller (blade to spine) than straight blades, which will make a huge difference. All else being equal, the bending stiffness of a blade in that direction of curve is proportional to the cube of the height!
Carlo takes note: when parrying a curved sword's cut, do so close to yourself, so the other guy cannot turn the damn thing and thrust around your parry
From personal experience, I can say that one of my favorite things to do with a curved sword when I was practicing was to mix into my normal cuts false edge cuts and curved thrusts with a flick of my wrist mid swing. The people I spared with (used to fighting against straight swords) often didn't even notice the switch until they felt the impact and looked to how my wrist was turned the opposite way they expected. The typical response to this was to try and fight at distance and keep me out of measure with a longer weapon or thrusts to not even give me the chance because of how hard they found to defend against it. Not an expert-level experience by any means, but hopefully a useful or at least interesting anecdote for some.
@@MusMasi I'm less familiar with more by the manuels saber fencing (especially since a lot of historical sabers don't have a false edge, so we're talking about a subset here) but I do know that stick fighting manuals show some very similar techniques (and I believe Matt has done a video on those) Like I said, not working at expert level here (though understanding non-expert level techniques is also valuable as not everyone in history was either)
@@MusMasi np, a good place to look, btw a place you might not immediately think to look for similar strikes are back/false edge cuts with things like arming swords. Here's a demonstration of some cutting tests using very similar techniques to what I'm discussing th-cam.com/video/TeED1jlGY2E/w-d-xo.html And while I'm at it the stick fighting video I mentioned, which in rewatching to make sure it was the right one (and for fun) was reminded does actually even mention curved swords with a "false edge" th-cam.com/video/WTEUz9lXExI/w-d-xo.html Hope that helps you or others visualize what I mean better and/or tie it to other techniques you may be more familiar with.
I feel a big part of that debate depend on the warrior and his/her preference coupled with the dominant armor they were facing similar to martial arts styles and their evolution
Small correction: The false edge katana (or moroha-zukuri) isn't derived from the naginata as far as I know. Naginatazukuri swords do have a wedge-shaped back at the end of the blade that looks a bit like a false edge but isn't sharpened. Moroha-style katana are also distinct in that they tend to have spear-tips, which naginata do not.
While curved swords deliver weaker thrusts due to the point not being in line with the arm, it's important to point out that thrusts penetrate (unarmored/lightly armored) opponents fairly easily, so you don't really need as much force in the direst place.
Advantages of a straight sword: 1. Greater penetration. 2. Better aim while thrusting, so you don't miss the right spot, where you intend to penetrate. 3. Looks cooler. 4. Scabbard can be made to look like a walking stick. 5. While slashing with the tip, the enemy gets less time to react. 6. Greater reach with same amount of steel. 7. A greater proportion of straight swords have pommels which can be unscrewed.
Cool to finally see that mentioned, I know cavalry sabers are primarily designed for slashing, but I’ve always thought they’d particularly be good at running someone through on foot from horseback, simply lower the blade and use momentum to impale them
Man, I dig learning so much from your video's. It's not just the info and understanding, though that's what is important to me. I dig the historical legitimacy you derive your information and lessons from, both interesting and illustrative, and demonstrative. These understandings can be applied and utilized as a philosophy perhaps.
I have an antique Nathan Starr (1814?) model American saber, previously sharpened at some point in it's history. Ever encountered any on that side of the pond?
I remember seeing one in a museum when I was young. Looking at images online a min ago and they have almost all the features of the "perfect " saber I designed in my head a while back. Do you now what they weigh on average?
Scholagladiatoria is my favorite HEMA-channel on TH-cam, but I've taken a long break on this content. Imagine my shock when Matt Easton starts selling me Raid: Shadow Legends of all things... What the actual... I was so stunned I couldn't even skip the ad. Sad to see this development, but I still do love your content.
Yeah, Raid is a horrible game, not to mention an extremely annoying advertisement. But Matt's content is still good, and he does deserve to make some money for his efforts.
That parang is amazing. Dont think I have seen one quite like it. I agree with all 7 of your points. For me the curved blade is the way to go. Thanks again Matt! Cheers!
Now do this for straight swords! One advantage I don’t see brought up often is the ability to half-sword, so if you choose to make one for straight ones please mention that.
It's perfectly possible to half-sword with a curved blade, the wielder only has to keep their fingers off the edge. So long as the wielder grips only the back and the flats, there shouldn't be a problem. That might not be precisely how half-swording with a straight blade is, but they're different blade structures in the first place: they're bound to have different methods of use.
@@Vlad_Tepes_III you wouldn’t get the benefits of half swording though. The curve would make it harder to put your weight behind a thrust or aim the tip as accurately, which is the entire reason for half swording.
@@Specter_1125 Shallow curves on blades, like with many Japanese swords, lend themselves pretty well to half-swording. I agree that stronger curves lose much of the benefit, but something like tachi would be able to still get that sweet thrust. I may be a little wrong, but I believe there are treatises on samurai being taught techniques for this in case of fighting armored opponents. Again, not 100% sure, but it is stuck in my head.
I took Kendo, and they did tell me that I should aim to hit my target with the portion of the shinai just above where the tsuru is tied to the body with that leather thong about 2/3 of the way up because it simulates the "cutting" area of the blade and is observed for scoring. That bit wears off fastest, typically XD
*Twitches every time Matt puts the blades back in the scabbard* I have always liked the Japanese "draw the blade along the scabbard until the tip reaches the hole", to me it seems less fiddly and a more accurate way to get a sword back into the scabbard than the "aim the point at the hole, and hope you don't stab your hand"
It seems like the swords that have the line of the handle behind the point of impact would be better for draw cuts. Once the edge bites, you can apply slight pressure by turning your wrist, and (through lever mechanics) that pressure is magnified at the edge, causing it to "dig in" as you pull or push the blade.
I always saw curved swords as more as a sword used on horseback. The swords being curved away allows the blade to "roll off" target while still delivering the blow. Basically, there's the pressure on your grip as you ride through the terrain
Thank goodness I found your channel!! Super information, well delivered. You are a man who knows his business, many thanks for sharing your expertise with us. Julian Wilkins NC USA
regarding your last point about a curved blade being less likely to bend (I.e. being more rigid), I think it has to do with the cross section more than the curve. Most of the curved blades I have seen have a deeper cross section with fullers, essentially making it like an H beam. If I had to guess, I think that the problems with rigidity of straight blades in the cut, like you mentioned in forged in fire example, is due to the problems that you mentioned earlier, namely the curve helps with edge alignment, helps with follow through of the cut, etc that reduce the likelihood of edge turning and blade bending in the flat plane.
Dooku's way of sword fighting - called "Form 2" - is duel-oriented (lightsaber vs. lightsaber), and I think his sword has curved grip for the same reason modern fencing foils often have pistol grip
Great video. I can't help but thinking that a few of these (obviously not alignment, horseback or grip angle) could also apply to leaf shaped Gladius blades. Can thrust around shields, cut with the other edge, strong blade, nice rounded center of percussion, easy to draw.
just make a sword with 2 blades coming out of the hilt, one that curves and one that doesn't. finally the perfect cut and thrust sword with all advantages and no disadvantages! =p
I think the force applied in your #4 is insignificant. The much more important matter (than the curve) on the force is the center of mass, and percussion. Curved swords are almost universally weighted toward the blade and that means much more force behind the cut.
I think you've missed some characteristics of curved blades that I consider important. 1. Tip cut geometry, which aids in edge alignement. If you grab a curved sword by the handle and put its tip on the table, flat on, then just release the grip a little bit, then the sword will naturally turn the edge downward. So even if the cut isn't perfect, the inertia of the belly of the blade will help in correcting the alignment. 2. Aerodynamic effect, which aids in edge alignment. Swinging a broad curved sword at exactly 90 deg to the motion, that is trying to deliver the cut with the flat, is not easy, because the blade acts like a vane on an arrow or an airplane tail and tries to steer the edge forward. Curved swords are aerodynamically stable with the edge forward. Straight swords are not. The use of this effect can be seen on many period depiction of XIXth century hussars charging. They hold their swords up, but with the edge backwards. Iwanowski describes a series of cuts which start with the edge backwards. The blade turns in the hand mid-cut. I believe that only with a curved sword delivering such cuts makes any sense at all.
