I am a judoka, I have studied Judo for the last 15 years. When I found out about ringen(European jacket grappling) I was shocked to find... It's the same thing. Almost entirely, it's the same move set, just a world apart and 500 years removed. The human body can only move in so many ways, so after a long enough time all humanity has come up with very similar martial arts for both unarmed and armed combat.
@@julietfischer5056 Yeah, like ringen has very little on the ground, very few holds and, to my incomplete knowledge, no submissions. (Edit: yeah it has submissions, many of which start from standing, like a standing figure 4 armbar.) The holds of judo are very policed, including a "normal" grip set/kumi kata. Judo also seems more interested in absolute technique, a tai otoshi(runners stretch throw) is most commonly practiced with the extended leg's heel to the sky, which points the knee down which protects the ACL's of the person getting thrown. Ringen seems have not had these little injury-preventing intricacies preserved, which /teeeechnically/ makes it more like traditional Japanese Jiu jitsu, but whatever.
As Skall points out, the Japanese have a lot more "work from the scabbard". Interestingly, the reason for that lies in the laws of medieval Japan. Basically, showing any part of the blade was considered as "starting a fight" in the eyes of the law. Hence why people wouldn't do that until the very last moment. If defending, you wouldn't want to start drawing your sword unless you were absolutely certain there was no other way, as you could end up starting the fight and be held responsible for it. As an attacker, you'd want to postpone drawing since the moment you start, so does everyone else around. In a tense situation, samurai would push the sword with its scabbard in front of them, so that sword would be positioned as if its already half drawn and they could draw it more by pulling the sheath off it, rather than just pulling the sword out of it. But they wouldn't draw unless (or until) they definitely intended to kill someone. And with that the skill of drawing and attacking a split second faster than the other guy became incredibly important to them.
But that itselfe is rather "new". Thes laws you speak of existed, but only since after the civil war era. Bevore that the main occupation of samurai was beeing soldier, after it the main occupation was beeing a noble. Just like in europe.
Fair enough, but I would bet that there are similar rules in Europe. If you got a pointy piece of metal in your hand your intentions probably arent friendly. ( In Germany we got proverbs like "vom Leder ziehen", basically meaning to start a fight (mostly verbally nowadays), which surely stems from pulling a sword out of a leather scabbard. So, there is that similarity.) Thats of course not making your statement less true, but I suppose its not like drawing a sword in Europe was any less an offense as in Japan.
@@535phobos Well you misumderstood my statement. Depending on the age and place the same rules with different detail applied. The honorbound samurai well versed in arts and fine craftsmanship was a relatively young concept. Just as the european, well educated nobleman (knight) who is well versed in languages, arts and stragegy/tactics was a young concept. There where differences, for excample in europe in the later ages the nobles (knights) more or less became generals and officers while in japan they stayed warriors first, and officers seccond. (Thats one of the reasons for the whole meji restoration and samurai abolishment.) Also if we talk like medival europe vs medival japan then we have to remember that samurai at that point in time where warriors only. There was little "honor duels" just like in medival europe. The idea of honorable duels was a later one. Doesn't mean it didn't exist in medival times, but it was way more nieche. Only in the 17th or 18th cenrury the idea of duels became "popular" the japanese where abit eralierwith that iirc but just like in europe it was a "late" invention. I realy hate to have to spell the obviouse out in great detail. As you are aware in german we even have a word/saying for that "Alles Haargenau erklären." What I tryto get at.In europe we tend to makea clear cut betwen early nobility (knights and such) and modern nobility (officers who love to duell each other) In japan/japanese history, even thou the same development happened, there is no such a clear cut. Causing a lit of people (especialy Hemaboos) to compare late samurai with early medival knight. Thats like comparing napoleonic age officers with knights... thats just stupid.
I’ve read once than the shrinking of the tachi to average katana size was due to the mongol invasion and fighting abroad ships, the Japanese basically didn’t any more sophicated ship tactics besides ramming and boarding. Something cut focus ( people to not wearing a lot of armor abroad ships, even well made makes your more top heavy which can be a very bad on a tiny ship in violent waves and short so there is less of a chance of hitting things and getting stuck in plankings doors, ceiling if below deck.
17 years ago, I visited Japan's National Sword Museum. One katana there had 3 contact cuts on the cutting edge and 2 on the back. They were deep hard block contact evidence that could not be worked out without redoing the whole blade. I've seen several European swords with similar evidence. Sparing and academic discourse is easy in a controlled environment. When your life is on the line, whatever keeps you alive is gospel. These warriors lived and died by the blade. A few things will work for a narrow few. Certain basic moves work for everybody.
In a hypothetical fight of knight v samurai, depending on the era, they would both use whatever anti-armour weapon they could. Heck, it might even start out as a gun fight.
@@Wasthere73 they never used peasant levy in field battle. It's like mistaking iPhone with a hammer. Digging ditches, setting a blockade, building siege engines and going in for fouraging during the sieges - of coarse, how do you see a highborn doing that, he is a bit too dumb and exalted for it.
@@SeanWinters I mean exatly what stands there - deployment of peasant levies on the battlefield was exceptionally rare in Medieval age. In the same time levied commoners were extremely useful when it came to engineering works and other siege routine where you need to have numbers and craftman's skills.
When I was a kid, I was all about the Japanese swordsmanship. As I got older, I shifted more to a HEMA mindset, and yeah, I got a bit snobby. But I've since settled to a place of acknowledging both. Honestly, either a knight or a samurai could kick my ass, lol. I prefer HEMA personally, but both are cool.
Honestly since sword arts have become watered down and less applicable to live combat today, I feel like most historic knights or samurai would be able to pretty cleanly dispatch the average or even above average practitioner to this day, at least more often than not
It was cathartic to see the "ultimate sword" being mythbusted after 30 years of the mystical claims of "lightning fast and capable of cutting European plate armor in half with ease," it seems like the pendulum is now on the opposite side. Like you, though, I have a preference, but I'm not going to dismiss Eastern culture just because there are guys still chanting loudly that "European swords are slow, blunt and obviously inferior to the razor sharp and fast katana!"
@@Modighen The thing is, a sword will kill you without armor, and probably won't kill you (at least very easily) with proper armor. Doesn't much matter in the broad strokes if it's a katana, longsword, arming sword, saber, et cetera.
@@mercury2157 Right, and I'd imagine that they also spent a considerably larger amount of time training than most folks today do. Matt Easton made the point in one of his videos a knight was hard for a foot soldier to kill not just because of the better armor, weapons, and other gear, but also because they spent so much time learning how to use them. Way more than most others of the period.
In one of the RPs I'm in, I've found a way that lets me embrace both what little inner "weeb" I have as well as my love for HEMA (which I tend to gravitate toward more) in one single character in a lore-friendly way and I love it.
Expertly analyzed. As a side note, for years when i hear people say something along the lines of "They should put katanas in Dungeons and Dragons." I always point to the longsword and say it's already there, make it look like a katana, it's functionally the same.
Running a Japanese inspired campaign right now. I just reskinned the PHB weapons to their Japanese equivalents. Longswords are indeed katanas. Shortswords are wakizashis. Daggers are tantos. So on and so forth.
I think the best way of representing a Katana in a d20 system is how they did back in 3.5. curved versions of swords tended to have a lower damage die and a higher critical threat range. So a katana, being a type of Bastard Sword (as the Longsword in D&D was generally a single-handed arming sword), would deal 1d8 damage with an 18-20x2 critical threat range)
@Kelly Sargent Don't even get me started on that. I can appreciate the desire to simplify and standardise the system, but that doesn't mean I have to like the result
It always annoys me when they put katanas in fantasy, because they never explain who is speaking japanese. Same whith claymore (gaelic). I can buy sabre and rapier because those are anglified words.
It's pretty obvious which is better....whichever kept you from dying in that battle. Just like the old saying "what's the best gun in the world? The one that just saved your life"
My style for battle if necessary is brutish:) Very little finesse, basically bash the enemy to a pulp without regard to "honor" or respect. As long as you survive/the people on your side survive. Then that's what matters.
The best (weapon) in the moment is the one you have at hand. First your brain, then other tools. 'They have a (stabby thing)!' Well, we have a net and heavy packs to hit stabby-boy with.
I did Kendo for 13 years and, while I know it's very sportified compared with Kenjutsu, when I started HEMA Longsword I found a ton of similarities. Like you say, it's two humans trying to hit each other with swords. Some stuff just works no matter what.
Alot of people will get upset when being told that all styles are fundamentally the same thing, just with different names and cultures. They felt that their styles are no longer unique or sacred or something. People can added a bunch of twirling, unique movements and footwork to make different styles look differently but under pressure against another person who is trying to hit you ? 90% of the time the connected hits will look the same no matter what kind of swords you're using. This applied to unarmed martial arts as well, even more relevance than weapon arts
I 100% agree, i am practitioning Kenjutsu myself and we´ve got an open competetion once. Watching people with same experience was amazing . You could see who does HEMA and who Kenjutsu but there were little to none diferencies.
The problem is slight changes make huge differences. A boxer and an MMA fighter who has a boxing background competing in a boxing match would be a bloodbath (Mayweather vs McGregor). And that is small details within the same martial art. Wing Chun vs Boxing might as well be frim different planets. Slight overlap is to be expected but no it's not just a "stylistic difference"
@@mariolakis Yes, the rule of the game dictates the differences, hence why we see certain styles won't work in other styles competition, like why we won't see a Muay thai guy winning a Taekwondo kickking competion. I was talking more about the context which has more freedom of movements like HEMA or MMA WC movements may look very exotic but the moment you throw a WC practictioners into the MMA cage, what do we have ? Bad kickboxing with a slight focus on hand trapping (implied the WC man understand what to do under pressure), not Ip Man reincarnated. Because under pressure, human will only resulted to using what's functional and forget all the useless stuffs
It is all about skill and opportunity (opportunity being the best according to Miyamoto Musashi’s experience who stated at one point that even an unskilled fighter could win a duel against a skilled fighter if the opportunity to land a deadly blow presented itself) and what best works for you as long as the job gets done your opponent is going to care less on what style you use during the fight (only to the extent of catching your rhythm and pattern in order to deflect them, create chaos in you during the fight and win the fight). The preference of tool, armor and technique are useful only to the wielder who is the one using them to defend himself/herself and be more effective during the fight 🤷
Not to mention Musashi won his most famous duel with a club against a opponent armed with a sword which kind pretty much makes the Katana fetish a bit silly.
Ah yes. Miyamoto "Kill the kid from ambush" Musashi. Just joking, by the way. He was in kill or be killed situation, but it's darkly hilarious that in that one duel he defeated an ambush by counter ambushing the kid his official duel was with.
In a 'Knight vs Samurai' fight, my thought would be that the biggest issue either fighter would have would be that (assuming this is a true 'first time' encounter and not a modern sparring match), neither opponent would know the weaknesses of the other's armour. Sure they're going to surmise ones given prior experience, but they're not going to be as sure as if they were facing a peer opponent.
I imagine a samurai in this situation might be horribly caught off guard by the chain-mail protecting joints like the armpit. The knight might also have an advantage in his pommel and crossguard for blunt damage against japanese armor. Later european armor was much more solid and comprehensive simply because of the availability of steel (no diss on japan, they worked with what they had).
@@mrgoober6320 The real katana will slice through the chainmail like a hot knife through butter. No full swing needed, just zip right through it no problem.
this makes perfect sense. I think in japan we dont have anything equivalent in terms of offensive use of the guard like the europeans did with the mordhau. That's probably the biggest difference i can point out between the two styles. Also I personally think its kind of pointless to compare an entire multicultural subcontinent with many different nations against a single isolated island nation
It probably has to do with the armor present, I don’t think samurai ever ran into an exact equivalent that required something like mordhau to deal with
Yup, the main difference was in the quality of the armor which led to difference in weapons. In a fictional battle between knights and samurai the knights would have had an advantage because of their armor and quality of their steel, not because if their technique. It's still white interesting to see how similar the techniques are. Kinda like a form of convergent evolution.
This's why I think HEMA practitioners should practice Kenjutsu too; HEMA's big problem is that it relies on the interpretation of writings and artworks because the martial arts it teaches fell outta use/practice eventually. But Kenjutsu's a *living* tradition, continuing to be practiced even though it's no longer necessary; and with a lot of its techniques being similar to or exactly the same as modern HEMA techniques, it could really help a HEMA practitioner to get their techniques down to practice Kenjutsu.
@@gamingdragon1356 exactly! It's funny that the HEMA nerds think they're any better than the weebs. We're all the same. Just enjoy what you enjoy and stop worrying about other people.
5:35 thats one of the most crucial points I think a lot of people don't understand who dont practice any form of martial art or martial art with weapons. If your life is in danger you will use any knowledge and training you have to keep yourself as alive and hopefully uninjured as possible. In the battlefield I highly doubt any knight or samurai would care about damaging their blade if they were in danger since people of that social class could afford to simply buy another one later or get it repaired. Plus I think the natural instinct of self preservation would override the thought of "oh no my sword which was made, designed and what i carry and paid for to go into battle with could get damaged"
Both knights and samurais used blades as a last measure because they weren't that great of a weapon after all The pointy stick has always been better, thus they preferred those Knights and samurais brought swords because they were a sign of status (very expensive)
@@tuluppampam People are really swinging too far on the other side of the sword pendulum. Yes, swords weren't as good against armor as polearms. Neither were maces. But swords were still widely favored and used as sidearms, which they worked well as. This was not just true for noble classes or mounted warriors, but also commoners and footsoldiers. Written documents from the late Middle Ages show the majority of footsoldiers also brought a sword as a sidearm, and knights' testimonies show they preferred and recommended swords to maces (which were a lot less popular historically than amongst amateur historians today.) Nobles also passed laws in some places mandating that commoners keep a sword if called to battle because they were undeniably useful if you lost your polearms or got too close for them to be useful. And this wasn't impossible to fulfill, eventually budget swords actually cost about as much as spears. These wouldn't be super fancy, but if you think about it pistols have a huge range in cost too. So while a Colt Python may be a status symbol, a Hi Point is not yet is far cheaper.
@@tuluppampam- The samurai were primarily mounted archers. They had ranged pointy sticks, along with spears and their swords. Each weapon had its appropriate uses.
@@tuluppampam- The samurai were primarily mounted archers. They had ranged pointy sticks, along with spears and their swords. Each weapon had its appropriate uses.
I've been watching you SINCE the days you reference in the video, and I have to say the reason I stick around is because you're naturally skeptical, which leads you even to question your own predisposed views on a certain topic over time, which I definitely appreciate, and it seems your content has evolved with us in maturity.
