Samurai sword documentary

[misterkami2]

.. such a limited view to european sword fighting technique.. 0.o

[Theseus1000]

"The katana is capable of cutting iron plates and other swords whithout being damaged" muhahaha what an "expert", have you ever tried it ? Germans did and guess what it can't. Many of these so called experts have no clue what they are talking about, they are rather telling fairy tales they heard of. It is known that katana was not that good and that was very often braking on the battlefield somethimes even piece of wood could brake it. The blade is sharp as a sword can get but it's brittle ...

[wanderer1125]

The Japanese old guy explaining looks like one of the first generation otaku geek, the teeth and glasses are the obvious evidence of his geekness LOL!

[duch182]

it isnt really samurai sword

it is katana

[Protherium]

4:47

Totally ignorant of european warfare. Where do they get such "experts" from?

[Protherium]

3:34

""European sword basically a thrusting weapon""

I doubt that he has even read Ewart Oakeshott. Totally biased and ignorant of european swords. A foil fencer. LOL

[NickTheVmaster]

@Protherium he also said that the weapon would only "stun" them. I guess wars were won by stunning the entire opposing army then.

[stuartotaku]

dude is rhat sean penn....sharp himself narrating

[elgostine]

@stuartotaku BEAN but yes, MISTER sharpe narrating.. makes it seem badass.

[dthelonelyone]

samurai were cops....lol.

[E2F83]

The Jews weild the greatest weapon, the Federal Reserve and the World Bank with the ability to print money and enlave all hahaha :D

[mango7272]

I fucking ROFLED at your comment xD

[JacobEliRossSC]

Both the Japanese and European swords are good weapons. But there is a more spiritual meaning behind the Japanese sword. And, it is much sharper than any european sword. I like this doc just cause of Sean Bean narrorating it

[FenrirTheDarkWolf]

BULLSHIT!

No sword is able to cut or pierce through iron plate armour, nor a Katana will ever be able to cut through another blade. That's just an ignorant affirmation.

[gumdostyle]

did you know that discovery channel did experiments using ink pens and shot them through brick walls using guns?

anything is possible

[GeetarAdam]

Steel > Iron

[RSwizzL]

quit hatin yo haha xD

[DarkWarrior450]

I'll take a Colt 1911 .45 ACP

[GeetarAdam]

Depends on if you're fighting more than 7 people.

[Sarva07]

one thousand years!?!???? the first who made a katana in traditional mode was Masamune in 14century!

[SuperNinja2000]

oh yeah thats right everyone on youtube is an expert i forgot the real experts know nothing silly me.

[kitedh]

i wanted to write something like that lol.

srsly. yt users know everything. :P

[elgostine]

@SuperNinja2000 nope. stephan turnbull, a revered historian of japanee history for westerners, continually gets things wrong regarding the durability of european swords verses the katana. and this guys been studying japan for ages.

[Protherium]

@elgostine

I've read Turnbulls "The Samurai Sourcebook" and his "Book of the Medieval Knight", he seems to know historical data about Europe pretty well. Sadly, it does not apply to his knowledge of arms. All he knows is about japanese swords and armor, and he unfortunately fell into the trap of comparing european swords with japanese ones in his "Sourcebook", swords he doesnt know a thing about. That's how he ended up repeating outdated Victorian era stereotypes.

[RWBn00b]

Wow. This documentary is just so off.

Can cut through Iron plate- They show us it cutting bamboo.

It's the ultimate!- Hell no. The Claymore crushed it in damage done. It lacked range, and finally, Claymores weighed only 1 pound more. And the claymore is beaten by other swords in other areas.

Capable of cutting through other blades- not european blades they ain't. Ever seen mythbusters? A katana gets damaged while the european sword suffers almost nothing at all.

Lol, biased "experts"

[aoluo]

you sound pretty fucking biased as well, hmmm lets see, i bet your European!

[aoluo]

also for myth busters I DOUBT they got a proper samurai sword made by a MASTER blacksmith. They probaly got some 3rd rate quality sword.

[RWBn00b]

I can point out several things horribly wrong with this documentary...

"Before gunpowder, war was fought with swords"

No, mainly bows, and spears.

"as potent today as 1000 years ago"

No. In an age with machine guns, it's not nearly as potent.

And then there is the fact that Katana first appeared in late 14th century. Lol, accuracy.

"It was the weapon who kept the Japanese japanese"

No, storms did the most, most of the other was bows.