Ive allways thought that a curved blade would cut rather automaticly , you know because the naturel movement of our arm ist rotation so the blade would automaticly slide over its target
Excellent video as usual, Matt! Went thru your presentation twice to make sure I’m not being dumb by bringing this up. I don’t know if you’ve covered this before, if so, apologies in advance but here goes. One advantage of the curved blade that I’ve not seen anyone address that you may wish to consider is - With a curved blade used in the thrust (straight or nearly straight) the wounding effect of the curved edge is dramatically larger than on a straight blade. For instance, if a 1 inch spine to edge width blade like a rapier is thrust into a target, it makes a nominal 1 inch wound track. Obviously upward or downward pressure upon the haft may affect this but the baseline mechanical structure of the blade only offers a 1 inch wide wound channel. When comparing that thrust wound to a curved blade the physics are similar to comparing a 1 inch edge to edge dagger to a 2 inch spine to edge Bowie knife. With a curved blade, the direct force of the thrust will mostly attempt to flow along the line of least resistance created by the initial track of penetration of the point… BUT NOT ALL OF IT! A certain amount of the energy will direct to the advancing edge in the belly of the blade, widening the wound track, no matter the depth of the penetration. Ergo: a 4 inch deep wound created by a 1 inch wide straight blade will give Far Less tissue damage vs a 4 inch deep wound created by a typical slightly wider curved blade but in part a large portion of the curved blade’s wound volume may be exacerbated by the shearing action of the belly of the curved blade as it is forced into the target - Adding a PUSH CUT component to the thrust by the simple mechanics of the blade shape itself. Therefore, while the straight blade has many advantages in the thrust, when one successfully lands a powerful thrust with a curved blade, the attendant shearing wounding capacity of the curved edge will be greater for every unit of measurement of the depth of the wound. This means that a point thrust which just manages to miss a vital organ could be saved by that same or an adjacent organ being damaged by being sliced through by the dependent (relative to the point) edge of the curved blade. That damage to vital parenchymal tissue or major blood vessels and the attendant shock, could win the fight when it might carry on longer with that near miss straight bladed thrust. As I began with, haven’t seen this addressed and certainly ballistics gel dummy testing could verify it. Once again, thank you for all your hard work and shared scholarship. Kelly Moulton
I've always just thought curved swords and knives look cooler, since I'm a gamer aesthetics have always mattered more to me than actual usability, it's really interesting hearing from the realistic historical martial art perspective though.
Sounds like you guys are talking from personal experience. NO the curve should be strictly vertically upwards, otherwise see a doctor. Expensive and painful surgery required. 😜
The handle difference in the curve leaning to back leaning is related to techniques used in combat as you described but more simply can be categorized by the direction of force. It has to do with energy of movement. If it is curve leaning the more common techniques are centripetal or a inward arching cut. If it is back leaning it is more for centrifugal movement of a curve pushing through the cut and away.
Can you make a review of "chance to hit" with all weapons? That would be super interesting Which weapons are easier to land a hit with? Lets put numbers on them
That last point on structural advantages is not only unequivocally true--but something I've been arguing for YEARS! Thank you for being someone with clout addressing it!
Usually materials can take more compression stress than tensile stress. When a blade impacts, the back of the blade is under tensile stress. Curved blades aren't double-edged so often, so there's more material to take that stress in the back. We'd have to take into account the comparable lengths of straight and curved blades, too. If there's a same amount of material used for both, and even the same cross section, curved blade has shorter reach. Same impact would cause less stress, if material isn't so far away from the point of impact, like in curved blades.
@@mikaluostarinen4858 You're definitely right about both compressive vs tensile stress and spine thickness on single edged blades being keys, that's been part of what I've long argued. 😊
With all due respect, the answer to the question is more complicated than just "arches are generally very strong, therefore so are curved swords." An arch is a particular kind of structure including certain conditions that are entirely different from those a sword encounters. Regarding a simple cut, both a straight and a curved sword are very nearly identical, which I explore in a comment above. There may indeed be some cases in which a curved blade has an advantage over a straight blade in terms of strength, but likewise there are cases where a straight blade is stronger. I can think of some such cases regarding thrusts. I can elaborate, or even draw up some diagrams if you're interested! I love this stuff. EDIT: Regarding spine thickness, you're definitely right -- having a single edge gives you room to beef up the back of the blade while keeping the edge nice and fine, which is especially helpful for preventing the blade from breaking in the center when the tip's inertia puts tension on the spine.
Hi Matt. Great Video. One point: An arch is supported on both sides, which allows dispersion of forces. A curved blade is only supported by one end. If the curved blade is indeed stronger than the straight blade, it would have more to do with your first point, ie. the curved blade slices through the strike rather than simply impacting.
Two engeering points, not thought out so forgive me: 1) arches are supported on both ends, and convert vertical load into horizontal compression which stone excels at. Not the same here. 2) I picture a curved sword as an axe in the first half, but second half is contacting BEHIND the center of gravity and therefore extremely self stabilizing at impact and follow through, reducing your chance of turning sideways and bending, no?
Re: the structural integrity: If the curvature of the sword means it concentrates more force in a smaller area, wouldn't that also imply that that puts a curved sword under stronger stress by not spreading the force out over as large a portion of the blade? Not a physicist, mind you, just a layman's musing.
11:29 This is actually Not a thing for two reasons: 1. The curve radius of curved swords is so large that it doesn't reduce the contact area even by 1% 2. Even if you had a ridiculously curved sword with a curve radius of let's say 5 cm, you wouldn't really see much difference. (I hope I can explain this somewhat well with just words). Let's say you cut through a cylindrical object with a diameter of 10 cm (leg or arm). A straight blade cutting through that object will increase its contact area with the object as the object gets thicker and decrease the contract area again after passing the center of the cylinder. A curved blade will have a (slightly) smaller contact area initially but will increase its contact area faster precisely Because! it is curved. This leads to the result that a curved sword will actually have a larger contact area with our imaginary cylinder after a certain penetration depth!
So about the "structural curve", I'm not conviced. I'm a civil engineer, so I know my arches, and for it to work you have to have 2 contact points and a force. With a sword, you only have one contact point (your hand) and one force (the impact). This means the sword acts as a cantilever, where its shape isn't really important. What Matt describes is probalby caused by the generely broader blades of curved swords, which are advantagious for a cantilever.
One question. When you hit a target with the middle part of a blade, the part of the blade furthest away from you, behind the point of impact, wants to travel on in the same direction. Now, with a straight blade this section is initially already in the same position as the one that impacts and then gets ahead of it, while with a curved blade, the section behind the point of impact is generally further away from the target than the one that impacts. Could that make curved blades more stable?
When it comes to durability out of curves, thinking less arch and more to do with mass. Curves usually imply single edge so you've got more meat on the blade to absorb shock
Mechanically speaking only if the shock is applied directly perpendicular to the edge at the point of contact all of it would be converted into bending. So even a pointy blade (non parallel blade edges) already transfer some portion of the impacting force towards the main axis of the blade and thus reducing bending. This is of course more likely with a curved blade because it is less likely to have a contact with the blade exactly at a 90 degree angle to the blades edge.
About the arched shape, you're completely right and it is for the same reason an arched bridge can hold its weight and some more when the same material laid in a straight line would just collapse. It is the same physics regarding shape. The shape just ensures a better dissipation of energy through the whole material when force is applied in the convex direction. That is why the outside of helmets are also round, rather than flat (and if they have been flat at one point, they "quickly" rounded up in the next generation).
Excellent job Matt there's one advantage that I think you overlooked on having a false edge on a curved sword and that would be a being able to force and cut your way out with considerable leverage on the false edge if your weapon becomes jammed in your opponent after a heavy chop or thrust ( though this is more a advantage over curved swords without a false edge than a straight blade with 2 edges as it can do the same maneuver)
Re: quickly drawing the blade - It's a bit strange that Japanese swords became not only straighter but also worn higher on the waist as they transitioned from tachi to katana. Given how important quickly drawing the sword is to Japanese martial philosophy, perhaps the relationship between curves and quickdraw deserves to be further elaborated on.
No it is not at all strange. The edge was flipped uppwards and as such the sword were moved higher, its the same logic to why edges downwards is worn low. The logic behind a straighter blade is in how the curve is manufactured. It is not as much a straighter blade as a shorter blade. A shorter blade is quicker to draw. And compared to a tachi a katana is streamlined for quicker draws and in particular quick draw-cuts (hence the edge upwards, high worn and shorter blade). Much of the development of katanas was done to fit a more "civil" and "self defence" setting, often on foot, then on horseback on the battlefield (as the Tachi was). During history though different schools and swordsmiths have experimented with length, weight, broadness etc quite often so there is much a bigger variation in historic katanas then is usually thought of (especially in the west).
@@sirseigan the video stipulates that a lower draw gives a better range of arm motion and an edge-down draw (favored by the most other curved sword examples in the video) allows a more direct cut. I'm sure there are compelling reasons the Japanese found the high, edge up draw more efficient...it just wasn't elaborated on in the video and I felt it would have been nice to explore the topic further. I'm afraid i'm going to have to disagree with you on the curve difference between tachi and katana. As pointed out in the video, typical historical examples even had the tang angled differerntly, making a more extreme deviation in the angle of the sword. The fit of the tang to the hilt is a design choice that exists outside the manufacturing process of the blade. I'm an aware of the degree of variation between katana . While I'm sure there are plenty katana that sported an equal, if not more extreme, curvature when compared to a typical tachi, it remains true that the katana are generally regarded as a straighter sword (as noted in matt's other videos). Indeed, the degree of variance between the size, shape and curvature of katana seem to indicate that Japanese smiths had a great degree of control over the end-result of the manufacturing process. If this is the case, then having the end result be generally straighter than tachi is most likely a deliberate design choice, not an accident of manufacture.