The reason I leaned toward HEMA at first was to help learn basically all of the fundamentals. It is from there that I picked up an Iaito and was able to figure that out as well. I could wield either to great effect, but I'm not staying in place! No, I'd like Chinese weapons next.
@@idnyftw I've kinda retired the blade and picked up a gun. However, muay thai/boxing has taken up the bulk of physical combat training, now. More likely than not, that will be essential over stick-fighting skills lmao.
Sword is a sword is a sword. What I know is, the Japanese didn’t come into contact with European swordsmanship until guns were around, so any European victories over the Japanese in warfare were done with a decisive unrelated advantage. There’s no historical precedent, nor is there any modern precedent for judging which is better. It is an entirely armchair debate
If you wanted to be full armchair about it you can compare how the Japanese did against the Mongols to how the Europeans did against the Mongols. That is the only thing to compare and that wouldn't be fair comparison.
@@dambigfoot6844 The reason the Japanese did better vs Mongols was because of their own horse archery tradition and excellent skill with the bow was a requirement for Samurai first and foremost. Whilst Knights were riders & melee, and had their horses shot when chasing lighter Mongol cav. They learnt quickly to not chase fleeing (feint) Mongols.
@@dambigfoot6844 you also need to consider strategic situations. Logistically it’s harder to invade mainland Japan, Europe doesn’t have the same choke points universally. Also with logistics transporting an army of horse archers from China to Europe is easier than making the ships necessary to transport and that Europe has at times more areas ideal for Mongol style warfare.
@@SilverforceX I haven't researched much into the Japanese-Mongol wars but I would say in any case that Japan itself is the Britain of the east but with mountains.
It's interesting how in the armed martial arts community there's this big divide between HEMA and Kenjutsu where people seem to act like they're completely different with no overlap whereas in the unarmed martial arts community people pretty regularly acknowledge that Eastern and Western systems (like Muay Thai vs Western Kickboxing for example) are basically the exact same thing
Yeah, i believe that's because people get culturaly invested in weapons, as in they represent the cultural traditions of their society. Meanwhile thousands of years of boxing and wrestling have made the unarmed martial arts more so about sports on people's minds
Actually as the video said its closer than one thinks, they only differ on intensity, false edge cutting and very specific techniques that isn't possible based on the nature of the swords. Most of the basics and strikes are similar in principle and execution especially between Liechtenauer and Kenjutsu both use attacks to both counter and defend, both are fairly agressive and finally both use grappling.
@@forickgrimaldus8301 I know they're close my comment was referring to how their respective communities treat them rather than how they actually are. I compared them to Muay Thai and Western Kickboxing because both of those are also very similar since they're both boxing.
I think that's because in unarmed combat when you compete either in grappling or striking you actually risk getting serious injuries and people have actually died in competition so obviously you would want what works best for you not what you like necessarily. For example I'm an average wrestler(5th and 7th place in two national championships) pretty bad at bjj(blue belt) and good at striking combining my karate(black belt) and boxing (amateur 4-0record). Now starting competing in MMA I know what will work for me and what to avoid because I tried things from different cultures. When it comes to armed combat the danger of getting injured in competition is minimised by wearing what is essentially armour also you don't need to really hurt your opponent in order to win, so you can practice what you like not what you need. Anyway that's my opinion doesn't mean I'm right.
I'm a katana guy, but anything I can do with my katana, I can do with my longsword, while only occasionally forgetting about the quillions and banging them into my head. Lol.
For me trying kenjutsu was interesting because I noticed there are a lot of things you don't really want to do with katana, that are decent founding principles with long sword. Katana was so short and fast that bind was really dangerous and I couldn't really do winden at all. Apparently also all strikes done with thumb grip that I usually think of as the master strikes were missing and there wasn't anything similar to replace them. It was much more focused on the basics and little differences in them. I kind of feel like a long sword is more expressive than a katana because I find more options on it. I would kind of like to learn a bit of katana though. I would have to learn what to do if I can't answer everything with a zwerchhaw. I was also feeling orphan without my quillions. On the other hand we also were using wooden bokken which maybe were a bit lighter than a katana should be. That probably also made winden more difficult.
@@Hirvee5 bokken are indeed much lighter that a real katana. I also should've prefaced my comment with "as far as my backyard cutting goes' lol. Against an opponent, that adds lots of variables.
I uhh, I never thought I'd see a video like this from the former "I swear I don't hate katanas" guy heheh good job Skall! It's interesting to see how close the various Arts really are.
@@outsideiskrrtinsideihurt699 That's a long long long way off. As of right now RUclips doesn't provide me enough income (almost nothing) to be able to do the video
Kenjutsu trainee here! I have to say that I’m really proud of you Skall, for pointing out the many similarity between Eastern and Western swordsmanship. However, there’s one difference in HEMA and Kenjutsu, which is not technical. It’s about the way of transmission. While HEMA is a modern martial art, based on the concepts of old sword manuals, and trying to revive the many techniques in a practical way, Kenjutsu (the Koryu arts, existed before the Meiji Restoration) schools are thinking about themselves as historical fighting styles. Passing the techniques as historical traditions on the next generations. This is one of the many reasons why most of the old schools stopped their gekiken or shiai geiko (free sparring practice), keeping only the katas (paired forms or single, mostly sword drawing techniques). Koryu are old traditions of fighting methods, and since we living in an age of peace (mostly), with modern weapons, sparring is no longer a needed training method since you no longer have to protect yourself with a sword. You learn a way of fighting but you won’t fighting with it. If you put together a HEMA guy who actively spars for years, and a kenshi who learning Kenjutsu for the same amount of time, I don’t think the japanese swordsman would win. Luckily, there are few koryu schools around which kept their sparring traditions, so if you want to test your skills against a human partner, you have to join one of these schools.
Thats similar to modern fencing in the west, that transitioned to be a sport, where lots of rules exclude certain moves and scoring points matters more than actual applicability in "combat". HEMA rolls back a lot of those regulations, and is closer to true combat. (of course its still not realistic for safety reasons).
Best opponent is yourself, a good self training is a win road to perfection, no need to focus on other moves just perfectly learn what catas or forms offer, also some manoeuvres in time are forgotten, just to keep in mind
@@wamy80s I think there is a great advantage in sparring, since you can use or opponent as a training tool. Trying out techniques in "real" situations can improve your technique.
@WhiteLichMage As far as I could tell based on duels I've seen, the speed of both swords are pretty similar or at least negligible in difference. Maneuverability between the two seem negligible in difference but longsword do suffer in cutting power because of their design but that is why they were much thinner to compensate which does still make them good at cutting and similar levels to katanas . I think its more likely battlefield swords as backups in japan would likely have been tachi for their longer reach, reserving katanas for everyday self defense for nobility and samurai because of how short they are. In conclusion it seems they are pretty similar in terms of numbers but they handle quite differently because katanas are heavy for their size and often heavier that longswords which may make them slightly slower but not noticeable so, negligible in difference. Longswords have more reach and slightly better defense but not to an enormous extent, but suffer slightly in raw cutting ability because of their design but that too is pretty negligible. I'd like to add that I'm not an expert, what I said mainly comes from Shadiversity, Skallagrim and Metatron so take what I say with a grain of salt. Thanks for the input and opening discussion. :P
It would be interesting to see a video how culture and available material affected historical styles of combat. Show how differences often have a reason within their context. (Cue Matt Easton summoning)
6:52 The only thing I can think of that might be a little "weird" to see for a Japanese swordsman would be false edge cuts and the associated techniques like Zwerchau because it does add a few different attack possibilities from positions they might not be expecting, but it's not like it would be a mythical thing that they can't comprehend. They would quickly understand the logic behind it once they saw it done. I'm not too familiar with Japanese sword fighting techniques, but perhaps longswords would also have more thrusting techniques? It would obviously suck to get stabbed by a katana, that's for sure, but from what I've seen there are more "block while stabbing" techniques in HEMA.
Though rare Tsrugi Katana and blade weapons did exist they are doubled edger variants of the normal. There used to be a school that taught the methods of false edge but that school has been dead since the Meiji era along with most good schools.
They'd get the logic, but on the other hand: muscle memory. In combat, the hypothetical traveling samurai is going to do what they've trained, and that training assumes the opponent only has one edge. It probably has defensive holes (but FWIW I bet they're not easy for the two-edger to exploit, either).
Having started in Japanese, and now also doing rapier, sword is sword. There is only so much you can do with a blade and be effective. Only real differences are one hand vs 2, cutting vs thrusting and single edge vs double. But when you get down to it, sword is sword.
As a long sword person I think that weight, nibleness, length and crossguard also make signifficant differences. To me it currently seems that there are defenitely quite a few strategies that are great with longswords but not with a katanas. I don't currently feel anywhere as confident with a katana as a longsword. It kind of seems to me that you have to focuse more on the basics with a katana.
Thing that folks also forget when it comes to western and eastern weapons is that they were developed in ways that were for the type of combat they'd be used in and what they'd be up against
I think people make the mistake of not understanding the conditions of Japan and how that influenced warfare. Japanese steel had a lot of impurities in it so they had to come up with clever solutions to problems not experienced in Europe. Assuming equal skill levels and wealth, I'd put money on a European knight over a Japanese samurai, only because of the higher quality metal available to the European. As far as technique and skill goes? Like the video said: there's only so many ways you can kill someone with a sharp, pointy, stabby thing and only so many ways you can avoid getting killed. Compare different styles is moot, especially in 2023 where we can make weapons of either style using the same quality materials. It's actually amazing what came out of Japan considering they were at a disadvantage with their natural resources. "Oh? I can't get a bunch of steel to make a sword and even if I could, it would be brittle and snap? I guess I'll just design a sword that's long, thin, and can transfer the weight of my back into a strong force along the blade that makes for a deadly slashing and cutting weapon."
As someone that's been studying from the Japanese manuals and taking it to freeplay, I'm happy to see videos like this come out. Eventually when you get down to it, there are only so many ways a body and a sword really want to move. Though I am hoping that more Japanese schools start adopting picking up fencing gear and sparring safe katanas.
Occasionally members of the Japanese Cultural Center in my city will visit our HEMA studio to spar. It's really interesting! From what I've seen (I haven't had the opportunity to face a kendo practitioner myself), the big differences come from the weapon construction, e.g. a katana is slightly shorter than a longsword and doesn't have a cross guard, so that affects measure and how you defend.
I don't know if others mentioned it before, but thank you for always putting these video clips you use in the description, helps if i want to dive deeper into each one
Thank you for making this video. I'm one of your earlier subs (I subbed after coming across your Dark Souls weapons video back in 2013). I've been watching your stuff off and on since then, though--admittedly--not too much these past couple of years. Some of it could be attributed to the usual causes: busy with life, my interests changing, etc. However, one contributing factor was the toxic elitism that is all too familiar in the historical weapons community. You yourself displayed some of this elitism, which you admit to in this video. What really wore me down, though, was the comment section. The katana-bashing was particularly aggravating for me (I'm half Japanese). It was evident that people were crapping on everything Eastern (or pop) because it was the "cool" thing to do. Anyway, it's good to see you've come around. I'll continue watching your videos from time to time, and I'll always be rooting for you.
When you were speaking about binding and winding, the footage you had playing (with the one training partner with the heavy "devil gloves") was of the style Ono-ha Ittō-ryū, which actively discourages binding and also has a penchant for displacing-type counter cuts. There are/were certainly other styles of Japanese swordsmanship that use binding, but I would agree it's a lower percentage than reconstructed HEMA styles. This might have partially to do with the tachi and katana only having a single-edge, so edge-on-edge simply occurs a bit less often than with double-edge swords.
In my experience the smaller lenght, weight and lack of cross guard also discourage the bind. When I tried kenjutsu I felt like I was really close to the opponent when I was at the binding distance and the sword really easily escaped the bind too. I was in a real danger because there was not a lot of blade between us and the enemy could just strike me very quickly. The blade in katana feels really strong for all its length where in hema the point is so far that the diffference between controlling the weak vs the strong is really signifficant.
Ive been trying to convince my friend to not be an elitist on either side, both parties practice the same motion and discipline. Their stances are almost exactly the same. Neither side is inferior or superior. Europeans have better metals and resources but when a person lacks something, he finds a way to adapt and use whatever he has for an advantage, and that is what the japanese has for a pro. No matter how strong the US military is in technology, they had a hard time fighting Iraq. Even the ages of both Europe and Japan is sort of the same, after their warring periods, duels became a thing for warriors born in their peaceful era. Thank you, Skall, for making this video. I like both European and Japanese martial arts, i don't want to be in favor on either of them. To be honest, I'm leaning more into the older ones such as the Romans and the Greeks but hey i love them all!
I enjoyed playing with both European and Japanese sword techniques and found a lot that transferred from one to the other. In many cases, it was more a matter of emphasis or what was allowed as part of sparring (disarms, for example, aren't always safe) that differentiated the two. Certainly working on both made me a better swordsman overall.
HEMA vs Asian martial arts is Coke vs Pepsi! This is a fabulous metaphor! When I first started to study sword at an Aikido dojo, I was immediately struck by the intense similarities and remarked upon it to my sensei. He made the same point about the limits of biomechanics.
Great video. Many historical combat communities would benefit greatly from the mindset of seeing how we are all the same rather than how we are different.
I think a confounding factor in the discourse is that a lot of the famous historical Japanese swordmasters were huge dorks who were into philosophy and poetry and stuff and fluffed up their writings with esoteric and hyperbolic statements. So a lot of people find their dorkiness to come across as cool and others think it's pretentious. Like when a kenjutsu practitioner would write about developing mental they would say something along the lines of, "You should clear your mind and become one with the universe, make your heart to be like still water and it will become a mirror that reflects all your foe's evil intent" but essentially they're saying, "Stay calm, because it'll make you more mindful of how you're fighting and you'll be in the right mindset to predict your opponent's moves."
I believe, and I could be mistaken here, that it has to do with their concept of balance. Any practitioner of blade arts would and should recognize that it is, by its very nature, a violent art form. It could very well boil down to the relationship between the yin and the yang, peace and war, violence and serenity. It could be that, in order to balance out the violence of their swordsmanship, the samurai or whatever-else-have-you may engage in poetry, bonsai keeping, calligraphy, philosophy or other art forms in order to maintain that balance of violence and peace. Introspection is also a vital part of not allowing the violent nature of this beautiful - though deadly - art form to consume the real person within, hence the philosophy and the allegorical nature of some of their writings. Like I said, I could be completely off base here, but this would make sense in my personal opinion.