[darkus13]

japanese people used the yari more than the katana, i could say that no katanas are 1000 years old, but the tachi is older than the katana.

[aoluo]

Also Incase you dont know, that bamboo is actually the same as a big humans arm (including the bone. Its not just babboo, its layers and layers of mats wrapped around a bamboo.

See how I actually know something rather than watch a TV show and think im better than experts? unlike you. idiot.

[RWBn00b]

Try again. And show me armor plate cutting this time.

Oh, and they do not mention the Samurai sword being brittle here, which it was. Hence it can not cut other blades. Heck, it's more likely to break.

And I'm biased because I'm european?

Not really.

[darkus13]

both japanese swords and european swords have their pros and cons, japanese swords are made from a poor quality ore that is transformed by the smiths into good quality steel. European weapons have the advantage of being massive, they could cut down a small tree, but not a pillow, japanese swords have the advantage of being flexible and sharp so they could cut a pillow but not a tree.

[Caliburnis]

European swords aren't "massive". They're longer, sure, but in terms of weight and balance they're relatively equal to a katana.

Neither style of sword could cut through a tree, but both could cut through a pillow.

As well, Katana are not flexible, especially not in comparison to European swords. Katana, for instance, are much more prone to taking a set when bent than a Longsword due to their rigid construction.

[Theseus1000]

@darkus13 That is only partially truth, european sword makers knew the techniques of combining the bendy metal with strong metal as early as antique Romans used celtic swords that were made that way for cavalry, Vikings had same techniques and so on. Japanese had also swords that were up to 2 meters long not just Europeans. Katana could be compared best with bastard sword, arming and side swords and rapiers all of wich were of great quality and of same weight or lighter. Katana is not Exalibur.

[elgostine]

@darkus13 funnily enough though stephan turnbull is supposed to be a revered historian of japan.. it baffles me that HE could get this wrong, and he does so in his book about the samurai as well, saying the katana s brittle edge developed the need for bocking with the flat and back, a feat other european swords couldnt match..

again, dont see how mr turnbull could get it SO wrong.. unless he simply doesnt care much about the weapons. and more interested in other aspects.

[RWBn00b]

@darkus13

You'd need an axe to cut through a small tree, and you certainly wouldn't do so in one blow. (unless it was a twiglike tree.)

European swords didn't even have the weight to seriously injure a man wearing 2 mm thick armor plates. And neither did the katana have edge to do that.

[RWBn00b]

@RWBn00b

Heck, even CROSSBOWS had trouble with armor. European plate armor was nuts.

[RWBn00b]

@darkus13

All swords have pros and cons:

Long, straight, doubleedged: Great for range and impaling(which was far more deadly than slashing). Hand guard was great for locking your opponents weapon, while you punched his nose in.

Curved(scimitar): Made far deeper gashes as the sword would curve into the wound. As a cutting sword, very scary.

Katana: Straighter than the scimitar, but more suited for impalement. It was a sword that was good at both, worse than each in specifics.

[walatalalaw]

@RWBn00b It's stupid and futile to compare two swords who have nothing in common. A european double edged sword isn't made to be used in the same way as a katana or a scimitar. A scimitar isn't made to be used in the same way as a katana, even though both are curved. They're all weapons, but it's like comparing an axe, a spear and a knife. They've got almost nothing in common. The strength of a weapon comes from the user, so none is effectively better than the other.

[walatalalaw]

@RWBn00b They were all very common, and people in those times didn't go for weapons that weren't reliable. If there truly was one weapon that was significantly better than the others, everybody would have adopted it. And besides, most fights ended on the ground, hands free or with knives, as much in europe (where we created elaborate wrestling and takedowns) as in japan (famous for ju jitsu).

[Japanorama]

@RWBn00b you base your statements off of "mythbusters"? Another fail american. kbai.

[Japanorama]

@RWBn00b You are from Sweden, how would you know? Mythbusters? ..ok, become another dumb american why don't you.

[anigopal]

Bamboo has greater tensile strength (or resistance to being pulled apart) than steel

[anigopal]

@RWBn00b

Bamboo has greater tensile strength (or resistance to being pulled apart) than steel

(look up 'stronger than steel newsweek' on google - I can't post the url for some reason)

[IMNOTCRAZY1]

@anigopa Tensile strength has nothing to do with getting cut. That has to do with hardness.

[makado1980]

the best man love it...