@@temperededge I agree that it is a topic worth exploring in more depth! I was merely pointing out that the evolution of the Katana and how it was worn is not so strange if one look at the circumstances around it. I am not sure you are familiar with how to draw a katana and how it differs from how to draw a tachi. If you are please bear with me, I mean no dissrespect and I will get to the point eventually 😉 A tachi was generally mounted to the belt, hanged low with the edge down (as already stated). Due to the mount it is hard to draw it in any other manner then with the edge downward or prehaps at the side. If you want to do a draw-cut you are quite limited. But as Tachi was primarly used on horseback, on the battlefield, mostly as a side arm during ritual one on one fighting (after the bow and spear/naginata/bizento was discarded) ther were rarely a need for such quick draw-cuts. A katana on the other hand was developed and favorized during a time where the battlefield fighting had become much less ritualized and quick draws and draw-cuts was in much more need - and much more flexible draw-cuts at that. This was then later even more in need when much of the fighting evolved to be done in a much more "civil" manner (as in not on the battlefield) with ambush attacks, not uncommonly indoors in tight spaces and quite often with unamored opponents (at least often without helmets) etc etc. As such is was developed to be used more on foot the on horseback (even though it was used in both contexts ofc). These new circumstances of war and the need to not only draw quickly but to draw-cut quickly is what drove the development of the katana. The katana scabbard was held loose in the belt without any mount. This allow you to to be able to draw-cut in 180 degrees instead of just 90 with the Tachi (sure you could most likely do it in 180 degrees with a Tachi also but it is not at all as easy and quick as the Katana). This also is a key feature in the actual draw technique as you do not just draw the sword from the scabbard, you also draw the scabbard off the sword, which the mount of the Tachi prevents you from doing. This means only half of the draw is done with the swordarm. This also allows you to quickly draw and cut while both move backwards and forwards, or indeed stand still. You can also draw in a very tight position were you draw the sword uppwards rather then forwards (a bit like a Viking sword that sits high in a shoulderstrap rather then low at the belt). And when you draw-cut with the edge uppward you right away can cut at the head and neck (or the main swordhands wrist and/or thumb) and as such in much better position to deal a fatal blow with the first cut (which was the ideal). A perhaps innteresting sidenote is that a katana worn with a full armour (mostly used primarly on horseback) the katana is mounted in a similar, if not identical, way as the Tachi; hanging low with the edge downward. You are absolutly correct in that the swordsmith did indeed have control over the overall curvature, especially when creating the tang and fitting the hilt etc. However the curvature in Japanese swordblades (excluding the hilt) comes first at the process of tempering where the spine is covered in clay to keep it soft and that is whats creates the curve of the blade. Up until that very moment the the blade has been straight. As such one could say a Katana is basically a straight sword, that is bent *hrrmm* sorry I ment curved 😄 So while the overall curvature and its properties is a design choice the curvature on the blade it self, as a biproduct of the tempering, is much less controlled. Even though where the main curve should be can be controlled the control over the curvature radious is much less then if the blade was made curved right from the start. The curveature is, due to the process, also imtimtly interconnected to other properties of the blade (such as wich parts are hard and wich is soft etc) where perhaps the radious of the curve in it self might not have been the highest priority, but who knows 🙂 On a Tachi, mounted with the edge down an angled hilt, or the main curve of the blade close to the hilt (Koshizori) would aid in drawing and point alignment from horseback (both mentioned in the video). However I personally am not sure what benefits those features would give on a Katana with how it was used in mind for quick draw-cuts... It could even be a drawback with less reach in the draw-cut (it is only the top 5 cm that is "supposed" to be used on a katana so the reach is a crucial thing). Perhaps that is why many Tachi that was made into Katanas had their root (the part close to the hilt where some had their main curvature) reforged into the tang instead of just shorten the blad at the tip. But I have not tested a katana with a koshizori curveature and angled hilt myself so I can unfortunatly only speculate on the differences...
But the force components of the impact would be diversed, compared to the straight (90 degree) impact of a straight sword. This would suggest that a curved sword would be "more resistant" to breaking, but how much this would actually appear in real life? I'd wager not that much, as you'd need a spot-on contact; however, I do think that a curved sword might be more forgiving in that sense (because of the curvature the contact is more likely not be 90 degrees) Hopefully you know what my tired brains are trying to say 😂
@@tapioperala3010 You are completely wrong. Curvature does not matter, if mass and distance from point of impact are same, force is the same. What matters, is cross section. Straight sword typically would be double edged, with something like diamond cross section. Most of the mass would be in the middle and very little at the edges and edges experience largest compression/tension forces. Back side being very thin and hard edge under immense tension is prone to crack. Curved blades are single edged, with cross section more like a wedge, with most mas at the back of a blade, exactly where blade experience most tension. More material, and usually less hard too, is much more resistant to breaking.
![[ ออกกอง ] วัยหนุ่ม 2544 โลกหลังลูกกรง..ทัวร์กองถ่ายหนังใน "คุกของจริง" | JUSTดูIT.](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vB--aOkZCpw/mqdefault.jpg)
Install Raid for Free ✅ IOS/ANDROID/PC: clcr.me/Use5Qj and get a special starter pack 💥 Available only for the next 30 days
Somebody please save Matt form the hands of "Raid f***##g ShadowLegends" pleeeeeaaaase!!!!!!!!!!!!
I thought this was "7 advantages of cur- *S* -ed swords"
What about a double bladed Clever, a blade on both the flat end & curved end? Would that be considered a hybrid sword?
@@al-imranadore1182 NordVPN help us please!! Or RidgeVallet!
@@al-imranadore1182 you can save him by paying more than raid
There's an anecdote, (probably made up, but still clever) about a German officer in The Great War declaring that the the centuries long debate between straight and curved swords had at last been settled...by the machine gun.
Lol It would be a German officer. But no this guy has a video about why officers dont carry swords no more and it's not cause they ineffective in combat (still to this day they are there a middle eastern man who hunted ISIS with a sword) but cause of snipers lol
Notice that both are still around. I would prefer everyone return to swords.
@@randallwilkinson4453 It would probably make Poland op again
@@randallwilkinson4453 a more civilized weapon for a more civilized age
@@randallwilkinson4453 agreed. I seriously think America could solve the gun violence problem by trading in guns for licenses to open carry swords. I would take that trade in a heartbeat. lol
see that Matt from England? He's got curved swords. Curved. Swords.
That's FORBIDDEN on the Queen's land!
The gods gave him two hands, and he uses both to point out the deepest penetration. I can respect that.
Why I knew this comment is here before I even clicked?
This is why I came.
I was a commentator as you. Then I took a trolling to the knee.
As a large gelatinous mass, I feel personally attacked
Do you stroll around dungeons, cleaning them up of debris (like monster and adventurer corpses)?
I found this extremely amusing...
Thanks for the laugh!
Best post I have seen today, well done!
Im personally apologizing for these three... Very sorry
@@JustGrowingUp84 goddamnit, after reading your comment I now can’t get rid of the idea that slimes are just dungeon roombas XD
As someone with an engineering background in regards to curved swords handling flex along the plane of the edge I can say that multiple effects of the geometry are assisting with resisting plastic deformation of the steel. First you noticed that the edge tends to be easier to align which helps to minimize the potential torque the steel receives. Second the curved shape minimizes the amount of blade in the target at any moment and maximizes pressure along the smallest or at least smaller arc of the edge. Last I'd point out many curved swords maintain more total metal from edge to spine from the center of percussion to the tip so having more steel total at the point of impact helps to absorb energy and resist bending both elastic and plastic deformation. This also pushes mass further forward and gives greater momentum for the same speed and force applied with the body. Many specialized thrust oriented swords become very narrow at the point or have a high degree of flexibility in temper so there is less metal to absorb stress and or bend elastically to avoid deformation and damage. The net results being a generally reduced ability to cut through resistive media and increased likelihood of blade damage with poor edge alignment. Lastly you referred to an arched bridge pointing out it's general ability to hold more weight than a straight surface... This isn't quite correct with an arched bridge the weight is being delivered at an angle through the material so it acts as though the material is thicker than it really is because the weight is supported through the arch shape to the ground. A closer similarity is seen in modern tank armor where angled plates are effectively thicker and the angle of the armor helps deflect impact rather than always absorbing the full force of enemy fire. Hope this helps and is of interest.
Yes, the parallel with curved bridges is not correct. It would apply only when your sabre would have been strenghtened with straight support spine (as classic school angle meter) :) Other points about dynamic aspect of loads mentioned in message higher seems correct to me. I think it all comes to point that when you need a sword which can withstand cutting it's much heavier then let's say epee or rapier and you coudn't parry fast enough in duel environment. Just try it against good epee fencer... :)
@@milkeer Id argue the parallel to a bridge is correct as noted it is effectively putting thicker and flatter geometry material along the spine of the sword which could bear a lot more load and reduce blade flexing or potential breakage, it also aids the swords edge therefore in delivering the energy into the target as opposed to flexion.
I'm reading a book called "The Last Full Measure: How Soldiers Die in Battle" by Michael Stephenson, and just came across a couple of different viewpoints on this very issue from contemporary sources.
The first was an argument in favour of straight swords, from a French cavalry specialist named Grandmaison in the mid-eighteenth century: "A single thrust into the body with the point will kill a man, which frequently cannot be achieved with twenty cuts with the edge."
On the other hand, this was the opinion of a Hungarian cavalry officer who was writing during the same era: "I know that straight swords deal a more deadly blow, but they are not nearly as effective in combat. If you need convincing, I will explain the mechanism of the two kinds of weapon. When he is at a full gallop and a cavalryman attacks his enemy with the point, he will inevitably pierce him. But he must stop and break off his part in the action, so as to pull the sword out. During an equivalent amount of time a dragoon with a curved saber will have wounded three or four enemy, without having to stop his horse or stop fighting. The enemy will not be mortally wounded, but at least they will be disabled, which is what we ought to look for in battle."
