I have been an epee fencer for 12 years, and have only faced other western fencers. Regarding Eastern martial arts, predominantly those regarding weapons, I am uninformed. This being a mixed martial arts forum, could someone please inform me of the differences between Western Fencing styles (stratified in themselves) and Kendo? Thank you in advance.
M
Welcome! Yeah, there was a big thread on this from persons knowledgable on both sides. I'm under the gun at work today, so any input from me will have to wait. For now I'll simply say Japanese sword arts are cut and thrust with an emphasis on cut while the European fencing arts seem to be mostly thrust (but then again there's saber). Hmmm, maybe there is no way to simply sum this up...
One point: Japanese developed katana and stopped there. Euros go from hand swords to estocs and long swords to rapiers to small swords and sabers - so I think Euro has more variety.
P.S. If you really were Hunter Rose, then you would know all this already, LOL!
Hi GG,
Saying that Euro systems focus more on thrusting is a bit of a generalisation. Some do, some don't.
If you want to talk some more about this then I'll start a new thread if you like.
Cheers,
Stu
Hunter Rose's intellect is more suited toward purist western fencing and a Fitzgeraldian social life, thank you very much.
M
Right, Stu, that's why I added "Hmmm, maybe there is no way to simply sum this up..." I was thinking of sport fencing, but then sabre is involved in that, too, so...
BTW, M, seen any vampires?
Isn't it a little unfair to do continent vs. country and then talk about diversity in the amount of weapons?
Looking at China (as a huge country), they have way more weapons than the Japanese (who were much more uniform in their equipment choice).
Kendo is derived from Kenjutsu, which is based on fighting lightly armoured opponents. So cutting becomes more important relative to an environment where the opponent is not wearing armour (think latter European swordfighting era).
I think that fencing is better ;o) I don't wear armour these days...
sorry, I shouldn't say that cutting becomes more important...
I mean that light thrusts that lead to 'first blood' aren't as important relatively speaking. Thrusting would also be useful in terms of killing of course.
Besides, weren't Samurai mainly spear and bowmen relative to their sword use?
Yes they were! I don't know why the Japanese didn't change the shape and function of the sword to a lighter one more like the rapier. Probably because culturally when they find something they like they resist change strongly. The katana really is a cut AND thrust weapon but the emphasis is on the cut. A "golden age" of unarmored duelling was ushered in with the Tokugawa era and probably shaped a lot of the he-who-cuts-first wins mentality of kendo.
Yeah, but even in the Tokugawa era (ie. no real use for most samurai), they weren't using guns (well last bit of the Tokugawa era leading up to the Meiji one had them). So IF they actually went to war, they would be wearing light armour. Wouldn't it be better to practise/use the blade that you would use in case of war (ie. in armour), rather than start to use lighter weapons?
Wouldn't the wakazashi be a lighter weapon btw?
Hm! Good point! In other words, this accounts for the fact that the katana did not change much or "evolve" into something like the rapier? Wakizashi is lighter and shorter, and as I understand it often worn as a "sidearm" in certain situations.
I was under the impression that "duelling" katanas produced during the Tokugawa era tended to be lighter than their battlefield ancestors.
Hi Guys,
GG, rapiers are not light weapons. The average basket hilted sword was between 2 and two and a half pounds with some making it closer to three. The average rapier was between 2.5 and 3 lbs. Although narrow, the blade of a rapier is quite thick at the ricasso and has a dramatic distal taper that has to be seen on an original to be believed.
Due to this combination of thickness and distal taper, rapiers are extremely agile at the point but not very agile at all at the hilt and therefore the assertion many make that they are "fast" weapons is quite off IMHO.
If you try and move the hilt or the whole weapon, rapiers would be just about the slowest swords of all.
Despite being a very keen student of WMA, I believe there is no better surprise/self defence sword than a late period Kat. Obviously though, a Western sword with similar dimensions would have much the same properties.
Cheers,
Stu.
Cheers,
Stu.
Sothy,Kendo is derived from Kenjutsu, which is based on fighting lightly armoured opponents. So cutting becomes more important relative to an environment where the opponent is not wearing armour (think latter European swordfighting era).Define "lightly armored".Japanese armors can range from around 50 to 70 lbs, which is in the same weight range as European plate field harnesses--battle armors--(which had an average weight of around 60lbs). Peace,TFS
I stand corrected. I didn't realize that the Japanese armour was that heavy.
So in conclusion, Kendo just isn't the way to go if you are looking into fighting in a leather jacket ;o)
But a leather trenchcoat, on the other hand...
Stu, very interesting. You wrote:
"I believe there is no better surprise/self defence sword than a late period Kat."
Care to elaborate on why you think so? What about small-swords?
"Obviously though, a Western sword with similar dimensions would have much the same properties."
What would be the western equivalent. The 15th century longsword? The hand-and-a-halfs?
Hi GG,
I have always found curved swords to draw more easily and quickly than straight ones. A Kat is razor sharp which is perfect for defence against surprise attack from someone unarmoured. (as is likely).
Smallswords are reasonable candidates here but they can easily be commanded (grabbed) compared to a sword with an edge that runs well back from the tip. In addition, the very act of drawing a Kat presents a threat only inches from your own body whereas a smallsword must be fully drawn to present a threat. This adds up to the fact that "jamming the draw" on a Kat is alot more problematic than doing the same to a smallsword.
The western equivalent I suppose would be a hunting sword or a hanger. The advantage of a Kat here is it's disadvantage elsewhere. The complete lack of a complex hilt on a Kat means that you are far less likely to stuff up your draw under pressure. The more complex your hilt, the more chance you might grab it rather than your handle with potentially disasterous effects.
I have only really done fast-draw stuff with Kats so this is only speculation on my part. We concentrate mainly on duelling in my club where fastdraw considerations are not a factor. Protecting your poor hands from blunt steel during sparring with your nice protective complex hilt is most definitely a factor.
Cheers,
Stu.
"A Kat is razor sharp which is perfect for defence against surprise attack from someone unarmoured. (as is likely)."I personally think any sharp sword would have this same advantage. A katana, a saber, a basket-hilted broadsword, a falchion, a gladius, etc - when sharpened they will all sever a limb or a head.
"I personally think any sharp sword would have this same advantage. A katana, a saber, a basket-hilted broadsword, a falchion, a gladius, etc - when sharpened they will all sever a limb or a head. "
I agree. Any sword of good quality can take a razor sharp edge, and against unarmoured flesh, a sword even as short as a gladius will make horrendous wounds. Hmm, a gladius would be damn quick to draw,wouldnt it? Doesnt have the reach of the kat, but in close quarters, I think it could whoop some katana ass. ;-)
I personally think any sharp sword would have this same advantage. A katana, a saber, a basket-hilted broadsword, a falchion, a gladius, etc - when sharpened they will all sever a limb or a head.Agreed.The gladius is interesting because one rarely hears about its use as a cutting weapon, and yet we know from several primary sources that it was indeed used in that capacity. It is a short sword, but it has a wide blade, facilitating a shallow bevel. The early "Mainz" types typically widen a bit at the COP--combined with the acutely-angled point, it makes for a fairly radical dual-purpose sword design. The later "Pompeii" variety is more conventional, with its parallel edges and stronger, more obtuse point. Both can sever limbs and cleave skulls.Still, it is probably the gladius's thrusting ability that will remain the sword's most noteworthy trait. I remember one article in some military mag, that described what kind of internal injuries a gladius thrust made; the author said it would "scramble" organs.And that's just a nasty visual.