I like the framing here. I never really thought of samurai as booky nerds, but it fits. Though, I'd have to add that it's a spiritual thing, and the flowery language is often meant to evoke a very specific mindset geared towards a flow state. Which is huge for martial arts and sports.
There's also this to consider, the language they use is full of symbolism and double meanings because literature of their time was usually written this way (depending on context).
Well by that point they kinda had to justify their own existance. So you got hte 'warrior phliosopher' noble thing. Think how post feudal europe had the whole chivalry bunk floating around. For pretty mcuh the same reasons. Nobility trying ot justify its own existance.
Knights are not necessarily any different. Samurai and knights, in their respective pinnacles of cultural development, would comprise a large part of the most well-educated populace. They had access to education in a time where it was normal not to. These people could read and write in a time where it was normal not to. They were all dorks by default. They actually had the ability (not just being literate, but the time to indulge in it) to sit around reading and writing about each other's exploits, and if they couldn't or wouldn't do their own writing, they damn well knew who to go to for a commissioned work about how they slay dragons with their sword and maidens with their dick.
Solid video, I appreciate your honesty Skall. Couldn't agree more with the "Who cares" sentiment, too many hema bros getting worked up because of some trolls on reddit pretending to be weebs.
This is a very good video, making one of the most relevant points I've ever heard in martial arts training I've been of the same opinion for a long time.
I find it interesting that there is such a debate between the two styles. People often cite the idea Bushido as something which separates Japan and European martial arts, when in actuality the book "Bushido" was written in the 1800s by Nitobe specifically for a European audience. In the book he intentionally drew comparisons with knightly chivalry and other "codes", sprinkling in bits of "oriental mysticism" to engage the reader. Bushido basically just transposed chivalry, itself mostly an invention onto a Japanese setting. It was essentially a piece of propaganda. Such a concept isn't found written in any texts before then, except perhaps the Hagakure, by Yamamoto Tsumetomo which is MUCH more fatalistic and less full of idealism. Great video Skall, keep 'em coming!
The Book of Five Rings is a text on kenjutsu and the martial arts in general, written by the Japanese swordsman Miyamoto Musashi around 1645. So a bit further back but it's not bushido.
Bushido is a book in which diplomat Nitobe explains to Westerners what Japanese morality is like. Nitobe wrote the book because he was often asked by Christian Westerners what the morals of non-Christian Japanese people were. The content of Bushido “The Way of Samurai” is a compilation of ancient records. In the 8th century, there was the tuwamono no michi (way of a strong soldier) as the morals that samurai should follow. In the 13th century, the Kamakura Shogunate enacted the Gosei Shikimoku, a code of samurai morality. In 1575, the word Bushido was written in Koyo Gunkan, a book on military science by the Takeda clan. Military scholar Soko Yamaga (1622 - 1685) proposed Shido. Yamaoka Tesshu (1836-1888) wrote Bushido. These were the morals of the samurai, but they were also shared with the peasants through poetry, kabuki, stories, and peasant schools.
It would be vary interesting to see an accurate reenactment of if let's say a knight encountered a samurai and how it would go. Because here it seems that both their martial arts are vary similar but again different in ways
Well, you then get into all sorts of questions. What exact time period is each from? What equipment configuration does each have? Is it even fair considering the differences in warfare, economics, etc. that led to the differences in available equipment? Is it even fair considering that their roles in warfare were often different?
A Knight in full metal armour wielding a considerably longer blade that is better at stabbing versus someone with a shorter primarily cutting weapon that is essentially useless against plate armour? It'd only go one way, regardless of the merits of the two styles.
@@tycarne7850 Not really. The Japanese wore plate armor around the same time knights did and their swords worked pretty well, plus some katana were actually designed for stabbing more than cutting believe it or not. Also the equipment could vary heavily, also the number of soldiers, battle strategy, skill. There’s too much to consider. Also your assuming the knights going to have full plate armor and the samurai won’t, why won’t he have some form of chain Mail or something like that? Again just too much variety.
@@tycarne7850 Samurai also wore plate cuirasses but regardless, comparing a katana to a longsword is like comparing a short sword to a longsword, it doesn’t take a genius to find out that katanas were not commonly used and not their primary weapon, samurai often used polearms, bows, and spears, 2 of which that are better anti armor weapons then a longsword and the spear being much better at stabbing then a longsword, all 3 with longer reach.
I honestly just wish there was a sword fighting MMA thing. Would be very fun to actually see what mixture of styles and weapon would end up being the most effective.Because while yes Hema and kenjutsu are very similar they both have their own anachronisms and id enjoy seeing what stops being used and what ends up being expressed more
Skallagrim, you are so good at what you are doing. Historians, reenactors, LARP people, writers just need you :D The explanations are so much on point, and not too long aswell.
I think it is a shame there is basically zero documentation on the specific combat forms used in Mesoamerican (Aztec, etc) militarism and martial arts, especially as they actually DID have fundamentally different weapons in some respects (Certainly at least Macuahuitl is far more functionally different any Eurasian sword then they are to each other then any of them are from each other, though Macuahuitl aside I think those differences are less major when looking at Mesoamerican vs eurasian polearms, clubs etc ) which may have led to more distinct approaches and techniques. We know that such martial training/forms existed, since the Aztec public schooling system in Tenochtitlan with Telpochcalli was as much a martial training institution as it was a general education one; but the specifics is basically lost to time. I've seen some people (such as those in the Atlatl Mexico Renactment group in Mexico) try to reconstruct likely practices and forms in general terms based on what is known about the weaponry and higher level battlefield tactics (as opposed to what was done in individual combat, though even that higher level information is scarce), but my thing is more stuff like urbanism and architecture and water mangement systems, so I don't have anything saved to really talk about here, the one I did have I lost at some point. T
Thats great, its sad so much generally is lot due europeans , well not rally ewant tohave any culture survive i guess, with the colonizing. But cool you recontruct and research, including that styles.
@@marocat4749 Cortez & a handful of Spaniards are not what defeated the Aztecs. The other central American tribes that allied themselves with Cortez did! The absolute destruction of the Aztecs was done in retaliation for the cruelty of their rule over the region & as an act of revenge by the locals. The Europeans, generally speaking, didn't care at all one way or another about the customs & beliefs of the natives who continued to practice their religions & carry on in their cultural norms as much as they liked. There was a lot more using the newcomers to even old scores against enemies by tribes who encountered Europeans first than most people want to admit or talk about!
@@richardavery4692 But theydid use th deveide and conquer stategy and their gruides to go there. and get it all. And they did care, and a population that has no tron identity cultural is easier to control. The ones allying with them, stuill on th european using that a mean.
@@marocat4749 but you're attempting to credit the Europeans for much more than they deserve. The Spanish did take a lot of the Aztec gold, that's absolutely true. The Aztec culture itself was destroyed by the other native tribes to prevent the empire from ever being able to reconstitute itself. That happens when the dominant culture, in this case the Aztecs, enslaves your people, has oppressed you for generations, & literally used you for human sacrifices to their gods until your societies barely exist anymore! The initial contacts with Europeans generally went this way throughout the New World in the beginning. There was very little actual aggression from the new arrivals except on behalf of their new native allies. Even the mass casualties of first contact where you see entire tribes disappear it's actually accidental from disease exposure, which no one knew about back then, not fighting! Cooperation & cohabitation on the newly discovered land was everyone's goal first & foremost!
@@richardavery4692 Ok its both.And the germs were european too. ok i will credit the high empire that fell becaus its opression, but i wpont let euroopean colonizrs off, that destroy culture generally so , maybe not that specific case. But its telling homuch we know of rome becaue that wa condidered civilized, and that is a fallen empire too, Its afactor ok. But thanks for eplaining they brought it upon tthemselves too. Genuinly interesting and good to know.
I love it when people say that the katana is overated and overrepresentet in pop media, whithout relising that the longsword is not much diferent, how often do you see a sword that isn't japonese or european in a movie?
Longsword is certainly a better weapon but they were both intended for different situations, you can carry a katana for self defense and as a sidearm very easily but it’s strange to carry a longsword for the same purpose. You can bring a katana to battle against a longsword but the longsword will outperform it because that’s not what it’s used for.
the problem is that when a katana is seen as a weapon for "experts", that you need to know how to use (and that's true), the longsword is seen as a heavy metal clubs used in a barbaric way, as if it require more brute force than skill it's not like katana is overrated, the problem is that european swords (or generally european weapons and martial arts) are underrated
I think the primary difference is the blade construction. The difference in technical focus flows from there. You're probably less likely to train for static blocking with a sword you know is at risk of major chipping or even breaking. Likewise, binding and winding with an edge that will happily take it is probably advantageous.
@@kingkilburn what, you wanted me to call you an idiot for thinking someone would not defend themselves in a certain manner just because their weapon might chip?
@@kingkilburn dude stop being so sensitive. People often ignore the amount of niku left on katana blades. They were not that easily chipped as brittle ones from both hardness and blade geometry
The debate about which of these styles are better reminds me so much of the PC vs. console or the console wars. It's just a bunch of opinions flying everywhere with little of importance being said. It's a fun debate as long as you take it with the seriousness it deserves.
Finally! The Tecumseh or Briggs and Stratton debate has been settled. Thank you. I appreciate your videos. I just hope that someone appreciates my humor. I'd hate to start an argument over small engines on your channel.
Thank you for touching on halfswording in kenjutsu. I have very often heard people make the incredibly uninformed statement that halfswording would be something totally foreign that would be impossible to do with Japanese swords, all while ignoring its place in various styles.
Honestly, I think a lot of the main differences between Eastern and Western combat comes down to available materials and the tactics used. Western battlefield combat was focused a lot on shield walls so a lot of manuscripts for things like longswords/rapiers etc were made specifically for duelling. While from what I understand, Eastern battlefield combat was focused more on cavalry and poleweapon formations. With katanas being more of a self defence weapon. This means that weaponry was designed more around its use and some of the techniques differ due to this use and these design changes. Such as how katanas not having quillons because a smaller tsuba is easier to carry or how there's more focus on drawing from a sheathe in Eastern styles giving a nod to the self defence use (I.e. You only pull out your weapon once you're in danger) as opposed to Western styles that figure you're both with weapons drawn in a 1v1 duel.
Yeah, warfare tactics are going to be different because the terrain is so different. Japan is a series of islands, whereas Europe is much larger and connected by land. Weirdly I'd be less interested in how sword fighting differs and more, warfare logistics and tactics. I'd especially want to know if it starts to look closer when you compare to warfare in England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales and all that.
Note, in Japan, even when you are in danger, say a tense situation, the samurai's first response wouldn't be to draw the sword. First they'd pull it up with the scabbard, so the hilt is positioned quite a bit in front of themselves (like for example in 10:32 clip in the video). That's because in Japan, the first person to show any part of the blade was the one legally considered responsible for starting the fight and because the instant someone did that, so would everyone else. This led to the development of those elaborate fighting styles where both start drawing at pretty much the same time and then whoever's faster wins.
Yes but no, it's a mistake to think sword are designed for battlefield, a rapiere would rarely face a shield, a court sword is primary made to be used... well at the court Sword varies depending of the doctrine, it's not even a question of west vs east, they're a lot of different sword in the west that are used totally differently. If you try to to use an estoc like a saber, you probably will have a bad time. Katana are designed for their doctrine, they don't need a guard (the only purpose of the tsuba is not cutting your fingers) since the doctrine doesn't rely on sword contact, they also don't put at bay the opponent, which avoid sword contact and hide your reach (which they kind like since they favorise ample garnement that hide movement) so having the sword sheated is not that big of a deal as long as you can unsheat it quick enough, the doctrine emphasis big cut (part of the evaluation to prove how skilled you are is how much you can cut in one swing) so it make sens to have a curved blade and a two handed handle
Skall, I LOVE your input on this. thorough research with a clear comparison. with little to none bias. now the foot work placement really interest me since the hands are practically the same.
The point about Europeans doing less "from the scabbard" is at least a little bit variable. The culture I'm thinking of is the Irish (or, as the English claimed, the Wild Irish). From medieval times to the 1500's a standard item for an Irish fighter would be a scian (literally knife), a slender single edged blade 18 - 24" long. No guard, and carried on the right side (for right-handers) with the edge forward. I've seen a lovely drawing from sometime in the 1500's of a group of kerns (Irish soldiers) standing around being themselves. One of them has his scian drawn and in front of the throat of his neighbor. If you think about it, with a blade like that worn edge forward, you could cut the throat of anyone within, or near, arms reach of you in 1/10 of a second. I've been told by a reputable retailer of good quality reproduction swords here in the States that "scains didn't really exist" and that "scians weren't a real thing." However, I have seen real, original scians hanging on the wall of the National Museum of Ireland in Dublin, along with all the Viking swords. For those wondering "Why Viking swords?", the Vikings totally Owned Dublin for a long time, until one of my ancestors kicked them out of Ireland. As to any other cultures in Europe with drawcut or drawstab techniques, I don't know. Mebbe, mebbe not.
Well that’s really cool to know but that was super obscure and specific so it still stands that Japanese swordsmanship still has dozens of iaido schools each having several different technique when the closest thing hema has is some fiore texts and scians, but from the way you describe them they sound like they are drawn with an ice pick grip which is a big disadvantage if the cut misses or it not immediately fatal
I have a bunch of friends stuck into this hipster phase of thinking european Martial arts are superior. None of them actually do any Martial arts, naturally
The superiority bit is the mistake. I thinks it's great that people are perhaps seeing how overblown Japanese martial arts have become, and are then discovering alternatives. So the pendulum swing is good; but like all pendulum swings, it's important to not let it swing back in the opposite direction. That being said, I do think that any art that actively focuses on sparring has a definite advantage over one that discourages, or outright forgets sparring. Personally I get very disappointed when I see a martial art neglecting that. I'd always rather learn things that I can then test
From my perspective, since there are only so many ways to kill someone with a sword, it would come down to a mix of luck, equipment and skill. However, a medieval knight would have a slight edge in 1 on 1 combat due to the more advanced metalworking technological development that europe had in that time, but only a little.
Big thanks for putting together examples that show the similarities. It is like assembling a puzzle not knowing before hand that the prices can fit. Any time I've thought of putting something like that together, I get bogged down. So, props.
You guys ever equip a Katana while wearing Knight Armor + a nifty shield in Dark Souls? Not only does it look wild, it fits like a glove! Combining both, oozes coolness. I rest my case.