Sounds a little like the .30 caliber vs. 5.56mm debate back in the 1960s.
Puncture to be quickly lethal is limited to eye, heart, throat. Small protected moving targets. Anything else has delayed effects. A man with 30 seconds to live can still kill. Plus the vacuum of the body will suck the blade in. A massive cut is incapacitating with shock and blood loss. And will not stick. A cut returns naturally to guard on the follow through whereas a thrust leaves you open.
This is exactly it. Continuous movement in horseback demands a curved blade.
That thumbnail is on an entirely new level. Well played.
Dont forget the judicious use of the capslock. A cunning stunt indeed.
Clickbait like this is below you Matt
The thumbnail design is pure perfection. 10/10, would get clickbaited again.
Got to say that 1829 Horse Artillery sabre positioning is top notch, hope Matt has a decent life assurance though. Coughing while it lasts.
They have CURVED swords...
Meanwhile in Hammerfal
Do you hear about those Nords? They have STRAIGHT swords.... Straight, swords!
And all I can think of is Gamer Poop.
@@Notmyname1593 Now i wish that i would newer google that. :D
@@Notmyname1593 did you ever install the gamerpoop skyrim mod?
@@hardgay7537 No, but those warriors from Hammerfell got
big
curved
meat scepters
Nords have paddle swords
It's interesting to note that curved swords are overwhelmingly (though not exclusively) used by light cavalry and cultures that emphasized light cavalry. Most of the advantages you talked about in the video are especially important for light cavalry. For instance, the curve providing a more natural cutting motion means that your blade is less likely to be stuck in your target while you do a ride by attack.
does it also protect the mount more on a miss? less likely to strike a flank or shank?
@@samuelbroad11 One would assume so and they are trained not to do that .
Pros/cons of forward-curving vs backwards-curving is also a interesting topic
I second this
I need a video on this right now bc I don't understand reverse curves
@@CharliMorganMusic across some of his videos in the past, he has briefly mentioned that curves like a saber do a natural draw cut (like here), while curves like a falx do a natural push cut.
...Maybe look up his video on "wavy blades" - another edge design to add to it all.
@@CharliMorganMusic look up the Gurkha Kukri knife. one of the deadliest choppers because of its forward curve. forward curve = heavy chop. similar to an axe head which is forward from the handle
Forward = Slash, backward = Chop
Physicist: The curve changes the vibrational mode of the metal stick, so that less of the force is lost to blade 'waves' about the point of impact. I think this kind of explains a number of points made (the cutting contact point, the strength, and the other one). Its interesting. I've fenced sabre all my life and never given this any thought.
Your rolled magazine demonstration was great and very useful in showing how the curved blade focuses more of the energy on a smaller surface area.
Tangent vs straight.
Thansk for the demonstration footage. You didn't have to film or find that, but it really helped get your point across.
I absolutely love Matt explaining the importance of pulling out.
And now we know that the curvature helps prevent one from pulling out too late.
The science for a curved blade energy focus is because of it being a tangent contact point rather than a parallel contact line, which would lead to greater impact pressure (force/area).
Maths are fun.
**Brain starts to melt**
@@finallychangedmyname3614 th-cam.com/video/fpYIPlVx4Rs/w-d-xo.html same principle for axe blades.
I've seen a shield wall before, but now I've seen a sword wall too!
„a curved blade draws through the target more conveniently“ - well, not for the target.
Lindy's Audible ads: I watch, with interest for some reason.
Matt's RSL ad: _skip, skip, skip, skip_
That's so true for me too 😂
Probably because Raid is an awful game with annoying ads while Audible is something you'd actually use and Matt recommends good books to you.
23:55 This is why I think the katana has a good thrust, because the force is pushing back against and being supported by the arch structure of the steel
“Give us a good boney knob!”
-Matt Easton 2021
Oh... This video is full of second meanings.
Smile: ”We love deep penetrations” slight suspension "when it come to blades."
"A curved blade helps focus the energy onto a smaller area and increase penetration, which is always good." Smiles
Matt "We Love Deep Penetration" Easton
10:03 - you can also think; You're not removing the sword from the shealth.
But rather, the sheath from the sword.
i.e. Push the sheath forewards before drawing. Then, draw the sword by keeping the handle position fixed in front of you. And moving only the sheath backwards (exposing the sword). This reduces the distance you need to move the arm holding the sword (speeding up the draw, by clearing more of the sheath) ;)
To weigh in on the structural aspect of the curved blade:
In the case of a basic cut, and setting aside the aspect of a curved blade's natural tendency to better align the edge on impact, a curved blade and a straight blade are approximately identical in strength.
When looking at a typical arch, such as an arch bridge, for instance, we see a curved structure supported at both ends and a load over the center. That load is directed and distributed by the arch into both of the two supports in a manner that depends as exclusively as possible upon the compressive performance of the material from which the arch is made. Take away one support, as in the case of a sword held at one end, and we no longer have an arch. We are left with a system in which the curved shape has essentially lost its (structural) significance. There is no overall compression between the tip of a curved sword and the sword's hilt (while performing a standard cut with the center of the blade), and the material of the blade does not behave like the stones of an arch.
The forces at play in a sword are the load upon the edge of the blade, the counteracting force at the hilt, and an additional torque supplied by the hand at the hilt in order to keep the system from rotating. (An arch needs to worry about little-to-no torque stresses as having supports on both sides of the load creates a symmetrical system that, thanks to the arch's nature, is all about compression.) With no force at the tip of the blade, and with torque therefore acting throughout the system, the blade experiences tension along the edge of the sword, and an equal amount of compression along the spine. These forces are the same regardless of whether the blade is curved or straight. It falls upon the dimensions, cross-section, and material properties of the blade to withstand these forces.
TL;DR
The parameters of this scenario are very different from those that allow an arch (bridge, roof, or what-have-you) to massively benefit from its curved shape. Therefore, two swords that are the same in every way other than curvature will have virtually identical blade strength when cutting.
This does not, however, account for other differences between the dynamics of straight and curved swords, such as the natural angles of impact, edge alignment, etc., nor does it include cases outside of a squarely-aligned ideal-world cutting action.
Structural engineer here, and I agree. You MIGHT get some effects due to inertia, if the accelaration is large enough, which will cause the curved blades to behave like arches, but I think this effect would be negligible. Otherwise, straight swords and curved swords behave like cantilevers when struck and will have the same strength if they have the same cross section and material strength.
@@rubsal Exactly!! I suppose I could do better to allow for that in my wording, but I was getting a bit worried about the length of my post X)
An old US Cavalry manual I read emphasized the curved blade's propensity to slice rather than chop. It made the point that swords are not axes. It also showed a high-wrist style of thrust, which I did not understand but then I am not a horseman. It also mentioned several of the issues you mentioned such as thrusting around shields and hooking arms and legs. Great job.
One of the things I love about your videos is that I can tell you've actually used many of the blades and do a lot of things right without thinking about it: centering the weight, rotating the torso for power & speed, etc. I can also tell you don't have that same experience with curved blades.
When drawing a curved blade, step forward with the sword-side foot like you are doing a lunge instead of drawing that shoulder back. Drawing backwards like you are winding up for a baseball swing robs you of defense and time.
Likewise, begin your thrust with edge down and rotate mid-thrust, away from the parry. Rotating before the parry gives your opponent an easier time. You can practice this with two suspended vertical strings. Thrust around the front string into the back one.
7 topics in (minus the ads) almost 30 minutes.
THAT is content! Other channels do 10 topics in 3 minutes and spend the most time on the click bait thumbnail.
Disadvantages would also be cool and advantages of straight swords
It can puncher armor more effectively
Now do it for straight swords, really I just want another half an hour of sword talk
SukiKirai Lol, same🙂
after he does swords that curve in the opposite direction to the ones he discussed today.
Agreed. I started as a hoplologist and moved into HEMA, before I became ill. The different uses and handling of single hand, hand/half, longsword, cut/thrust, chopping/slashing falchion types, and the later rapiers and small sword (not to mention the greatswords and true two handers, which I can't wield lol and they're really not that heavy, I think one of the heaviest TRULY used two handers was around six pounds or so?) fascinate me a great deal. I'll never be able to examine the intricacies physically, but I love studying it and reading about it. This is a great and fun channel
I mean....yes. what this man said.
Really good video Mr Easton. One thing you didn't cover though was straight bladed swords with curved cutting edges. (I'm thinking Greek Ziphos and to a lesser extent early pattern imperial roman gladii). Although shorter in length than the blades you used as examples, is there a case that the "straight blade/curved edge" form is the best of both worlds? Be interested to hear what you think.
After the constant bombardement of RSL advertisements, I finally succumbed, and installed the game. Let me tell you, it is one of the worst things I have ever played.
Even compared to other Gacha games, like Danmachi, Girls Frontline, or Genshin Impact, the monetisation is offensively aggressive.
You start the game, and immediately have to close several windows of their cash shop "offers".
The gameplay is bland, the "story" is barely existant, and the "champions" are just dolls, without any characterisation, back stories, or personal sidestories to explore.
The worst thing, however, is the upgrade system. You have to grind yourself through the bland levels to level up your characters. But to progress beyond a certain point, you have to upgrade their "star rating", which you can only do by sacrificing other characters of an equal star rating, and you have to sacrifice as many of them as the number of stars the character you want to upgrade has. At higher star ratings, you will end up having to sacrifice dozens of characters to upgrade a single one, and each of the sacrifices also have to be upgraded first, unless you buy the higher end summoning crystals. And then, once you have upgraded your character, its level gets reset to 1, so you have to grind up its level all over again.
Luckily, I resisted the urge to spend any cash on it, and deleted the game and my account after a week.
I tried it out way back and had the exact same experience
fuckin hell thats bad
Shhhhh don't kill the goose. Just be glad that it's laying golden eggs.
Same bro
Still a better love story than Twilight.
Before the Heian tachi, with a continuous curve through the tang, there was also the kenuki-gata tachi - which had a curved tang but straight or nearly straight blade - and the tang was offset at an angle which gave a further impression of a deeply curved blade. The ancestor of this sword, the warabite-to, had the same feature. These were short, single handed swords with a single edged blade which was usually completely straight, yet the grip was offset at an angle. I have always been curious as to how such swords would feel in the cut.
"This video is brought to you be predatory gambling apps for children"
We truly live in a society.
Except no kids are watching this, I bet, so why not take the companies money?
Would you explain this to me as if I am completely unfamiliar with the concept?
@@adamsaley9460 Raid is what's known to gamers as pay to win, basically a game with tons of microtransactions that effect you ability to play the game effectively
momerathe Gambling generally presupposes that you have a chance to win money in return. Maybe I’m just uninformed, but I’m not seeing that. Does RSL offer you a 5X payout if you win or something?
I knew about edge alignment and focusing force, but I didn't know there were more advantages, thanks for the info. I have some things to share.
About the edge alignment. There might be more to what you said. Not only can you feel the alignment, but it also wants to be aligned. Shadiversity showed that when you support it in both ends, it rolls to being in line. When Jairus of All made God of War swords, swords on the ends of chains and the user spins, he talked about some rocket science in order for the blades to fly straight. I don't know how good of a job I'll do of explaining, but I'll try. There's an axis of rotation, and you want mass behind the axis of rotation in order to make the center of drag behind the line, so the mass trails behind. If the profile is shaped in such a way that the center of drag is behind the axis of rotation, the sword will to a degree self correct human error in edge alignment and maintain edge alignment when something tries to make it turn. The farther away the center of drag is from the axis of rotation, the greater the effect. Regardless of the center of drag, curves can put mass farther away from the axis of rotation to make them "wider". Wider blades will cut better than narrower blades with the same mass, POB, edge geometry, thickness, etc. I don't know if whoever is currently reading this understands why, so in case they don't, I'll explain. Think of a right triangle. At a constant height, the wider the triangle the more accute the angle of the base and hypotenuse. Imagine there's a sword hitting a target and it wants to turn, if it has enough energy to rotate the end of the sword x millimeters, how many degrees will the sword rotate? The wider the sword, the less degrees of rotation, the more the edge alignment is maintained, the less energy goes in the wrong direction, the more energy is exerted where it should be, the better the cut. Also, the wider the blade, the harder it is for the edge alignment to be thrown off by the target. When Skallagrim was testing a really wide longsword, the prinepe, he said it was very forgiving when you messed up the edge alignment. I think that it's because normally when you mess up the edge alignment, it rolls further out of alignment and doesn't cut very deep, but because this sword was very wide, it didn't get very much out of alignment and even though it lost some force going in the needed direction, it still had enough because of the acute edge geometry. Even if the edge geometry isn't super acute, wider swords will still be harder to throw off and more forgiving. Curved swords aren't all the same. For example, the kopesh will be "wider" but won't be self correcting. A katana will be self correcting and, but not as much as a shamshir.
When you say that the profile causes the force to be focused, I agree. My first thought is that simply by visualizing it like your demonstration with the rolled up paper it's true, but with what I know about science, I agree that tests should be done to confirm it. I think Skallagrim has done some tests on that, probably not enough to satisfy science, but it's some evidence.
As far as comparing a curved sword to an arched bridge, I don't think so, but I'm not an expert. If the arch tries to bend from the weight, it has to move out in order to maintain the length or compress and get shorter. Because it's supported on both ends, the connection supports it from moving out to maintain length, and the compressional strength of the material helps to prevent it from getting shorter. I would think both happen a little as no material is perfect, but I don't think it would be noticable. With a curved sword, there's nothing on each end of the blade supporting it from moving out to maintain length, the energy from the swing isn't isn't being applied in the direction that supports against that.
Civil engineer here: About your point that curved swords are stronger due to arch effects - this almost certainly isn't correct.
Arches are used a lot in concrete construction, as concrete is strong in compression but weak in tension. An arch bridge works by directing loads directly to the supports on both sides of the banks directly under compression and there is little to no tension in the system. The foundations of the arch also press sideways into the abutments, creating a form of negative moment that provides additional stability (similar to how the string on a bow pulls the two ends together - bow shafts actually work like an arch!), and if the foundation can’t take this horizontal load, the arch can collapse. Arches are generally effective with other materials, and are a very stable form.
However an arch only works if it is supported on both sides, with a sword it is only supported at the grip, which prevents any benefits of the arched form. The only way a curved blade would have any advantage from arching action would be if the tip was also supported, and both ends were prevented from sliding apart from one another.
One possible reason for curved swords being more stable would be because they are single edged blades (would also apply to straight single edge blades). With a single edged blade the spine of the blade tends to be (but is not always) thicker. The spine of the blade takes compression forces during impact, and tends to undergo an effect similar to lateral torsional buckling. A cross sections ability to resist against this is primarily due to it’s stiffness, and the thickness of a “plate” (blade) effects the stiffness to the power of 3, so a plate/blade that is twice as thick is 8 times stiffer (2^3 = 8). This is also why flexing of the blade to the side is significantly higher than in the direction of the blade, as the stiffness in this axis is for most blades several orders of magnitude higher, but they can flex in both directions.
Good explanation. Thank you for sharing it.
The concrete is good for compresion not tension
@@ecthelionalfa Jebus that's a bad muddling of words, fixed, cheers!
As a non-engineer (a non-anything, really) I was also thinking this during the video. "An arch is strong because it's supported at both ends!" I thought. So anyway thanks for vindicating my instincts and making me feel like a genius.
As an aerospace engineer there's a subject shared both in my field and civil that'd be fairly useful in studying properties of blades: slender element, plate and shell stability analysis.
I wish I saw this video/comment earlier. I'll say though that the curved blade, as a cantilever rotation-restrained slender profile beam, has some advantage in that the blade, if curved away from target, is statically stable in rotation, given the contact point of the force is behind the centerline (in relation to the cutting motion), which might reduce the chance of buckling and local failure. For a straight blade it is ever so slightly unstable, and very unstable for a blade curved forward.
On the subject of curved swords structural strength.
Not to say, that your point is wrong entirely, however, the architectural arch comparison is definitely flawed.
The structural strength of the arch is stemming from the forces being evenly distributed and redirected into the supporting structure (foundations). This will not be the case in a sword, because the ends are not supported in the same way nor direction.
Furthermore, while an arch is capable of supporting high distributed load, it's resistance to impact is less impressive.
Curved swords still might or might not be stronger for different reasons (mass distribution, less taper, maybe angle of impact or whatnot; But also remember you own point about the forces being concentrated in a smaller area, which might in fact make it easier to damage the blade);
You can instead just model it like a curved cantilever beam. In that case, the end that's gripped acts as the force concentration point. If we assume that the blade is perfectly made with no imperfections throughout the blade, then the greatest point of focus is where the grip meets the blade or the support. The curve is still very beneficial when you make some basic assumptions.
Correct. The curve might mean that more (relative to a straight blade with the same amount of material) material is supporting the load on impact. Think about sloped armor on modern vehicles, where this principle is used.
As far as it goes "area moment of inertia", curved beams do have some advantage in deflection resilience on parallel axis over straight ones when considering same conditions (Materials, cross section etc)...
That is problably the main point that Matt couldnt explain properly.
I would be interested in expanding this inquiry to include straight and curved pole weapons. How does the curve of a glave, for example, alter its use and usefulness compared to a 'regular' spear. What are the trade-offs associated with trying to combine thrust and cut functions for weapons such as bills, halberds, and poleaxes. What contexts dictated the shape, use, and tactics for these weapons.
For a warm up, so to speak, pretty much everything he said here applies to those as well in some ways. Exception being about scabbards, for what I hope are obvious reasons. There is more of course, just as there is more to curved swords vs straight swords than these 6 points, but just starting with the how exactly these points apply to weapons with longer handles should be already good food for thought.
@@louisvictor3473 Indeed and thank you.
I think you'd appreciate Kogarasu Maru, which is a Japanese sword from the 8th Century that is both curved, and also double-edged.
i think one of the great advantages of curved swords is that they naturally slide out of a body during a cut when used from the back of a moving horse
Also works in the other direction if you're using a glaive or something like that. You really don't want your blade dragging on that horse (alive, dead, wounded or carrying a body in either of those 3 stages) passing by your side.
@@louisvictor3473 yeah, a blade like a halberd, shotel, or kukri can trap/trip but note that cavalry nearly always have backswept blades so that you aren’t violently dismounted (or have your arm broken, or both/worse) when you make a slash at a solid target while at full gallop, I believe that was Hans’ point.
@@paulpolito2001 Yes exactly.