I'd say that the main difference between kenjutsu and HEMA (mainly speaking about longsword fight) could be that some guards will protect your hand more and will make the bind easier or safer, but apart from that they're practically the same. Apart from that the technique shown in minute 9:00 actually appears in Verdadera Destreza(spanish rapier) and it's called "flaqueza bajo la fuerza", it's done exactly in the same manner, you're meant to bind oponnents blade, twist it and pull it outside before performing a cut. Really interesting to see same techniques used by weapons of much of a difference.
im glad you made this video. people, factions, countries, everyone made their own versions of swords at different times during different parts of history set in a era and area. every sword has there reasons, there plus and negatives. To compared a swords would be a fools aaron, you need to look at everything. just because one sword has more plus's than others, does not mean its better, you put the "better" sword in that time and history and it would not work out as well as you think, compared to the historical sword of that time. hell even resources and tools that you have at the time takes part in this. if your doing a sword vs sword as a personal opinion thats fine, but instead of sword vs sword. i would look at it as more of era and challenges of the sword and why they existed.
i always try to keep in mind that historical weapons and martial arts, no matter where they are from, were basically developed under pain of death. instead of some modern guy picking them up wondering how effective they were or ranking them on youtube it was more like if you or the group you belonged to used suboptimal arms, armor, or tactics you would be killed or invaded or enslaved. if an entire civilization spends thousands of years refining a weapon or system of weapons with THAT much incentive...for me to be overly critical of it without acknowledging that it was very likely the best possible result they could achieve at that particular time and location would be absurd. picking a best is like picking the best medicine. the best for what? allergies? covid? psychological disorders? infection?
I find the knight v samurai pointless because there quite a few factors to take into account like individual skill, experience, reaction time, what both sides are wearing and just plain old luck all of which make it impossible to say one side is better then the other.
It's all a mind exercise, it doesn't matter which one turned out stronger, the important thing is you did your research and hopefully learned something about the things you're comparing. The fate of the world doesn't exactly hang on proving if the knight or samurai were superior, so you don't even have to worry too much about being wrong.
I always thought the weapons and technique were similar enough, but i always prefered the look of a European sword over a Katana or Tatchi asthetically
11:00 - What changed my mind from that way of thinking... was just outright buying a katana and trying to use it. The very nature of the blade itself felt different enough that certain things I was taught in HEMA (particularly Italian longsword) that were off-limits "no-no", that then looked really stupid in more Asian arts (particularly with the curved blades used) suddenly made sense. The way a weapon handles in complimentary use to biomechanics either making them easier or improves the use compared to a different sword. Literally holding a particular guard and performing a single swing with a katana instantly killed my elitism. And I felt astonished and embarrassed. I vowed never again to so quickly judge another martial art.
I've always been firmly stuck in the European camp when it comes to swords, but when it comes to polearms I do prefer Asiatic weaponry I like the looks of both a Glaive and Naginahta.
europe isnt a country.. most european styles were more diferent from one another than kenjutsu is to hema .. hema isnt a martial arts its a group of martial arts . comparing a group of martial arts to kenjutsu is pretty ignorant . kenjutsu vs german fighting would be more true question
Asiatic polearms? Check out Chinese great spear. Not the short, shoulder-high stuff, it's the 3-6m long one, which pretty much resembles a pike. With a series of unique techniques, this pike-lengthed weapon can be used in a lethal and incredibly agile way. There's a reason why Chinese people hail the spear as the king of all arms.
And this is why I respect you the most in this community. There is no need for a d*ck measuring contest as you say there are indeed more similarities than differences. Plus it's best to look deeply into any fighting art east, west, north south whatever it may be.
I studied ken/iaijutsu for about ten years, and the similarities in movement and principles became such that it made me *go back* to competitive fencing after years off. I think it is fascinating to see the parallels once one gets past the surface level differences
@@kronoscamron7412 Honestly hard to tell. I already had several years of olympic fencing under my belt so it was a good choice for me, but I don't know how it would be to start at the beginning. It is a lot of fun to do, though, so there is that
But we can all agree that European metalurgy and steel quality was far better than the Japanese which was not their fault btw japan has very impure iron.
Spring steel wasn’t a thing in medieval Europe. And pure iron doesn’t exist anywhere in the world in good quantities. The Japanese still made great quality steel and the raw material played little role in the end product
Also you could argue that with culture and available resources the katana design was perfect, just like how the longsword was. The hema keyboard warrior in japan wouldnt have acces to even making a longsword. It just makes no sense to put this stuff against eachother unless in an equal compitition in the same invironment.
Hi I practice both: HEMA and japanese swordsmanship (Kendo, Iaido and Kenjutsu). I came to the same conclusion some time ago. I find it always amusing to see people arguing over the internet which "style" is superior. People seem to forget, that sword techniques, guards etc. are for the same purpose: increasing your chance of surviving a duel situation. The swords vary only in design, the final function is the same.
I think the biggest difference between eastern vs western swordsmanship is the attitudes of modern practitioners. Modern Kendo practitioners are more concerned with being accurate to the art as it was centuries ago, while HEMA practitioners are more interested in continuing to evolve the art from what it used to be, rather than trying to freeze it in some arbitrary time period. That, and HEMA clubs have a MASSIVELY greater focus on practical sparring, while Kendo has way more kata work, with a lot of gyms having no sparring at all.
It is similar to the fact that the evolution of the shape and manufacturing method of katana stopped in early ages, and the emphasis was solely on appraisal and preservation.
I think the whole hipster sword thing has also flipped the pendulum to the opposite side. What do I mean by this? I always hear about how people say other people say the katana is the best sword in the world, the sharpest sword in the world, how amazing and magical it is. But I never actually hear people say this unironically. I never actually see it for myself outside of hollywood which is not where I'm going for sword advice. But I do see people tell me the long sword is the best sword in history. That it's the only sword that never broke. That it's the sharpest sword ever made. That it's the longest sword ever made. That it's the only sword that could cut through armor. That it could cut a fully armored knight in half. And they also tell me the katana was a piece of garbage that bent easily, broke easily, crumpled like a soda can with any stab, was so fragile that swinging it in the air too hard will break it, and that after the Japanese met Europeans there was cultural conflict because everyone wanted to get rid of their trashy katana in favor of superior European swords. I also hear that katana technique was so awful and garbage they lost 15 out of 16 duels, the last duel only winning because the fighter was drunk. I never hear this magical claim about katanas for myself except through clearly garbage sites. I only hear people debunking them while making the same claims about European swords.
the thing is that weebs really don’t exist anymore and the ones that do aren’t on channels like this one. We’ve been bashing the katana for so long all in the name of destroying weebs that we’ve now flooded the internet with more misconceptions (just in the opposite direction ). Most European fanboys kinda know this and won’t see a weeb if they weren’t actively searching for one, but will still *pretend* they are everywhere and then type up long rants on why medieval japan was actually garbage after maybe 30 mins of biased research. (Some even cite Shad lol) It’s also not uncommon for shit to just be made up too. Some I’ve seen that don’t really have any basis are: “japan had the most impure steel” “samurai were literally children sized” “samurai were delicate when handling their swords in a fight” “samurai never fought and only killed peasants” “they had to ban rapiers because too many kenjutsu practitioners kept dying” etc.
@@outsideiskrrtinsideihurt699 nope, theyre right they had impure steel (cough cough just like everyone else's, including europe especially, cough cough but), thats why they folded it! its annoying when people use the fact that they folded it as proof that it was terrible. the child size bullshit is just racist. im usually not one to claim that, but theres no facts to back this up. Unless they believe that all 8 year olds are 5 foot 5, in which they arent racist, just stupid.
@@Red-jl7jj oh yeah in no way do I think Japans smelting techniques produced pure steel nor do I think their swords were 100% pure after folding I just said “most impure steel” as people believe Japanese steel was inherently more impure than the rest of the world’s and it somehow affects the final product despite in depth forging techniques. I agree, it really sucks that Japan has preserved their method of making top quality swords for nearly a millennium only for it to be used against them. It’s like people conveniently ignore all other forging methods that try to remove impurities (twisting).
I do not exactly have any real experience with weapons whatsoever, but once upon a time I stumbled upon a thing in game that made me realise how confusing it may be, when a low-to-medium end fighter faces something totally different from their known style. In Hellish Quart I played a lot against the "familiar" saber styles so eventually I sorta had a feeling of how they move. And then Alexander showed up, the black guy with african saber style or what it was. His constant position changes, swinging the saber under different angles from what I dealt with before, it was extremely confusing and without deep understanding of what's what I was just shocked and couldn't understand how to deal with it. With predictable results. Yeah, button-mashing has very little to do with actual fencing, but I felt that psychological aspect of facing a style that has certain amount of differences could still be applicable to real fight and real confusion of someone who hasn't mastered all the intricacies of combat.
Awesome video - very well made. I really appreciate you interspersing sparring footage as a show of the techniques happening even in force-on-force. I'm sure the editing on this one wasn't measly: it is appreciated!
You're 100% correct that at their core, both sets of skills are designed to kill the other guy before he kills you. As all humans have the same tools, of course the mechanics are going to be very similar. I think the reason why in the past I've struggled to take eastern styles seriously is due to all of the extra silly stuff that comes along with it. The vast majority of HEMA I've observed over the years was generally practical in nature. The equipment is practical and pragmatic where as the (what I think) are silly outfits, routines and "dancing" that they do so much a part of eastern martial arts gives me the view that it's pretentious and less interested in practical skills than in showing off.
This is what I like to see! Detailed analysis and comparisons! And a call for sanity and less toxicity is a major plus! I've never been a major "weeb", I always viewed the katana as something cool looking but never considered it as particularly special (I actually have more fondness for sabers). However, all the criticism and hate directed at Asian cultures just because of the annoying weebs always irritated me. So it's refreshing to see an actually valid comparison that doesn't nitpick details or try to tip the scales: "oh well the katana is heavier despite being shorter so it's actually worse but really it's about personal taste but it's worse".
I am glad to see a very balanced perspective on this... like it makes a lot of sense that at some point, martial arts in Europe and Asia converged to some degree in terms of both of them figuring out what moves work and what moves don't.
I am a judoka, I have studied Judo for the last 15 years. When I found out about ringen(European jacket grappling) I was shocked to find...
It's the same thing. Almost entirely, it's the same move set, just a world apart and 500 years removed.
The human body can only move in so many ways, so after a long enough time all humanity has come up with very similar martial arts for both unarmed and armed combat.
The differences seem to be in the attitudes and mental disciplines around the various arts. Maybe a few details of grips, holds, and throws.
@@julietfischer5056 Yeah, like ringen has very little on the ground, very few holds and, to my incomplete knowledge, no submissions. (Edit: yeah it has submissions, many of which start from standing, like a standing figure 4 armbar.)
The holds of judo are very policed, including a "normal" grip set/kumi kata. Judo also seems more interested in absolute technique, a tai otoshi(runners stretch throw) is most commonly practiced with the extended leg's heel to the sky, which points the knee down which protects the ACL's of the person getting thrown. Ringen seems have not had these little injury-preventing intricacies preserved, which /teeeechnically/ makes it more like traditional Japanese Jiu jitsu, but whatever.
@@SeanWinters interesting read. Thank you.
Ringen is definitely not a jacket wrestling.
I once heard a Brazilian Ju Jitsu master say that "there is no Canadian Geometry".
A martial arts instructor once said to us. “Everyone has one head, one torso, two arms and two legs. Everything flows from that knowledge “
two legs, I don't know about him, but I beg to differ
@@juggalox1000 Swordsmen with less will quickly find themselves down one head as well, so I don't think they need count.
@@melanoc3tusii205 It's only a flesh wound ...
@@VosperCDN : A small sidenote out of context . In german Fleisch means both flesh and meat, the german word Mett means raweaten fine minced meat.
Crippled Masters laughs in the face of your anecdote
As Skall points out, the Japanese have a lot more "work from the scabbard". Interestingly, the reason for that lies in the laws of medieval Japan. Basically, showing any part of the blade was considered as "starting a fight" in the eyes of the law.
Hence why people wouldn't do that until the very last moment. If defending, you wouldn't want to start drawing your sword unless you were absolutely certain there was no other way, as you could end up starting the fight and be held responsible for it.
As an attacker, you'd want to postpone drawing since the moment you start, so does everyone else around.
In a tense situation, samurai would push the sword with its scabbard in front of them, so that sword would be positioned as if its already half drawn and they could draw it more by pulling the sheath off it, rather than just pulling the sword out of it.
But they wouldn't draw unless (or until) they definitely intended to kill someone.
And with that the skill of drawing and attacking a split second faster than the other guy became incredibly important to them.
Huh, I suppose that might explain the conceptual origins of iaido
But that itselfe is rather "new". Thes laws you speak of existed, but only since after the civil war era. Bevore that the main occupation of samurai was beeing soldier, after it the main occupation was beeing a noble.
Just like in europe.
Fair enough, but I would bet that there are similar rules in Europe. If you got a pointy piece of metal in your hand your intentions probably arent friendly. ( In Germany we got proverbs like "vom Leder ziehen", basically meaning to start a fight (mostly verbally nowadays), which surely stems from pulling a sword out of a leather scabbard. So, there is that similarity.)
Thats of course not making your statement less true, but I suppose its not like drawing a sword in Europe was any less an offense as in Japan.
@@535phobos Well you misumderstood my statement. Depending on the age and place the same rules with different detail applied. The honorbound samurai well versed in arts and fine craftsmanship was a relatively young concept. Just as the european, well educated nobleman (knight) who is well versed in languages, arts and stragegy/tactics was a young concept. There where differences, for excample in europe in the later ages the nobles (knights) more or less became generals and officers while in japan they stayed warriors first, and officers seccond. (Thats one of the reasons for the whole meji restoration and samurai abolishment.)
Also if we talk like medival europe vs medival japan then we have to remember that samurai at that point in time where warriors only. There was little "honor duels" just like in medival europe. The idea of honorable duels was a later one. Doesn't mean it didn't exist in medival times, but it was way more nieche. Only in the 17th or 18th cenrury the idea of duels became "popular" the japanese where abit eralierwith that iirc but just like in europe it was a "late" invention.
I realy hate to have to spell the obviouse out in great detail. As you are aware in german we even have a word/saying for that "Alles Haargenau erklären."
What I tryto get at.In europe we tend to makea clear cut betwen early nobility (knights and such) and modern nobility (officers who love to duell each other) In japan/japanese history, even thou the same development happened, there is no such a clear cut. Causing a lit of people (especialy Hemaboos) to compare late samurai with early medival knight. Thats like comparing napoleonic age officers with knights... thats just stupid.