@@louisvictor3473 good point, that's probably why there are so many hooks on these weapons. But especially with the Glaive you have a curved blade on one side so that you can give a rider a cut without the weapon being torn out of your hand.
@@paulpolito2001 I know. That is why I said it works on _both_ directions.
Mechanical engineer here! I haven't done the maths, but my intuition is that *for the same cross-section*, the curve of the blade won't make too much difference to its bending stiffness. The comparison to bridges is missing a key point - bridges are supported at both ends. Swords are usually only supported from one end.
Additionally, arch bridges get their strength by redirecting the load into compressive forces in the structure. That's great for materials like stone or concrete that are strong in compression but weak in tension, but steel is more or less equally strong in tension and compression. It's certainly possible to build a steel arch, but it's equally possible to build a steel truss or suspension bridge.
All of which is to say: I don't think that arch bridges are a good analogy for curved swords.
Having said that, from the examples in the video, it looks like curved swords tend to be taller (blade to spine) than straight blades, which will make a huge difference. All else being equal, the bending stiffness of a blade in that direction of curve is proportional to the cube of the height!
Carlo takes note: when parrying a curved sword's cut, do so close to yourself, so the other guy cannot turn the damn thing and thrust around your parry
From personal experience, I can say that one of my favorite things to do with a curved sword when I was practicing was to mix into my normal cuts false edge cuts and curved thrusts with a flick of my wrist mid swing.
The people I spared with (used to fighting against straight swords) often didn't even notice the switch until they felt the impact and looked to how my wrist was turned the opposite way they expected.
The typical response to this was to try and fight at distance and keep me out of measure with a longer weapon or thrusts to not even give me the chance because of how hard they found to defend against it.
Not an expert-level experience by any means, but hopefully a useful or at least interesting anecdote for some.
@@dynamicworlds1 do they use those techniques a lot in sabre fencing?
@@MusMasi I'm less familiar with more by the manuels saber fencing (especially since a lot of historical sabers don't have a false edge, so we're talking about a subset here) but I do know that stick fighting manuals show some very similar techniques (and I believe Matt has done a video on those)
Like I said, not working at expert level here (though understanding non-expert level techniques is also valuable as not everyone in history was either)
@@dynamicworlds1 ok thanks because I do not have much experience in any of that stuff, its all mostly theory to me.
@@MusMasi np, a good place to look, btw a place you might not immediately think to look for similar strikes are back/false edge cuts with things like arming swords.
Here's a demonstration of some cutting tests using very similar techniques to what I'm discussing
th-cam.com/video/TeED1jlGY2E/w-d-xo.html
And while I'm at it the stick fighting video I mentioned, which in rewatching to make sure it was the right one (and for fun) was reminded does actually even mention curved swords with a "false edge"
th-cam.com/video/WTEUz9lXExI/w-d-xo.html
Hope that helps you or others visualize what I mean better and/or tie it to other techniques you may be more familiar with.
That was some really really nice "armor"
More like armored pasties
Besagew bras would be like gun porn for us nerds.
It's a distraction technique. It's easier to attack someone while they're gawping....
@@robbikebob Springs at the bottom of the cups, I swear!
I feel a big part of that debate depend on the warrior and his/her preference coupled with the dominant armor they were facing similar to martial arts styles and their evolution
Small correction: The false edge katana (or moroha-zukuri) isn't derived from the naginata as far as I know. Naginatazukuri swords do have a wedge-shaped back at the end of the blade that looks a bit like a false edge but isn't sharpened. Moroha-style katana are also distinct in that they tend to have spear-tips, which naginata do not.
While curved swords deliver weaker thrusts due to the point not being in line with the arm, it's important to point out that thrusts penetrate (unarmored/lightly armored) opponents fairly easily, so you don't really need as much force in the direst place.
If your opponent is unarmed, it doesn't matter much which weapon you have, you always have a huge advantage.
@@BelleDividends meant unarmored 😂
Advantages of a straight sword:
1. Greater penetration.
2. Better aim while thrusting, so you don't miss the right spot, where you intend to penetrate.
3. Looks cooler.
4. Scabbard can be made to look like a walking stick.
5. While slashing with the tip, the enemy gets less time to react.
6. Greater reach with same amount of steel.
7. A greater proportion of straight swords have pommels which can be unscrewed.
I like my woman with a lot of curves just like my blades.
Flamberge enthusiast, I see.
I like them clean and well oiled.
And "deep penetration"
ive noticed curvy women seem to love a curved “sword” too
@@mattdubya1037 Im in luck then :D
Damnit. The Skyrim references are already here!
_they always were_
(Death to the Dominion)
Curved swords...
Cool to finally see that mentioned, I know cavalry sabers are primarily designed for slashing, but I’ve always thought they’d particularly be good at running someone through on foot from horseback, simply lower the blade and use momentum to impale them
You see those warriors from Hammerfell? They’ve got curved swords. Curved. Swords.
I suppose this probably deserved to be the first comment!
@@scholagladiatoria Man, you must have learned so much about swords in fiction just from comments
Curved swords, who'd want one of them!?! 🧐 🤯 😟 😥 😅
You beat me to it 😂 👍
Man, I dig learning so much from your video's. It's not just the info and understanding, though that's what is important to me. I dig the historical legitimacy you derive your information and lessons from, both interesting and illustrative, and demonstrative. These understandings can be applied and utilized as a philosophy perhaps.
I have an antique Nathan Starr (1814?) model American saber, previously sharpened at some point in it's history. Ever encountered any on that side of the pond?
They are very rare over here, but I am very familiar with them via books/internet :-)
I remember seeing one in a museum when I was young. Looking at images online a min ago and they have almost all the features of the "perfect " saber I designed in my head a while back. Do you now what they weigh on average?
Scholagladiatoria is my favorite HEMA-channel on TH-cam, but I've taken a long break on this content. Imagine my shock when Matt Easton starts selling me Raid: Shadow Legends of all things... What the actual...
I was so stunned I couldn't even skip the ad. Sad to see this development, but I still do love your content.
Yeah, Raid is a horrible game, not to mention an extremely annoying advertisement. But Matt's content is still good, and he does deserve to make some money for his efforts.
Notification gang
Love these nice long videos lately Matt
That parang is amazing. Dont think I have seen one quite like it. I agree with all 7 of your points. For me the curved blade is the way to go. Thanks again Matt! Cheers!
Now do this for straight swords! One advantage I don’t see brought up often is the ability to half-sword, so if you choose to make one for straight ones please mention that.
It's perfectly possible to half-sword with a curved blade, the wielder only has to keep their fingers off the edge. So long as the wielder grips only the back and the flats, there shouldn't be a problem. That might not be precisely how half-swording with a straight blade is, but they're different blade structures in the first place: they're bound to have different methods of use.
@@Vlad_Tepes_III you wouldn’t get the benefits of half swording though. The curve would make it harder to put your weight behind a thrust or aim the tip as accurately, which is the entire reason for half swording.
@@Specter_1125 Shallow curves on blades, like with many Japanese swords, lend themselves pretty well to half-swording. I agree that stronger curves lose much of the benefit, but something like tachi would be able to still get that sweet thrust. I may be a little wrong, but I believe there are treatises on samurai being taught techniques for this in case of fighting armored opponents. Again, not 100% sure, but it is stuck in my head.
@@Specter_1125 Could you mitigate that by doing a rotating thrust rather than a straight one?
I took Kendo, and they did tell me that I should aim to hit my target with the portion of the shinai just above where the tsuru is tied to the body with that leather thong about 2/3 of the way up because it simulates the "cutting" area of the blade and is observed for scoring. That bit wears off fastest, typically XD
straight swords: *exist*
curved swords: *also exist*
flamberge: *IDENTITY CRISIS*
Flamberge is the true bastard sword
Flamberge now hangs out with kris
@@pipebomber04 Kris Flamberge is a great character name!
@@samuelbroad11 wow never thought of that but yeah. That name has got an edge to it lol.
isnt flamberge a jagged sword?
How serendipitous. I was asking myself this last week about why swords would be curved, and BAM here's this video. Thanks!
*Twitches every time Matt puts the blades back in the scabbard*
I have always liked the Japanese "draw the blade along the scabbard until the tip reaches the hole", to me it seems less fiddly and a more accurate way to get a sword back into the scabbard than the "aim the point at the hole, and hope you don't stab your hand"
Also can be done by feel instead of sight.
Back edge.
It seems like the swords that have the line of the handle behind the point of impact would be better for draw cuts. Once the edge bites, you can apply slight pressure by turning your wrist, and (through lever mechanics) that pressure is magnified at the edge, causing it to "dig in" as you pull or push the blade.
I always saw curved swords as more as a sword used on horseback. The swords being curved away allows the blade to "roll off" target while still delivering the blow. Basically, there's the pressure on your grip as you ride through the terrain
Thank goodness I found your channel!! Super information, well delivered. You are a man who knows his business, many thanks for sharing your expertise with us.
Julian Wilkins NC USA
RAID: alright let sponsor Matt, he's got the base
Matt : today I'll be analysing RAID's weaponery
RAID : wait nononononono
regarding your last point about a curved blade being less likely to bend (I.e. being more rigid), I think it has to do with the cross section more than the curve. Most of the curved blades I have seen have a deeper cross section with fullers, essentially making it like an H beam. If I had to guess, I think that the problems with rigidity of straight blades in the cut, like you mentioned in forged in fire example, is due to the problems that you mentioned earlier, namely the curve helps with edge alignment, helps with follow through of the cut, etc that reduce the likelihood of edge turning and blade bending in the flat plane.
I was going to say "ah but what about forward curved blades like the Dacian falx" I'm looking forward to your thoughts. Especially against shields.
I would have regretted missing a fine video presentation, but normally I ignore anything that tells me "YOU NEED TO KNOW"
I hear the curved ones poke a certain spot on a certain angle and adds to the feel :)
Would that be the "E" spot?
@@texasbeast239 The V spot. The "V" stands for "Vital organs"
Excellent video Matt. It has been interesting watching over the years seeing you build your understand of the functionality of swords
So this is why Count Dooku has a curved handle on his lightsaber 😂
no, its to give a better grip for thrusting
Dooku's way of sword fighting - called "Form 2" - is duel-oriented (lightsaber vs. lightsaber), and I think his sword has curved grip for the same reason modern fencing foils often have pistol grip
@@vsm1456 "It is obvious that this contest cannot be decided by our knowledge of the force- but by our skills with a lightsaber!"
Dooku has a curved hilt because Christopher Lee was taught to fence with a curved hilt and asked for one.
This is honestly a really good topic for a video. Well done and well argued. Thanks, Matt!
Insert tired Skyrim "curved swords," joke.
"Tired" is an understatement.
"joke" is being pretty generous
Better than arrow to the knee jokes
Yeah, nothing better than overusing hell out of reference until you just groan when you see it again.
Great video. I can't help but thinking that a few of these (obviously not alignment, horseback or grip angle) could also apply to leaf shaped Gladius blades. Can thrust around shields, cut with the other edge, strong blade, nice rounded center of percussion, easy to draw.
just make a sword with 2 blades coming out of the hilt, one that curves and one that doesn't. finally the perfect cut and thrust sword with all advantages and no disadvantages! =p
Thirsting blade dark excalibur mega genesis vibes here
A hermaphrosword..?
@@nolanolivier6791 damn skippy.
I think the force applied in your #4 is insignificant. The much more important matter (than the curve) on the force is the center of mass, and percussion. Curved swords are almost universally weighted toward the blade and that means much more force behind the cut.
I think you've missed some characteristics of curved blades that I consider important.
1. Tip cut geometry, which aids in edge alignement.
If you grab a curved sword by the handle and put its tip on the table, flat on, then just release the grip a little bit, then the sword will naturally turn the edge downward. So even if the cut isn't perfect, the inertia of the belly of the blade will help in correcting the alignment.
2. Aerodynamic effect, which aids in edge alignment.
Swinging a broad curved sword at exactly 90 deg to the motion, that is trying to deliver the cut with the flat, is not easy, because the blade acts like a vane on an arrow or an airplane tail and tries to steer the edge forward. Curved swords are aerodynamically stable with the edge forward. Straight swords are not.
The use of this effect can be seen on many period depiction of XIXth century hussars charging. They hold their swords up, but with the edge backwards. Iwanowski describes a series of cuts which start with the edge backwards. The blade turns in the hand mid-cut. I believe that only with a curved sword delivering such cuts makes any sense at all.
Ive allways thought that a curved blade would cut rather automaticly , you know because the naturel movement of our arm ist rotation so the blade would automaticly slide over its target
Excellent video as usual, Matt!
Went thru your presentation twice to make sure I’m not being dumb by bringing this up. I don’t know if you’ve covered this before, if so, apologies in advance but here goes.
One advantage of the curved blade that I’ve not seen anyone address that you may wish to consider is -
With a curved blade used in the thrust (straight or nearly straight) the wounding effect of the curved edge is dramatically larger than on a straight blade.
For instance, if a 1 inch spine to edge width blade like a rapier is thrust into a target, it makes a nominal 1 inch wound track. Obviously upward or downward pressure upon the haft may affect this but the baseline mechanical structure of the blade only offers a 1 inch wide wound channel.
When comparing that thrust wound to a curved blade the physics are similar to comparing a 1 inch edge to edge dagger to a 2 inch spine to edge Bowie knife. With a curved blade, the direct force of the thrust will mostly attempt to flow along the line of least resistance created by the initial track of penetration of the point… BUT NOT ALL OF IT!
A certain amount of the energy will direct to the advancing edge in the belly of the blade, widening the wound track, no matter the depth of the penetration. Ergo: a 4 inch deep wound created by a 1 inch wide straight blade will give Far Less tissue damage vs a 4 inch deep wound created by a typical slightly wider curved blade but in part a large portion of the curved blade’s wound volume may be exacerbated by the shearing action of the belly of the curved blade as it is forced into the target - Adding a PUSH CUT component to the thrust by the simple mechanics of the blade shape itself.
Therefore, while the straight blade has many advantages in the thrust, when one successfully lands a powerful thrust with a curved blade, the attendant shearing wounding capacity of the curved edge will be greater for every unit of measurement of the depth of the wound.
This means that a point thrust which just manages to miss a vital organ could be saved by that same or an adjacent organ being damaged by being sliced through by the dependent (relative to the point) edge of the curved blade. That damage to vital parenchymal tissue or major blood vessels and the attendant shock, could win the fight when it might carry on longer with that near miss straight bladed thrust.
As I began with, haven’t seen this addressed and certainly ballistics gel dummy testing could verify it.
Once again, thank you for all your hard work and shared scholarship.
Kelly Moulton
I've always just thought curved swords and knives look cooler, since I'm a gamer aesthetics have always mattered more to me than actual usability, it's really interesting hearing from the realistic historical martial art perspective though.
I just can't get my eyes from thw black saber you have to your left, below the "golden" scabbard one 😍
A little curve doesn't affect penetration effectiveness, as long as it curves to the left.
I agree, left curve is optimal
Sounds like you guys are talking from personal experience. NO the curve should be strictly vertically upwards, otherwise see a doctor. Expensive and painful surgery required. 😜
The handle difference in the curve leaning to back leaning is related to techniques used in combat as you described but more simply can be categorized by the direction of force. It has to do with energy of movement. If it is curve leaning the more common techniques are centripetal or a inward arching cut. If it is back leaning it is more for centrifugal movement of a curve pushing through the cut and away.
Can u talk about forward curved blades plz
I would definitely be interested to see a video like this for straight swords as well.
Can you make a review of "chance to hit" with all weapons? That would be super interesting
Which weapons are easier to land a hit with? Lets put numbers on them
senior mechanical engineering student, loved the structural integrity point!
That last point on structural advantages is not only unequivocally true--but something I've been arguing for YEARS! Thank you for being someone with clout addressing it!
Ilya from that works also addresses it. i heard it first from him
Usually materials can take more compression stress than tensile stress. When a blade impacts, the back of the blade is under tensile stress. Curved blades aren't double-edged so often, so there's more material to take that stress in the back.
We'd have to take into account the comparable lengths of straight and curved blades, too. If there's a same amount of material used for both, and even the same cross section, curved blade has shorter reach. Same impact would cause less stress, if material isn't so far away from the point of impact, like in curved blades.
@@mikaluostarinen4858 You're definitely right about both compressive vs tensile stress and spine thickness on single edged blades being keys, that's been part of what I've long argued. 😊
With all due respect, the answer to the question is more complicated than just "arches are generally very strong, therefore so are curved swords." An arch is a particular kind of structure including certain conditions that are entirely different from those a sword encounters. Regarding a simple cut, both a straight and a curved sword are very nearly identical, which I explore in a comment above. There may indeed be some cases in which a curved blade has an advantage over a straight blade in terms of strength, but likewise there are cases where a straight blade is stronger. I can think of some such cases regarding thrusts. I can elaborate, or even draw up some diagrams if you're interested! I love this stuff.
EDIT: Regarding spine thickness, you're definitely right -- having a single edge gives you room to beef up the back of the blade while keeping the edge nice and fine, which is especially helpful for preventing the blade from breaking in the center when the tip's inertia puts tension on the spine.
@@ToddTR Please.
Hi Matt. Great Video. One point: An arch is supported on both sides, which allows dispersion of forces. A curved blade is only supported by one end. If the curved blade is indeed stronger than the straight blade, it would have more to do with your first point, ie. the curved blade slices through the strike rather than simply impacting.
Have you seen those warriors from Hammerfell they've got curved swords.
CURVED SWORDS!
Dam right.
Two engeering points, not thought out so forgive me:
1) arches are supported on both ends, and convert vertical load into horizontal compression which stone excels at. Not the same here.
2) I picture a curved sword as an axe in the first half, but second half is contacting BEHIND the center of gravity and therefore extremely self stabilizing at impact and follow through, reducing your chance of turning sideways and bending, no?
Re: the structural integrity: If the curvature of the sword means it concentrates more force in a smaller area, wouldn't that also imply that that puts a curved sword under stronger stress by not spreading the force out over as large a portion of the blade? Not a physicist, mind you, just a layman's musing.
11:29 This is actually Not a thing for two reasons:
1. The curve radius of curved swords is so large that it doesn't reduce the contact area even by 1%
2. Even if you had a ridiculously curved sword with a curve radius of let's say 5 cm, you wouldn't really see much difference.
(I hope I can explain this somewhat well with just words).
Let's say you cut through a cylindrical object with a diameter of 10 cm (leg or arm).