I’ve read once than the shrinking of the tachi to average katana size was due to the mongol invasion and fighting abroad ships, the Japanese basically didn’t any more sophicated ship tactics besides ramming and boarding. Something cut focus ( people to not wearing a lot of armor abroad ships, even well made makes your more top heavy which can be a very bad on a tiny ship in violent waves and short so there is less of a chance of hitting things and getting stuck in plankings doors, ceiling if below deck.
17 years ago, I visited Japan's National Sword Museum. One katana there had 3 contact cuts on the cutting edge and 2 on the back. They were deep hard block contact evidence that could not be worked out without redoing the whole blade. I've seen several European swords with similar evidence. Sparing and academic discourse is easy in a controlled environment. When your life is on the line, whatever keeps you alive is gospel. These warriors lived and died by the blade. A few things will work for a narrow few. Certain basic moves work for everybody.
some schools use those chips on the blade to pull the opponent blade and disarm him.
In a hypothetical fight of knight v samurai, depending on the era, they would both use whatever anti-armour weapon they could. Heck, it might even start out as a gun fight.
Heck yeah bring out the poleaxe
Thats not realistic enough. They should both start with a peasant levy as the appetizer.
@@Wasthere73 they never used peasant levy in field battle. It's like mistaking iPhone with a hammer. Digging ditches, setting a blockade, building siege engines and going in for fouraging during the sieges - of coarse, how do you see a highborn doing that, he is a bit too dumb and exalted for it.
@@nikmenn2751 what? Can you clarify?
@@SeanWinters I mean exatly what stands there - deployment of peasant levies on the battlefield was exceptionally rare in Medieval age. In the same time levied commoners were extremely useful when it came to engineering works and other siege routine where you need to have numbers and craftman's skills.
When I was a kid, I was all about the Japanese swordsmanship. As I got older, I shifted more to a HEMA mindset, and yeah, I got a bit snobby. But I've since settled to a place of acknowledging both. Honestly, either a knight or a samurai could kick my ass, lol. I prefer HEMA personally, but both are cool.
Honestly since sword arts have become watered down and less applicable to live combat today, I feel like most historic knights or samurai would be able to pretty cleanly dispatch the average or even above average practitioner to this day, at least more often than not
It was cathartic to see the "ultimate sword" being mythbusted after 30 years of the mystical claims of "lightning fast and capable of cutting European plate armor in half with ease," it seems like the pendulum is now on the opposite side. Like you, though, I have a preference, but I'm not going to dismiss Eastern culture just because there are guys still chanting loudly that "European swords are slow, blunt and obviously inferior to the razor sharp and fast katana!"
@@Modighen The thing is, a sword will kill you without armor, and probably won't kill you (at least very easily) with proper armor. Doesn't much matter in the broad strokes if it's a katana, longsword, arming sword, saber, et cetera.
@@mercury2157 Right, and I'd imagine that they also spent a considerably larger amount of time training than most folks today do. Matt Easton made the point in one of his videos a knight was hard for a foot soldier to kill not just because of the better armor, weapons, and other gear, but also because they spent so much time learning how to use them. Way more than most others of the period.
In one of the RPs I'm in, I've found a way that lets me embrace both what little inner "weeb" I have as well as my love for HEMA (which I tend to gravitate toward more) in one single character in a lore-friendly way and I love it.
Expertly analyzed.
As a side note, for years when i hear people say something along the lines of "They should put katanas in Dungeons and Dragons." I always point to the longsword and say it's already there, make it look like a katana, it's functionally the same.
What those people probably want is the Finesse property on longswords lol (and I don’t blame em I’m one of them in some cases)
Running a Japanese inspired campaign right now. I just reskinned the PHB weapons to their Japanese equivalents. Longswords are indeed katanas. Shortswords are wakizashis. Daggers are tantos. So on and so forth.
I think the best way of representing a Katana in a d20 system is how they did back in 3.5. curved versions of swords tended to have a lower damage die and a higher critical threat range. So a katana, being a type of Bastard Sword (as the Longsword in D&D was generally a single-handed arming sword), would deal 1d8 damage with an 18-20x2 critical threat range)
@Kelly Sargent Don't even get me started on that. I can appreciate the desire to simplify and standardise the system, but that doesn't mean I have to like the result
It always annoys me when they put katanas in fantasy, because they never explain who is speaking japanese. Same whith claymore (gaelic). I can buy sabre and rapier because those are anglified words.
It's pretty obvious which is better....whichever kept you from dying in that battle. Just like the old saying "what's the best gun in the world? The one that just saved your life"
My style for battle if necessary is brutish:)
Very little finesse, basically bash the enemy to a pulp without regard to "honor" or respect. As long as you survive/the people on your side survive. Then that's what matters.
The best (weapon) in the moment is the one you have at hand. First your brain, then other tools.
'They have a (stabby thing)!'
Well, we have a net and heavy packs to hit stabby-boy with.
@@Reepicheep-1 Me have Hammer, me bash their face with it, me win;)
I did Kendo for 13 years and, while I know it's very sportified compared with Kenjutsu, when I started HEMA Longsword I found a ton of similarities. Like you say, it's two humans trying to hit each other with swords. Some stuff just works no matter what.
"Keep an open mind but not to the point where your brain falls out." That is such a great line.
As Bruce sed there is only one way of fighting. Unless you grow more arms and legs.
Wateryetalkinabeet
As a Wiseman once said...There is no Canadian geometry
Then you become Goro.
@@kalivr1908 there is no war in Ba Sing Se
Alot of people will get upset when being told that all styles are fundamentally the same thing, just with different names and cultures. They felt that their styles are no longer unique or sacred or something. People can added a bunch of twirling, unique movements and footwork to make different styles look differently but under pressure against another person who is trying to hit you ? 90% of the time the connected hits will look the same no matter what kind of swords you're using. This applied to unarmed martial arts as well, even more relevance than weapon arts
I 100% agree, i am practitioning Kenjutsu myself and we´ve got an open competetion once. Watching people with same experience was amazing . You could see who does HEMA and who Kenjutsu but there were little to none diferencies.
It would go the mma way, eventually things would get trimmed down to what works more reliably with some styles having a few curveballs.
Only so many ways to hit another human that fights back
The problem is slight changes make huge differences. A boxer and an MMA fighter who has a boxing background competing in a boxing match would be a bloodbath (Mayweather vs McGregor). And that is small details within the same martial art. Wing Chun vs Boxing might as well be frim different planets. Slight overlap is to be expected but no it's not just a "stylistic difference"
@@mariolakis Yes, the rule of the game dictates the differences, hence why we see certain styles won't work in other styles competition, like why we won't see a Muay thai guy winning a Taekwondo kickking competion. I was talking more about the context which has more freedom of movements like HEMA or MMA
WC movements may look very exotic but the moment you throw a WC practictioners into the MMA cage, what do we have ? Bad kickboxing with a slight focus on hand trapping (implied the WC man understand what to do under pressure), not Ip Man reincarnated. Because under pressure, human will only resulted to using what's functional and forget all the useless stuffs
It is all about skill and opportunity (opportunity being the best according to Miyamoto Musashi’s experience who stated at one point that even an unskilled fighter could win a duel against a skilled fighter if the opportunity to land a deadly blow presented itself) and what best works for you as long as the job gets done your opponent is going to care less on what style you use during the fight (only to the extent of catching your rhythm and pattern in order to deflect them, create chaos in you during the fight and win the fight). The preference of tool, armor and technique are useful only to the wielder who is the one using them to defend himself/herself and be more effective during the fight 🤷
"Win your battles. Everything Else is Secondary."
Not to mention Musashi won his most famous duel with a club against a opponent armed with a sword which kind pretty much makes the Katana fetish a bit silly.
@@RJLbwb Britain 🤝 Japan
Being best known for a Magic Longsword when the Longbow was their favorite weapon.
Well said
Ah yes. Miyamoto "Kill the kid from ambush" Musashi.
Just joking, by the way. He was in kill or be killed situation, but it's darkly hilarious that in that one duel he defeated an ambush by counter ambushing the kid his official duel was with.
In a 'Knight vs Samurai' fight, my thought would be that the biggest issue either fighter would have would be that (assuming this is a true 'first time' encounter and not a modern sparring match), neither opponent would know the weaknesses of the other's armour. Sure they're going to surmise ones given prior experience, but they're not going to be as sure as if they were facing a peer opponent.
I imagine a samurai in this situation might be horribly caught off guard by the chain-mail protecting joints like the armpit. The knight might also have an advantage in his pommel and crossguard for blunt damage against japanese armor. Later european armor was much more solid and comprehensive simply because of the availability of steel (no diss on japan, they worked with what they had).
It might be more fair to compare a Norman knight to a samurai, but even chain mail will stop a curved sword dead in its tracks.
@@mrgoober6320 The real katana will slice through the chainmail like a hot knife through butter. No full swing needed, just zip right through it no problem.
@@actionjksn No
@@bakonman6611 he's being sarcastic
this makes perfect sense. I think in japan we dont have anything equivalent in terms of offensive use of the guard like the europeans did with the mordhau. That's probably the biggest difference i can point out between the two styles. Also I personally think its kind of pointless to compare an entire multicultural subcontinent with many different nations against a single isolated island nation
It probably has to do with the armor present, I don’t think samurai ever ran into an exact equivalent that required something like mordhau to deal with
Yup, the main difference was in the quality of the armor which led to difference in weapons. In a fictional battle between knights and samurai the knights would have had an advantage because of their armor and quality of their steel, not because if their technique.
It's still white interesting to see how similar the techniques are. Kinda like a form of convergent evolution.
This's why I think HEMA practitioners should practice Kenjutsu too; HEMA's big problem is that it relies on the interpretation of writings and artworks because the martial arts it teaches fell outta use/practice eventually. But Kenjutsu's a *living* tradition, continuing to be practiced even though it's no longer necessary; and with a lot of its techniques being similar to or exactly the same as modern HEMA techniques, it could really help a HEMA practitioner to get their techniques down to practice Kenjutsu.
Hema is basically European weebs trying to convince everybody why european martial art was the best as such it's no different than Japanese weebs.
@@gamingdragon1356 2 Sides of the same coin
@@gamingdragon1356 exactly! It's funny that the HEMA nerds think they're any better than the weebs. We're all the same. Just enjoy what you enjoy and stop worrying about other people.
Weebs vs dweebs
and become Mix Martial Weapon Arts practitioner
5:35 thats one of the most crucial points I think a lot of people don't understand who dont practice any form of martial art or martial art with weapons. If your life is in danger you will use any knowledge and training you have to keep yourself as alive and hopefully uninjured as possible. In the battlefield I highly doubt any knight or samurai would care about damaging their blade if they were in danger since people of that social class could afford to simply buy another one later or get it repaired. Plus I think the natural instinct of self preservation would override the thought of "oh no my sword which was made, designed and what i carry and paid for to go into battle with could get damaged"
Both knights and samurais used blades as a last measure because they weren't that great of a weapon after all
The pointy stick has always been better, thus they preferred those
Knights and samurais brought swords because they were a sign of status (very expensive)
@@tuluppampam People are really swinging too far on the other side of the sword pendulum.
Yes, swords weren't as good against armor as polearms. Neither were maces. But swords were still widely favored and used as sidearms, which they worked well as. This was not just true for noble classes or mounted warriors, but also commoners and footsoldiers. Written documents from the late Middle Ages show the majority of footsoldiers also brought a sword as a sidearm, and knights' testimonies show they preferred and recommended swords to maces (which were a lot less popular historically than amongst amateur historians today.)
Nobles also passed laws in some places mandating that commoners keep a sword if called to battle because they were undeniably useful if you lost your polearms or got too close for them to be useful. And this wasn't impossible to fulfill, eventually budget swords actually cost about as much as spears. These wouldn't be super fancy, but if you think about it pistols have a huge range in cost too. So while a Colt Python may be a status symbol, a Hi Point is not yet is far cheaper.
@@tuluppampam- The samurai were primarily mounted archers. They had ranged pointy sticks, along with spears and their swords. Each weapon had its appropriate uses.
@@tuluppampam- The samurai were primarily mounted archers. They had ranged pointy sticks, along with spears and their swords. Each weapon had its appropriate uses.
@@julietfischer5056 Yup and the knight was primarily heavy cavalry. Heavily armoured and using a lance in large scale charges to break enemy lines.
I've been watching you SINCE the days you reference in the video, and I have to say the reason I stick around is because you're naturally skeptical, which leads you even to question your own predisposed views on a certain topic over time, which I definitely appreciate, and it seems your content has evolved with us in maturity.
Same sentiment. I've been subbed for nearly 10 years now, and it's because Skall is always developing his thoughts.
The reason I leaned toward HEMA at first was to help learn basically all of the fundamentals. It is from there that I picked up an Iaito and was able to figure that out as well. I could wield either to great effect, but I'm not staying in place! No, I'd like Chinese weapons next.
now that there's a lot of rabbit holes :P
@@idnyftw Yeah but this is going 6 years now so not too much at once
@@BeamMonsterZeus well hey man, as long as you're having a great time mastering your stuff :)
@@idnyftw I've kinda retired the blade and picked up a gun. However, muay thai/boxing has taken up the bulk of physical combat training, now. More likely than not, that will be essential over stick-fighting skills lmao.
Sword is a sword is a sword. What I know is, the Japanese didn’t come into contact with European swordsmanship until guns were around, so any European victories over the Japanese in warfare were done with a decisive unrelated advantage. There’s no historical precedent, nor is there any modern precedent for judging which is better. It is an entirely armchair debate
If you wanted to be full armchair about it you can compare how the Japanese did against the Mongols to how the Europeans did against the Mongols. That is the only thing to compare and that wouldn't be fair comparison.
@@dambigfoot6844 The reason the Japanese did better vs Mongols was because of their own horse archery tradition and excellent skill with the bow was a requirement for Samurai first and foremost. Whilst Knights were riders & melee, and had their horses shot when chasing lighter Mongol cav. They learnt quickly to not chase fleeing (feint) Mongols.
@@SilverforceX And whose freaky storms which completely decimated the mongols helped too.
@@dambigfoot6844 you also need to consider strategic situations. Logistically it’s harder to invade mainland Japan, Europe doesn’t have the same choke points universally. Also with logistics transporting an army of horse archers from China to Europe is easier than making the ships necessary to transport and that Europe has at times more areas ideal for Mongol style warfare.
@@SilverforceX I haven't researched much into the Japanese-Mongol wars but I would say in any case that Japan itself is the Britain of the east but with mountains.