A straight blade cutting through that object will increase its contact area with the object as the object gets thicker and decrease the contract area again after passing the center of the cylinder.
A curved blade will have a (slightly) smaller contact area initially but will increase its contact area faster precisely Because! it is curved.
This leads to the result that a curved sword will actually have a larger contact area with our imaginary cylinder after a certain penetration depth!
still great video thought :)
So about the "structural curve", I'm not conviced. I'm a civil engineer, so I know my arches, and for it to work you have to have 2 contact points and a force. With a sword, you only have one contact point (your hand) and one force (the impact). This means the sword acts as a cantilever, where its shape isn't really important. What Matt describes is probalby caused by the generely broader blades of curved swords, which are advantagious for a cantilever.
Thanks for this explanation
One question. When you hit a target with the middle part of a blade, the part of the blade furthest away from you, behind the point of impact, wants to travel on in the same direction. Now, with a straight blade this section is initially already in the same position as the one that impacts and then gets ahead of it, while with a curved blade, the section behind the point of impact is generally further away from the target than the one that impacts. Could that make curved blades more stable?
When it comes to durability out of curves, thinking less arch and more to do with mass. Curves usually imply single edge so you've got more meat on the blade to absorb shock
There is a comment section where people make a curved swords reference... CURVED. SWORDS.
Wow! Great information. You are also a very talented speaker. Thank you
Mechanically speaking only if the shock is applied directly perpendicular to the edge at the point of contact all of it would be converted into bending. So even a pointy blade (non parallel blade edges) already transfer some portion of the impacting force towards the main axis of the blade and thus reducing bending. This is of course more likely with a curved blade because it is less likely to have a contact with the blade exactly at a 90 degree angle to the blades edge.
About the arched shape, you're completely right and it is for the same reason an arched bridge can hold its weight and some more when the same material laid in a straight line would just collapse. It is the same physics regarding shape. The shape just ensures a better dissipation of energy through the whole material when force is applied in the convex direction. That is why the outside of helmets are also round, rather than flat (and if they have been flat at one point, they "quickly" rounded up in the next generation).
Spoiler warning:
This video contains curved swords.
Curved
Swords
Excellent job Matt there's one advantage that I think you overlooked on having a false edge on a curved sword and that would be a being able to force and cut your way out with considerable leverage on the false edge if your weapon becomes jammed in your opponent after a heavy chop or thrust ( though this is more a advantage over curved swords without a false edge than a straight blade with 2 edges as it can do the same maneuver)
Re: quickly drawing the blade - It's a bit strange that Japanese swords became not only straighter but also worn higher on the waist as they transitioned from tachi to katana. Given how important quickly drawing the sword is to Japanese martial philosophy, perhaps the relationship between curves and quickdraw deserves to be further elaborated on.
No it is not at all strange. The edge was flipped uppwards and as such the sword were moved higher, its the same logic to why edges downwards is worn low.
The logic behind a straighter blade is in how the curve is manufactured. It is not as much a straighter blade as a shorter blade. A shorter blade is quicker to draw.
And compared to a tachi a katana is streamlined for quicker draws and in particular quick draw-cuts (hence the edge upwards, high worn and shorter blade). Much of the development of katanas was done to fit a more "civil" and "self defence" setting, often on foot, then on horseback on the battlefield (as the Tachi was).
During history though different schools and swordsmiths have experimented with length, weight, broadness etc quite often so there is much a bigger variation in historic katanas then is usually thought of (especially in the west).
@@sirseigan the video stipulates that a lower draw gives a better range of arm motion and an edge-down draw (favored by the most other curved sword examples in the video) allows a more direct cut. I'm sure there are compelling reasons the Japanese found the high, edge up draw more efficient...it just wasn't elaborated on in the video and I felt it would have been nice to explore the topic further.
I'm afraid i'm going to have to disagree with you on the curve difference between tachi and katana. As pointed out in the video, typical historical examples even had the tang angled differerntly, making a more extreme deviation in the angle of the sword. The fit of the tang to the hilt is a design choice that exists outside the manufacturing process of the blade.
I'm an aware of the degree of variation between katana . While I'm sure there are plenty katana that sported an equal, if not more extreme, curvature when compared to a typical tachi, it remains true that the katana are generally regarded as a straighter sword (as noted in matt's other videos).
Indeed, the degree of variance between the size, shape and curvature of katana seem to indicate that Japanese smiths had a great degree of control over the end-result of the manufacturing process. If this is the case, then having the end result be generally straighter than tachi is most likely a deliberate design choice, not an accident of manufacture.
@@temperededge I agree that it is a topic worth exploring in more depth! I was merely pointing out that the evolution of the Katana and how it was worn is not so strange if one look at the circumstances around it.
I am not sure you are familiar with how to draw a katana and how it differs from how to draw a tachi. If you are please bear with me, I mean no dissrespect and I will get to the point eventually 😉
A tachi was generally mounted to the belt, hanged low with the edge down (as already stated). Due to the mount it is hard to draw it in any other manner then with the edge downward or prehaps at the side. If you want to do a draw-cut you are quite limited. But as Tachi was primarly used on horseback, on the battlefield, mostly as a side arm during ritual one on one fighting (after the bow and spear/naginata/bizento was discarded) ther were rarely a need for such quick draw-cuts.
A katana on the other hand was developed and favorized during a time where the battlefield fighting had become much less ritualized and quick draws and draw-cuts was in much more need - and much more flexible draw-cuts at that. This was then later even more in need when much of the fighting evolved to be done in a much more "civil" manner (as in not on the battlefield) with ambush attacks, not uncommonly indoors in tight spaces and quite often with unamored opponents (at least often without helmets) etc etc. As such is was developed to be used more on foot the on horseback (even though it was used in both contexts ofc). These new circumstances of war and the need to not only draw quickly but to draw-cut quickly is what drove the development of the katana.
The katana scabbard was held loose in the belt without any mount. This allow you to to be able to draw-cut in 180 degrees instead of just 90 with the Tachi (sure you could most likely do it in 180 degrees with a Tachi also but it is not at all as easy and quick as the Katana). This also is a key feature in the actual draw technique as you do not just draw the sword from the scabbard, you also draw the scabbard off the sword, which the mount of the Tachi prevents you from doing. This means only half of the draw is done with the swordarm. This also allows you to quickly draw and cut while both move backwards and forwards, or indeed stand still. You can also draw in a very tight position were you draw the sword uppwards rather then forwards (a bit like a Viking sword that sits high in a shoulderstrap rather then low at the belt). And when you draw-cut with the edge uppward you right away can cut at the head and neck (or the main swordhands wrist and/or thumb) and as such in much better position to deal a fatal blow with the first cut (which was the ideal).
A perhaps innteresting sidenote is that a katana worn with a full armour (mostly used primarly on horseback) the katana is mounted in a similar, if not identical, way as the Tachi; hanging low with the edge downward.
You are absolutly correct in that the swordsmith did indeed have control over the overall curvature, especially when creating the tang and fitting the hilt etc. However the curvature in Japanese swordblades (excluding the hilt) comes first at the process of tempering where the spine is covered in clay to keep it soft and that is whats creates the curve of the blade. Up until that very moment the the blade has been straight. As such one could say a Katana is basically a straight sword, that is bent *hrrmm* sorry I ment curved 😄
So while the overall curvature and its properties is a design choice the curvature on the blade it self, as a biproduct of the tempering, is much less controlled. Even though where the main curve should be can be controlled the control over the curvature radious is much less then if the blade was made curved right from the start. The curveature is, due to the process, also imtimtly interconnected to other properties of the blade (such as wich parts are hard and wich is soft etc) where perhaps the radious of the curve in it self might not have been the highest priority, but who knows 🙂 On a Tachi, mounted with the edge down an angled hilt, or the main curve of the blade close to the hilt (Koshizori) would aid in drawing and point alignment from horseback (both mentioned in the video). However I personally am not sure what benefits those features would give on a Katana with how it was used in mind for quick draw-cuts... It could even be a drawback with less reach in the draw-cut (it is only the top 5 cm that is "supposed" to be used on a katana so the reach is a crucial thing). Perhaps that is why many Tachi that was made into Katanas had their root (the part close to the hilt where some had their main curvature) reforged into the tang instead of just shorten the blad at the tip. But I have not tested a katana with a koshizori curveature and angled hilt myself so I can unfortunatly only speculate on the differences...
Well explained! Thx for the incites Matt
arch is better on resisting deformation only when both ends are fixed on something solid, what is not the case here...
But the force components of the impact would be diversed, compared to the straight (90 degree) impact of a straight sword.
This would suggest that a curved sword would be "more resistant" to breaking, but how much this would actually appear in real life?
I'd wager not that much, as you'd need a spot-on contact; however, I do think that a curved sword might be more forgiving in that sense (because of the curvature the contact is more likely not be 90 degrees)
Hopefully you know what my tired brains are trying to say 😂
@@tapioperala3010 You are completely wrong. Curvature does not matter, if mass and distance from point of impact are same, force is the same.
What matters, is cross section. Straight sword typically would be double edged, with something like diamond cross section. Most of the mass would be in the middle and very little at the edges and edges experience largest compression/tension forces. Back side being very thin and hard edge under immense tension is prone to crack.
Curved blades are single edged, with cross section more like a wedge, with most mas at the back of a blade, exactly where blade experience most tension. More material, and usually less hard too, is much more resistant to breaking.