It's interesting how in the armed martial arts community there's this big divide between HEMA and Kenjutsu where people seem to act like they're completely different with no overlap whereas in the unarmed martial arts community people pretty regularly acknowledge that Eastern and Western systems (like Muay Thai vs Western Kickboxing for example) are basically the exact same thing
Yeah, i believe that's because people get culturaly invested in weapons, as in they represent the cultural traditions of their society.
Meanwhile thousands of years of boxing and wrestling have made the unarmed martial arts more so about sports on people's minds
Actually as the video said its closer than one thinks, they only differ on intensity, false edge cutting and very specific techniques that isn't possible based on the nature of the swords.
Most of the basics and strikes are similar in principle and execution especially between Liechtenauer and Kenjutsu both use attacks to both counter and defend, both are fairly agressive and finally both use grappling.
@@forickgrimaldus8301 I know they're close my comment was referring to how their respective communities treat them rather than how they actually are. I compared them to Muay Thai and Western Kickboxing because both of those are also very similar since they're both boxing.
@@degiguess yup no system is completely independently unique but there are specific things that make it unique.
I think that's because in unarmed combat when you compete either in grappling or striking you actually risk getting serious injuries and people have actually died in competition so obviously you would want what works best for you not what you like necessarily. For example I'm an average wrestler(5th and 7th place in two national championships) pretty bad at bjj(blue belt) and good at striking combining my karate(black belt) and boxing (amateur 4-0record). Now starting competing in MMA I know what will work for me and what to avoid because I tried things from different cultures. When it comes to armed combat the danger of getting injured in competition is minimised by wearing what is essentially armour also you don't need to really hurt your opponent in order to win, so you can practice what you like not what you need. Anyway that's my opinion doesn't mean I'm right.
I'm a katana guy, but anything I can do with my katana, I can do with my longsword, while only occasionally forgetting about the quillions and banging them into my head. Lol.
Yeah, trying to do a shomen uchi with a longsword on instinct would probably lead to that. :p
Can your katana throw a pommel? No, then you can't do anything.
@@pixytorres7117 neither can my longsword, cuz the pommel is peened on.
For me trying kenjutsu was interesting because I noticed there are a lot of things you don't really want to do with katana, that are decent founding principles with long sword. Katana was so short and fast that bind was really dangerous and I couldn't really do winden at all. Apparently also all strikes done with thumb grip that I usually think of as the master strikes were missing and there wasn't anything similar to replace them. It was much more focused on the basics and little differences in them. I kind of feel like a long sword is more expressive than a katana because I find more options on it. I would kind of like to learn a bit of katana though. I would have to learn what to do if I can't answer everything with a zwerchhaw. I was also feeling orphan without my quillions. On the other hand we also were using wooden bokken which maybe were a bit lighter than a katana should be. That probably also made winden more difficult.
@@Hirvee5 bokken are indeed much lighter that a real katana. I also should've prefaced my comment with "as far as my backyard cutting goes' lol. Against an opponent, that adds lots of variables.
I uhh, I never thought I'd see a video like this from the former "I swear I don't hate katanas" guy heheh good job Skall! It's interesting to see how close the various Arts really are.
We all learn and grow..😂
Character development!
Having watched Skall for years and seeing him come around to seeing how ridiculously similar the arts really are has been amazing. Fantastic video.
What happened to that yumi video you were planning?
@@outsideiskrrtinsideihurt699 That's a long long long way off. As of right now RUclips doesn't provide me enough income (almost nothing) to be able to do the video
@@JapanatWar Where were you planning to get a powerful yumi anyway? I thought all the bow makers shifted to making low-poundage bows for Kyudo.
@@outsideiskrrtinsideihurt699 Ik someone in Japan that studies yabusame and she knows makers that would take the project on for the right price
Kenjutsu trainee here! I have to say that I’m really proud of you Skall, for pointing out the many similarity between Eastern and Western swordsmanship. However, there’s one difference in HEMA and Kenjutsu, which is not technical. It’s about the way of transmission.
While HEMA is a modern martial art, based on the concepts of old sword manuals, and trying to revive the many techniques in a practical way, Kenjutsu (the Koryu arts, existed before the Meiji Restoration) schools are thinking about themselves as historical fighting styles. Passing the techniques as historical traditions on the next generations. This is one of the many reasons why most of the old schools stopped their gekiken or shiai geiko (free sparring practice), keeping only the katas (paired forms or single, mostly sword drawing techniques). Koryu are old traditions of fighting methods, and since we living in an age of peace (mostly), with modern weapons, sparring is no longer a needed training method since you no longer have to protect yourself with a sword. You learn a way of fighting but you won’t fighting with it. If you put together a HEMA guy who actively spars for years, and a kenshi who learning Kenjutsu for the same amount of time, I don’t think the japanese swordsman would win.
Luckily, there are few koryu schools around which kept their sparring traditions, so if you want to test your skills against a human partner, you have to join one of these schools.
Thanks for the info. 💯
Thats similar to modern fencing in the west, that transitioned to be a sport, where lots of rules exclude certain moves and scoring points matters more than actual applicability in "combat". HEMA rolls back a lot of those regulations, and is closer to true combat. (of course its still not realistic for safety reasons).
@@vast634 I think modern Kendo is closer to fencing than kenjutsu. They also have rules where to hit and strict regulations.
Best opponent is yourself, a good self training is a win road to perfection, no need to focus on other moves just perfectly learn what catas or forms offer, also some manoeuvres in time are forgotten, just to keep in mind
@@wamy80s I think there is a great advantage in sparring, since you can use or opponent as a training tool. Trying out techniques in "real" situations can improve your technique.
I never really thaught about their similarities, thanks for the interresting and enlightening video.
@WhiteLichMage As far as I could tell based on duels I've seen, the speed of both swords are pretty similar or at least negligible in difference. Maneuverability between the two seem negligible in difference but longsword do suffer in cutting power because of their design but that is why they were much thinner to compensate which does still make them good at cutting and similar levels to katanas . I think its more likely battlefield swords as backups in japan would likely have been tachi for their longer reach, reserving katanas for everyday self defense for nobility and samurai because of how short they are. In conclusion it seems they are pretty similar in terms of numbers but they handle quite differently because katanas are heavy for their size and often heavier that longswords which may make them slightly slower but not noticeable so, negligible in difference. Longswords have more reach and slightly better defense but not to an enormous extent, but suffer slightly in raw cutting ability because of their design but that too is pretty negligible. I'd like to add that I'm not an expert, what I said mainly comes from Shadiversity, Skallagrim and Metatron so take what I say with a grain of salt. Thanks for the input and opening discussion. :P
It would be interesting to see a video how culture and available material affected historical styles of combat. Show how differences often have a reason within their context. (Cue Matt Easton summoning)
that something most do think about. japan did not have the best quality of iron ore to make steal weapons like many areas of europe had.
6:52 The only thing I can think of that might be a little "weird" to see for a Japanese swordsman would be false edge cuts and the associated techniques like Zwerchau because it does add a few different attack possibilities from positions they might not be expecting, but it's not like it would be a mythical thing that they can't comprehend. They would quickly understand the logic behind it once they saw it done. I'm not too familiar with Japanese sword fighting techniques, but perhaps longswords would also have more thrusting techniques? It would obviously suck to get stabbed by a katana, that's for sure, but from what I've seen there are more "block while stabbing" techniques in HEMA.
Though rare Tsrugi Katana and blade weapons did exist they are doubled edger variants of the normal. There used to be a school that taught the methods of false edge but that school has been dead since the Meiji era along with most good schools.
They'd get the logic, but on the other hand: muscle memory. In combat, the hypothetical traveling samurai is going to do what they've trained, and that training assumes the opponent only has one edge. It probably has defensive holes (but FWIW I bet they're not easy for the two-edger to exploit, either).
Having started in Japanese, and now also doing rapier, sword is sword. There is only so much you can do with a blade and be effective. Only real differences are one hand vs 2, cutting vs thrusting and single edge vs double. But when you get down to it, sword is sword.
As a long sword person I think that weight, nibleness, length and crossguard also make signifficant differences. To me it currently seems that there are defenitely quite a few strategies that are great with longswords but not with a katanas. I don't currently feel anywhere as confident with a katana as a longsword. It kind of seems to me that you have to focuse more on the basics with a katana.
Bro Japan literally outlawed rapiers cause they were getting shat on
@@hernanperez5737 That's interesting. Do You have any historical data on that? I am curious to read about this :)
Thing that folks also forget when it comes to western and eastern weapons is that they were developed in ways that were for the type of combat they'd be used in and what they'd be up against
I think people make the mistake of not understanding the conditions of Japan and how that influenced warfare. Japanese steel had a lot of impurities in it so they had to come up with clever solutions to problems not experienced in Europe. Assuming equal skill levels and wealth, I'd put money on a European knight over a Japanese samurai, only because of the higher quality metal available to the European.
As far as technique and skill goes? Like the video said: there's only so many ways you can kill someone with a sharp, pointy, stabby thing and only so many ways you can avoid getting killed. Compare different styles is moot, especially in 2023 where we can make weapons of either style using the same quality materials.
It's actually amazing what came out of Japan considering they were at a disadvantage with their natural resources. "Oh? I can't get a bunch of steel to make a sword and even if I could, it would be brittle and snap? I guess I'll just design a sword that's long, thin, and can transfer the weight of my back into a strong force along the blade that makes for a deadly slashing and cutting weapon."
As someone that's been studying from the Japanese manuals and taking it to freeplay, I'm happy to see videos like this come out. Eventually when you get down to it, there are only so many ways a body and a sword really want to move.
Though I am hoping that more Japanese schools start adopting picking up fencing gear and sparring safe katanas.
Do you mind if I ask where can I find these manuals.
@@eagle162 did you try the internet?
Occasionally members of the Japanese Cultural Center in my city will visit our HEMA studio to spar. It's really interesting! From what I've seen (I haven't had the opportunity to face a kendo practitioner myself), the big differences come from the weapon construction, e.g. a katana is slightly shorter than a longsword and doesn't have a cross guard, so that affects measure and how you defend.
I don't know if others mentioned it before, but thank you for always putting these video clips you use in the description, helps if i want to dive deeper into each one
Thank you for making this video. I'm one of your earlier subs (I subbed after coming across your Dark Souls weapons video back in 2013). I've been watching your stuff off and on since then, though--admittedly--not too much these past couple of years. Some of it could be attributed to the usual causes: busy with life, my interests changing, etc. However, one contributing factor was the toxic elitism that is all too familiar in the historical weapons community. You yourself displayed some of this elitism, which you admit to in this video. What really wore me down, though, was the comment section. The katana-bashing was particularly aggravating for me (I'm half Japanese). It was evident that people were crapping on everything Eastern (or pop) because it was the "cool" thing to do. Anyway, it's good to see you've come around. I'll continue watching your videos from time to time, and I'll always be rooting for you.
Its so much more interesting to examine the similarities between two cultures than the differences
Nice to see some Yagyu in the video :) When I started practicing I noticed lots of overlap with HEMA. Great video :)
Great analysis. Never get tired of your lectures
When you were speaking about binding and winding, the footage you had playing (with the one training partner with the heavy "devil gloves") was of the style Ono-ha Ittō-ryū, which actively discourages binding and also has a penchant for displacing-type counter cuts.
There are/were certainly other styles of Japanese swordsmanship that use binding, but I would agree it's a lower percentage than reconstructed HEMA styles. This might have partially to do with the tachi and katana only having a single-edge, so edge-on-edge simply occurs a bit less often than with double-edge swords.
In my experience the smaller lenght, weight and lack of cross guard also discourage the bind. When I tried kenjutsu I felt like I was really close to the opponent when I was at the binding distance and the sword really easily escaped the bind too. I was in a real danger because there was not a lot of blade between us and the enemy could just strike me very quickly. The blade in katana feels really strong for all its length where in hema the point is so far that the diffference between controlling the weak vs the strong is really signifficant.
Ive been trying to convince my friend to not be an elitist on either side, both parties practice the same motion and discipline. Their stances are almost exactly the same. Neither side is inferior or superior.
Europeans have better metals and resources but when a person lacks something, he finds a way to adapt and use whatever he has for an advantage, and that is what the japanese has for a pro. No matter how strong the US military is in technology, they had a hard time fighting Iraq.
Even the ages of both Europe and Japan is sort of the same, after their warring periods, duels became a thing for warriors born in their peaceful era.
Thank you, Skall, for making this video. I like both European and Japanese martial arts, i don't want to be in favor on either of them. To be honest, I'm leaning more into the older ones such as the Romans and the Greeks but hey i love them all!
I enjoyed playing with both European and Japanese sword techniques and found a lot that transferred from one to the other. In many cases, it was more a matter of emphasis or what was allowed as part of sparring (disarms, for example, aren't always safe) that differentiated the two. Certainly working on both made me a better swordsman overall.
I personally love seeing fights with different weapons. It's like letting different worlds crush into each other.
I love both Eastern and Western swords styles. That's really just it for me, I love them both.
HEMA vs Asian martial arts is Coke vs Pepsi! This is a fabulous metaphor!
When I first started to study sword at an Aikido dojo, I was immediately struck by the intense similarities and remarked upon it to my sensei. He made the same point about the limits of biomechanics.
Great video. Many historical combat communities would benefit greatly from the mindset of seeing how we are all the same rather than how we are different.
Thank you so much for making this video. I’m so glad someone made a video about this.
I think a confounding factor in the discourse is that a lot of the famous historical Japanese swordmasters were huge dorks who were into philosophy and poetry and stuff and fluffed up their writings with esoteric and hyperbolic statements. So a lot of people find their dorkiness to come across as cool and others think it's pretentious.
Like when a kenjutsu practitioner would write about developing mental they would say something along the lines of, "You should clear your mind and become one with the universe, make your heart to be like still water and it will become a mirror that reflects all your foe's evil intent" but essentially they're saying, "Stay calm, because it'll make you more mindful of how you're fighting and you'll be in the right mindset to predict your opponent's moves."
I believe, and I could be mistaken here, that it has to do with their concept of balance. Any practitioner of blade arts would and should recognize that it is, by its very nature, a violent art form. It could very well boil down to the relationship between the yin and the yang, peace and war, violence and serenity. It could be that, in order to balance out the violence of their swordsmanship, the samurai or whatever-else-have-you may engage in poetry, bonsai keeping, calligraphy, philosophy or other art forms in order to maintain that balance of violence and peace. Introspection is also a vital part of not allowing the violent nature of this beautiful - though deadly - art form to consume the real person within, hence the philosophy and the allegorical nature of some of their writings. Like I said, I could be completely off base here, but this would make sense in my personal opinion.
I like the framing here. I never really thought of samurai as booky nerds, but it fits.
Though, I'd have to add that it's a spiritual thing, and the flowery language is often meant to evoke a very specific mindset geared towards a flow state. Which is huge for martial arts and sports.
There's also this to consider, the language they use is full of symbolism and double meanings because literature of their time was usually written this way (depending on context).
Well by that point they kinda had to justify their own existance. So you got hte 'warrior phliosopher' noble thing. Think how post feudal europe had the whole chivalry bunk floating around. For pretty mcuh the same reasons. Nobility trying ot justify its own existance.
Knights are not necessarily any different. Samurai and knights, in their respective pinnacles of cultural development, would comprise a large part of the most well-educated populace. They had access to education in a time where it was normal not to. These people could read and write in a time where it was normal not to. They were all dorks by default. They actually had the ability (not just being literate, but the time to indulge in it) to sit around reading and writing about each other's exploits, and if they couldn't or wouldn't do their own writing, they damn well knew who to go to for a commissioned work about how they slay dragons with their sword and maidens with their dick.
This is perfect! Im working on a character who has a dueling style hybridized between eastern and western styles of swordplay using a 2 handed sabre.
i love your videos and i always find these comparisons interesting. keep the great videos coming!
Solid video, I appreciate your honesty Skall. Couldn't agree more with the "Who cares" sentiment, too many hema bros getting worked up because of some trolls on reddit pretending to be weebs.
Yeah, same with hema bros acting like they know more than kenjutsu and kung fu masters because they spar, like who cares
This is a very good video, making one of the most relevant points I've ever heard in martial arts training I've been of the same opinion for a long time.
I find it interesting that there is such a debate between the two styles. People often cite the idea Bushido as something which separates Japan and European martial arts, when in actuality the book "Bushido" was written in the 1800s by Nitobe specifically for a European audience. In the book he intentionally drew comparisons with knightly chivalry and other "codes", sprinkling in bits of "oriental mysticism" to engage the reader. Bushido basically just transposed chivalry, itself mostly an invention onto a Japanese setting. It was essentially a piece of propaganda. Such a concept isn't found written in any texts before then, except perhaps the Hagakure, by Yamamoto Tsumetomo which is MUCH more fatalistic and less full of idealism.
Great video Skall, keep 'em coming!
The Book of Five Rings is a text on kenjutsu and the martial arts in general, written by the Japanese swordsman Miyamoto Musashi around 1645. So a bit further back but it's not bushido.
Thanks for sharing, I'll definitely have to look more into this Nitobe fella.
Bushido is a book in which diplomat Nitobe explains to Westerners what Japanese morality is like. Nitobe wrote the book because he was often asked by Christian Westerners what the morals of non-Christian Japanese people were. The content of Bushido “The Way of Samurai” is a compilation of ancient records.
In the 8th century, there was the tuwamono no michi (way of a strong soldier) as the morals that samurai should follow.
In the 13th century, the Kamakura Shogunate enacted the Gosei Shikimoku, a code of samurai morality.
In 1575, the word Bushido was written in Koyo Gunkan, a book on military science by the Takeda clan.
Military scholar Soko Yamaga (1622 - 1685) proposed Shido.
Yamaoka Tesshu (1836-1888) wrote Bushido.
These were the morals of the samurai, but they were also shared with the peasants through poetry, kabuki, stories, and peasant schools.
@@tn1881 there were also large parts that Nitobe made up which is why it was poorly received in Japan
It would be vary interesting to see an accurate reenactment of if let's say a knight encountered a samurai and how it would go. Because here it seems that both their martial arts are vary similar but again different in ways
Well, you then get into all sorts of questions. What exact time period is each from? What equipment configuration does each have? Is it even fair considering the differences in warfare, economics, etc. that led to the differences in available equipment? Is it even fair considering that their roles in warfare were often different?
A Knight in full metal armour wielding a considerably longer blade that is better at stabbing versus someone with a shorter primarily cutting weapon that is essentially useless against plate armour? It'd only go one way, regardless of the merits of the two styles.
@@tycarne7850 Not really. The Japanese wore plate armor around the same time knights did and their swords worked pretty well, plus some katana were actually designed for stabbing more than cutting believe it or not. Also the equipment could vary heavily, also the number of soldiers, battle strategy, skill. There’s too much to consider. Also your assuming the knights going to have full plate armor and the samurai won’t, why won’t he have some form of chain Mail or something like that? Again just too much variety.
@@tycarne7850 Samurai also wore plate cuirasses but regardless, comparing a katana to a longsword is like comparing a short sword to a longsword, it doesn’t take a genius to find out that katanas were not commonly used and not their primary weapon, samurai often used polearms, bows, and spears, 2 of which that are better anti armor weapons then a longsword and the spear being much better at stabbing then a longsword, all 3 with longer reach.
You could half have a part where they start using the same techniques as the other to show how similar they are
I honestly just wish there was a sword fighting MMA thing. Would be very fun to actually see what mixture of styles and weapon would end up being the most effective.Because while yes Hema and kenjutsu are very similar they both have their own anachronisms and id enjoy seeing what stops being used and what ends up being expressed more
Finally. A video which I looked for. Everything seems so clear now. Thank you
Skallagrim, you are so good at what you are doing. Historians, reenactors, LARP people, writers just need you :D The explanations are so much on point, and not too long aswell.
I think it is a shame there is basically zero documentation on the specific combat forms used in Mesoamerican (Aztec, etc) militarism and martial arts, especially as they actually DID have fundamentally different weapons in some respects (Certainly at least Macuahuitl is far more functionally different any Eurasian sword then they are to each other then any of them are from each other, though Macuahuitl aside I think those differences are less major when looking at Mesoamerican vs eurasian polearms, clubs etc ) which may have led to more distinct approaches and techniques. We know that such martial training/forms existed, since the Aztec public schooling system in Tenochtitlan with Telpochcalli was as much a martial training institution as it was a general education one; but the specifics is basically lost to time.
I've seen some people (such as those in the Atlatl Mexico Renactment group in Mexico) try to reconstruct likely practices and forms in general terms based on what is known about the weaponry and higher level battlefield tactics (as opposed to what was done in individual combat, though even that higher level information is scarce), but my thing is more stuff like urbanism and architecture and water mangement systems, so I don't have anything saved to really talk about here, the one I did have I lost at some point. T
Thats great, its sad so much generally is lot due europeans , well not rally ewant tohave any culture survive i guess, with the colonizing.
But cool you recontruct and research, including that styles.
@@marocat4749 Cortez & a handful of Spaniards are not what defeated the Aztecs. The other central American tribes that allied themselves with Cortez did! The absolute destruction of the Aztecs was done in retaliation for the cruelty of their rule over the region & as an act of revenge by the locals. The Europeans, generally speaking, didn't care at all one way or another about the customs & beliefs of the natives who continued to practice their religions & carry on in their cultural norms as much as they liked. There was a lot more using the newcomers to even old scores against enemies by tribes who encountered Europeans first than most people want to admit or talk about!
@@richardavery4692 But theydid use th deveide and conquer stategy and their gruides to go there. and get it all.
And they did care, and a population that has no tron identity cultural is easier to control.
The ones allying with them, stuill on th european using that a mean.
@@marocat4749 but you're attempting to credit the Europeans for much more than they deserve. The Spanish did take a lot of the Aztec gold, that's absolutely true. The Aztec culture itself was destroyed by the other native tribes to prevent the empire from ever being able to reconstitute itself. That happens when the dominant culture, in this case the Aztecs, enslaves your people, has oppressed you for generations, & literally used you for human sacrifices to their gods until your societies barely exist anymore! The initial contacts with Europeans generally went this way throughout the New World in the beginning. There was very little actual aggression from the new arrivals except on behalf of their new native allies. Even the mass casualties of first contact where you see entire tribes disappear it's actually accidental from disease exposure, which no one knew about back then, not fighting! Cooperation & cohabitation on the newly discovered land was everyone's goal first & foremost!
@@richardavery4692 Ok its both.And the germs were european too.
ok i will credit the high empire that fell becaus its opression, but i wpont let euroopean colonizrs off, that destroy culture generally so , maybe not that specific case.
But its telling homuch we know of rome becaue that wa condidered civilized, and that is a fallen empire too,
Its afactor ok. But thanks for eplaining they brought it upon tthemselves too. Genuinly interesting and good to know.
I love it when people say that the katana is overated and overrepresentet in pop media, whithout relising that the longsword is not much diferent, how often do you see a sword that isn't japonese or european in a movie?
Middle eastern stuff is also seen pretty often but im not gonna complain about that because i like it
Longsword is certainly a better weapon but they were both intended for different situations, you can carry a katana for self defense and as a sidearm very easily but it’s strange to carry a longsword for the same purpose. You can bring a katana to battle against a longsword but the longsword will outperform it because that’s not what it’s used for.
@@somm150 A longsword was also a self-defense sidearm that could be carried easily. It wasn't strange at all to wear one in civilian life.
the problem is that when a katana is seen as a weapon for "experts", that you need to know how to use (and that's true), the longsword is seen as a heavy metal clubs used in a barbaric way, as if it require more brute force than skill
it's not like katana is overrated, the problem is that european swords (or generally european weapons and martial arts) are underrated
I would say the popular stereotype of katana is way more positive and commonly accepted than that of long sword or any other sword really.
I think the primary difference is the blade construction. The difference in technical focus flows from there. You're probably less likely to train for static blocking with a sword you know is at risk of major chipping or even breaking. Likewise, binding and winding with an edge that will happily take it is probably advantageous.
Thats my thought as well.. Just like to see the evidence/analysis of how that came about
Katanas arent made out of glass. And even if they chip, who cares? Samurai and knights were both rich, more rich than you can imagine.
@@Red-jl7jj Way to be hyper dramatic. People really like holding discussions with you when you do that.
@@kingkilburn what, you wanted me to call you an idiot for thinking someone would not defend themselves in a certain manner just because their weapon might chip?
@@kingkilburn dude stop being so sensitive. People often ignore the amount of niku left on katana blades. They were not that easily chipped as brittle ones from both hardness and blade geometry
The debate about which of these styles are better reminds me so much of the PC vs. console or the console wars. It's just a bunch of opinions flying everywhere with little of importance being said. It's a fun debate as long as you take it with the seriousness it deserves.
Finally! The Tecumseh or Briggs and Stratton debate has been settled. Thank you. I appreciate your videos. I just hope that someone appreciates my humor. I'd hate to start an argument over small engines on your channel.
Thank you for touching on halfswording in kenjutsu. I have very often heard people make the incredibly uninformed statement that halfswording would be something totally foreign that would be impossible to do with Japanese swords, all while ignoring its place in various styles.
Let me guess. Those people think it cannot be done with a katana because it is "incredibly sharp"
@@gustavotriqui No, actually. It's just HEMA newbies who think that halfswording is the most unique thing ever and no one else did it.
we do half swording in kenjutsu yes. and pommel strikes, no pommel throwing though, practically impossible with a katana 😀
Everyone has a plan, until a blade makes contact with your flesh.
Honestly, I think a lot of the main differences between Eastern and Western combat comes down to available materials and the tactics used.
Western battlefield combat was focused a lot on shield walls so a lot of manuscripts for things like longswords/rapiers etc were made specifically for duelling.
While from what I understand, Eastern battlefield combat was focused more on cavalry and poleweapon formations. With katanas being more of a self defence weapon.
This means that weaponry was designed more around its use and some of the techniques differ due to this use and these design changes. Such as how katanas not having quillons because a smaller tsuba is easier to carry or how there's more focus on drawing from a sheathe in Eastern styles giving a nod to the self defence use (I.e. You only pull out your weapon once you're in danger) as opposed to Western styles that figure you're both with weapons drawn in a 1v1 duel.
Yeah, warfare tactics are going to be different because the terrain is so different. Japan is a series of islands, whereas Europe is much larger and connected by land. Weirdly I'd be less interested in how sword fighting differs and more, warfare logistics and tactics. I'd especially want to know if it starts to look closer when you compare to warfare in England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales and all that.
Note, in Japan, even when you are in danger, say a tense situation, the samurai's first response wouldn't be to draw the sword. First they'd pull it up with the scabbard, so the hilt is positioned quite a bit in front of themselves (like for example in 10:32 clip in the video). That's because in Japan, the first person to show any part of the blade was the one legally considered responsible for starting the fight and because the instant someone did that, so would everyone else.
This led to the development of those elaborate fighting styles where both start drawing at pretty much the same time and then whoever's faster wins.
Yes but no, it's a mistake to think sword are designed for battlefield, a rapiere would rarely face a shield, a court sword is primary made to be used... well at the court
Sword varies depending of the doctrine, it's not even a question of west vs east, they're a lot of different sword in the west that are used totally differently. If you try to to use an estoc like a saber, you probably will have a bad time. Katana are designed for their doctrine, they don't need a guard (the only purpose of the tsuba is not cutting your fingers) since the doctrine doesn't rely on sword contact, they also don't put at bay the opponent, which avoid sword contact and hide your reach (which they kind like since they favorise ample garnement that hide movement) so having the sword sheated is not that big of a deal as long as you can unsheat it quick enough, the doctrine emphasis big cut (part of the evaluation to prove how skilled you are is how much you can cut in one swing) so it make sens to have a curved blade and a two handed handle
Good rant! Love seeing you breaking down these things and seeing how’re they’re pretty similar
Skall, I LOVE your input on this. thorough research with a clear comparison. with little to none bias. now the foot work placement really interest me since the hands are practically the same.
The point about Europeans doing less "from the scabbard" is at least a little bit variable. The culture I'm thinking of is the Irish (or, as the English claimed, the Wild Irish). From medieval times to the 1500's a standard item for an Irish fighter would be a scian (literally knife), a slender single edged blade 18 - 24" long. No guard, and carried on the right side (for right-handers) with the edge forward. I've seen a lovely drawing from sometime in the 1500's of a group of kerns (Irish soldiers) standing around being themselves. One of them has his scian drawn and in front of the throat of his neighbor. If you think about it, with a blade like that worn edge forward, you could cut the throat of anyone within, or near, arms reach of you in 1/10 of a second.
I've been told by a reputable retailer of good quality reproduction swords here in the States that "scains didn't really exist" and that "scians weren't a real thing." However, I have seen real, original scians hanging on the wall of the National Museum of Ireland in Dublin, along with all the Viking swords. For those wondering "Why Viking swords?", the Vikings totally Owned Dublin for a long time, until one of my ancestors kicked them out of Ireland.
As to any other cultures in Europe with drawcut or drawstab techniques, I don't know. Mebbe, mebbe not.
Well that’s really cool to know but that was super obscure and specific so it still stands that Japanese swordsmanship still has dozens of iaido schools each having several different technique when the closest thing hema has is some fiore texts and scians, but from the way you describe them they sound like they are drawn with an ice pick grip which is a big disadvantage if the cut misses or it not immediately fatal
I have a bunch of friends stuck into this hipster phase of thinking european Martial arts are superior. None of them actually do any Martial arts, naturally
The superiority bit is the mistake. I thinks it's great that people are perhaps seeing how overblown Japanese martial arts have become, and are then discovering alternatives. So the pendulum swing is good; but like all pendulum swings, it's important to not let it swing back in the opposite direction. That being said, I do think that any art that actively focuses on sparring has a definite advantage over one that discourages, or outright forgets sparring. Personally I get very disappointed when I see a martial art neglecting that. I'd always rather learn things that I can then test
From my perspective, since there are only so many ways to kill someone with a sword, it would come down to a mix of luck, equipment and skill.
However, a medieval knight would have a slight edge in 1 on 1 combat due to the more advanced metalworking technological development that europe had in that time, but only a little.
okay - but prove it !!
@@daveingram9240 Ya got me!
I counter that in my brutish way...Club/Mace good, break pointy thing and bones. No need thinky;)
I'm glad to finally see you making a video like this. Congratulations for the insight and growth!
Big thanks for putting together examples that show the similarities. It is like assembling a puzzle not knowing before hand that the prices can fit. Any time I've thought of putting something like that together, I get bogged down. So, props.
Who cares which one is better, i say use everything you can to survive.. yes even cheap tatctics.
You guys ever equip a Katana while wearing Knight Armor + a nifty shield in Dark Souls? Not only does it look wild, it fits like a glove! Combining both, oozes coolness. I rest my case.
A katana really isn't that different from a typical saber, and we all know sabers are sexy as all hell~
Haven’t played dark souls since Elden ring came out
I'd say that the main difference between kenjutsu and HEMA (mainly speaking about longsword fight) could be that some guards will protect your hand more and will make the bind easier or safer, but apart from that they're practically the same.
Apart from that the technique shown in minute 9:00 actually appears in Verdadera Destreza(spanish rapier) and it's called "flaqueza bajo la fuerza", it's done exactly in the same manner, you're meant to bind oponnents blade, twist it and pull it outside before performing a cut. Really interesting to see same techniques used by weapons of much of a difference.
im glad you made this video. people, factions, countries, everyone made their own versions of swords at different times during different parts of history set in a era and area. every sword has there reasons, there plus and negatives. To compared a swords would be a fools aaron, you need to look at everything. just because one sword has more plus's than others, does not mean its better, you put the "better" sword in that time and history and it would not work out as well as you think, compared to the historical sword of that time. hell even resources and tools that you have at the time takes part in this. if your doing a sword vs sword as a personal opinion thats fine, but instead of sword vs sword. i would look at it as more of era and challenges of the sword and why they existed.
i always try to keep in mind that historical weapons and martial arts, no matter where they are from, were basically developed under pain of death. instead of some modern guy picking them up wondering how effective they were or ranking them on youtube it was more like if you or the group you belonged to used suboptimal arms, armor, or tactics you would be killed or invaded or enslaved. if an entire civilization spends thousands of years refining a weapon or system of weapons with THAT much incentive...for me to be overly critical of it without acknowledging that it was very likely the best possible result they could achieve at that particular time and location would be absurd. picking a best is like picking the best medicine. the best for what? allergies? covid? psychological disorders? infection?
Highly insightful simile.
I find the knight v samurai pointless because there quite a few factors to take into account like individual skill, experience, reaction time, what both sides are wearing and just plain old luck all of which make it impossible to say one side is better then the other.
What factor is an example of "luck"
why not just make them equal? there is luck involved in everything but that doesn't mean we can't compare things? bruh........
@@spicymeatballs2thespicening having the opportunity to catch an opening for a strike
@@Nero_Eclipse openings are made by messing up though
It's all a mind exercise, it doesn't matter which one turned out stronger, the important thing is you did your research and hopefully learned something about the things you're comparing. The fate of the world doesn't exactly hang on proving if the knight or samurai were superior, so you don't even have to worry too much about being wrong.
I always thought the weapons and technique were similar enough, but i always prefered the look of a European sword over a Katana or Tatchi asthetically
I love that iado video. I constantly reference it for examples of good parrying.
11:00 - What changed my mind from that way of thinking... was just outright buying a katana and trying to use it.
The very nature of the blade itself felt different enough that certain things I was taught in HEMA (particularly Italian longsword) that were off-limits "no-no", that then looked really stupid in more Asian arts (particularly with the curved blades used) suddenly made sense. The way a weapon handles in complimentary use to biomechanics either making them easier or improves the use compared to a different sword.
Literally holding a particular guard and performing a single swing with a katana instantly killed my elitism. And I felt astonished and embarrassed. I vowed never again to so quickly judge another martial art.
Ive touched a katana and im still elitist, barely more than a long knife
I've always been firmly stuck in the European camp when it comes to swords, but when it comes to polearms I do prefer Asiatic weaponry I like the looks of both a Glaive and Naginahta.
You know what they say. If you dont look cool then you didnt really win the fight.
@@madlarkin8 Zweihanders are the Gigachads of all weapons then
europe isnt a country.. most european styles were more diferent from one another than kenjutsu is to hema .. hema isnt a martial arts its a group of martial arts . comparing a group of martial arts to kenjutsu is pretty ignorant . kenjutsu vs german fighting would be more true question
@@myname-mz3lo your comment is really special, and I bet you feel really special for posting it.
Because you are. 🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺
Asiatic polearms? Check out Chinese great spear. Not the short, shoulder-high stuff, it's the 3-6m long one, which pretty much resembles a pike.
With a series of unique techniques, this pike-lengthed weapon can be used in a lethal and incredibly agile way.
There's a reason why Chinese people hail the spear as the king of all arms.
This was a cool way to do comparisons. Can you do videos about other cultures like Chinese or Thai swordsmanship like this?
And this is why I respect you the most in this community. There is no need for a d*ck measuring contest as you say there are indeed more similarities than differences. Plus it's best to look deeply into any fighting art east, west, north south whatever it may be.
This was a fun, insightful and very, very positive video. Thanks! (I'm a kendo practitioner 🙂)
I studied ken/iaijutsu for about ten years, and the similarities in movement and principles became such that it made me *go back* to competitive fencing after years off. I think it is fascinating to see the parallels once one gets past the surface level differences
I also train Ken/iai , do you think I should give olympic fencing a try ?
@@kronoscamron7412 Honestly hard to tell. I already had several years of olympic fencing under my belt so it was a good choice for me, but I don't know how it would be to start at the beginning. It is a lot of fun to do, though, so there is that
But we can all agree that European metalurgy and steel quality was far better than the Japanese which was not their fault btw japan has very impure iron.
It wasn't and japan did not have any problems.
Something to read.
"Japanese Swords "Mythbusting" - Part 1" on Gunbai.
Spring steel wasn’t a thing in medieval Europe. And pure iron doesn’t exist anywhere in the world in good quantities. The Japanese still made great quality steel and the raw material played little role in the end product
Western sword believers repeat it like the ramblings of a fool. Do a search for "Tatara iron making".
Skallagrim getting more mature on his view points as day goes by.
Also you could argue that with culture and available resources the katana design was perfect, just like how the longsword was. The hema keyboard warrior in japan wouldnt have acces to even making a longsword. It just makes no sense to put this stuff against eachother unless in an equal compitition in the same invironment.
Love every word and point you made. Your video examples support your argument so well. Thank you!
Hi
I practice both: HEMA and japanese swordsmanship (Kendo, Iaido and Kenjutsu). I came to the same conclusion some time ago. I find it always amusing to see people arguing over the internet which "style" is superior. People seem to forget, that sword techniques, guards etc. are for the same purpose: increasing your chance of surviving a duel situation. The swords vary only in design, the final function is the same.
I think the biggest difference between eastern vs western swordsmanship is the attitudes of modern practitioners. Modern Kendo practitioners are more concerned with being accurate to the art as it was centuries ago, while HEMA practitioners are more interested in continuing to evolve the art from what it used to be, rather than trying to freeze it in some arbitrary time period. That, and HEMA clubs have a MASSIVELY greater focus on practical sparring, while Kendo has way more kata work, with a lot of gyms having no sparring at all.
Kendo spars constantly, perhaps you mean kenjutsu?
It is similar to the fact that the evolution of the shape and manufacturing method of katana stopped in early ages, and the emphasis was solely on appraisal and preservation.
Japan doesn't consist of whole eastern though there is china, india,etc.
Wouldn't different footwork make potentialy big difference? I don't think it's any less important than actual cut and stabs.
The footwork is different but not a whole lot. There's slightly different footwork in multiple styles of both.
I think the whole hipster sword thing has also flipped the pendulum to the opposite side. What do I mean by this? I always hear about how people say other people say the katana is the best sword in the world, the sharpest sword in the world, how amazing and magical it is. But I never actually hear people say this unironically. I never actually see it for myself outside of hollywood which is not where I'm going for sword advice. But I do see people tell me the long sword is the best sword in history. That it's the only sword that never broke. That it's the sharpest sword ever made. That it's the longest sword ever made. That it's the only sword that could cut through armor. That it could cut a fully armored knight in half. And they also tell me the katana was a piece of garbage that bent easily, broke easily, crumpled like a soda can with any stab, was so fragile that swinging it in the air too hard will break it, and that after the Japanese met Europeans there was cultural conflict because everyone wanted to get rid of their trashy katana in favor of superior European swords.
I also hear that katana technique was so awful and garbage they lost 15 out of 16 duels, the last duel only winning because the fighter was drunk.
I never hear this magical claim about katanas for myself except through clearly garbage sites. I only hear people debunking them while making the same claims about European swords.
To quote from Muderface: "It's all the g*dd@mn same!"
The katana myth was spouted by a total of 5 weebs in the early 2000s on some obscure internet forum.
the thing is that weebs really don’t exist anymore and the ones that do aren’t on channels like this one. We’ve been bashing the katana for so long all in the name of destroying weebs that we’ve now flooded the internet with more misconceptions (just in the opposite direction ).
Most European fanboys kinda know this and won’t see a weeb if they weren’t actively searching for one, but will still *pretend* they are everywhere and then type up long rants on why medieval japan was actually garbage after maybe 30 mins of biased research. (Some even cite Shad lol)
It’s also not uncommon for shit to just be made up too. Some I’ve seen that don’t really have any basis are: “japan had the most impure steel” “samurai were literally children sized” “samurai were delicate when handling their swords in a fight” “samurai never fought and only killed peasants” “they had to ban rapiers because too many kenjutsu practitioners kept dying” etc.
@@outsideiskrrtinsideihurt699 nope, theyre right they had impure steel (cough cough just like everyone else's, including europe especially, cough cough but), thats why they folded it! its annoying when people use the fact that they folded it as proof that it was terrible.
the child size bullshit is just racist. im usually not one to claim that, but theres no facts to back this up. Unless they believe that all 8 year olds are 5 foot 5, in which they arent racist, just stupid.
@@Red-jl7jj oh yeah in no way do I think Japans smelting techniques produced pure steel nor do I think their swords were 100% pure after folding I just said “most impure steel” as people believe Japanese steel was inherently more impure than the rest of the world’s and it somehow affects the final product despite in depth forging techniques. I agree, it really sucks that Japan has preserved their method of making top quality swords for nearly a millennium only for it to be used against them. It’s like people conveniently ignore all other forging methods that try to remove impurities (twisting).
I do not exactly have any real experience with weapons whatsoever, but once upon a time I stumbled upon a thing in game that made me realise how confusing it may be, when a low-to-medium end fighter faces something totally different from their known style. In Hellish Quart I played a lot against the "familiar" saber styles so eventually I sorta had a feeling of how they move. And then Alexander showed up, the black guy with african saber style or what it was. His constant position changes, swinging the saber under different angles from what I dealt with before, it was extremely confusing and without deep understanding of what's what I was just shocked and couldn't understand how to deal with it. With predictable results.
Yeah, button-mashing has very little to do with actual fencing, but I felt that psychological aspect of facing a style that has certain amount of differences could still be applicable to real fight and real confusion of someone who hasn't mastered all the intricacies of combat.
Awesome video - very well made. I really appreciate you interspersing sparring footage as a show of the techniques happening even in force-on-force. I'm sure the editing on this one wasn't measly: it is appreciated!
You're 100% correct that at their core, both sets of skills are designed to kill the other guy before he kills you. As all humans have the same tools, of course the mechanics are going to be very similar.
I think the reason why in the past I've struggled to take eastern styles seriously is due to all of the extra silly stuff that comes along with it. The vast majority of HEMA I've observed over the years was generally practical in nature. The equipment is practical and pragmatic where as the (what I think) are silly outfits, routines and "dancing" that they do so much a part of eastern martial arts gives me the view that it's pretentious and less interested in practical skills than in showing off.
Don’t tell Shad. He’ll blow a blood vessel if you suggest anything European might not be the absolute total bestest of all times evar.
He was being sarcastic (Shad that is)
@@n0rdlys_40 yeah, like when he said the Crusades were the awesomest most righteous thing ever?
@@SmurfPerfect I’m so glad Shad’s channel is dying.
I like both, I like the halberd and rapiers but I also like katana, my favorite of which being the odachi/nodachi
This is what I like to see! Detailed analysis and comparisons! And a call for sanity and less toxicity is a major plus!
I've never been a major "weeb", I always viewed the katana as something cool looking but never considered it as particularly special (I actually have more fondness for sabers). However, all the criticism and hate directed at Asian cultures just because of the annoying weebs always irritated me. So it's refreshing to see an actually valid comparison that doesn't nitpick details or try to tip the scales: "oh well the katana is heavier despite being shorter so it's actually worse but really it's about personal taste but it's worse".
Yeah I’ve seen plenty of that lol
“It’s worse, like objectively worse, but it doesn’t really matter…but for the record it’s still worse”
I am glad to see a very balanced perspective on this... like it makes a lot of sense that at some point, martial arts in Europe and Asia converged to some degree in terms of both of them figuring out what moves work and what moves don't.
"If you like anything Japanese, you are a weeb"- Skallagrim, modern philosopher