Just how sharp were European swords?

The following is a clip from the History Channel special "Punishment". In this clip historians discuss the evolution of various methods of beheading and why the guilotine was invented.Apparently European swords of the 18th century would become dull after just two beheadings and thus could not be used in a practical, reliable system of execution.Thus the guilotine was invented to fill this gap.

IMO this calls into question many Western Martial Artists assertion that European swords were just as sharp as Japanese swords.Now ofcourse many will rightfully say this clip is talking about the 18th century and at this point in history European swords had lost much of their battlefield uses.Many WMA consider the 12th and 13th centuries to be the golden age of European swords and thus the swords of the 18th century are not representative of the quality of swords Europe has produced throughout the ages.I accept this assement to a certain degree.As far as longswords of the 12th and 13th century are concerned they may very well be equally as sharp as Japanese swords.Although it is curious that up until the 18th century the standard tool for beheading was the axe and block?Could it be that even before the 18th century European swords dulled fairly easily?At any pace I believe this clip ends the debate over whether or not rapiers and various sabers of the 17th and 18th century were of the same quality of Japanese swords.There were not. Please comment and keep it civil.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• European
• Swords
• Execution
• Beheadings
• Punishment
• History
• Arms

[ryddragyn]

How does this end the debate? It's an off the cuff comment with no primary sources quoted, and taken completely out of context. Why not look at the actual surviving swords? What about the X-rays of ancient euro swords showing pattern welding? What about the bevel angles? Better yet, look at how drastically differently reproduction swords can perform with varying degrees of sharpness. And consider the fact that if you're up against armor you don't want a super sharp, fragile edge?

[pritzi101]

@Plato86 That could be why japan was never invaded, or... because it was a) a series of islands surrounded harsh water and a rocky coast, not being conducive to a naval landing b) had only 2 real credible threats, The Koreans and the Chinese, both of whom were far more interested with crushing the constant tirades of rebellions they faced c) Japan has nothing that anyone would actually want to take: small amounts of poor iron, a few horses and poor agricultural land d) all of the above

[Zyamaman]

@Plato86

One more thing - the whole point of tempering is that it rendered techniques such as differential heat treatment obsolete.

Tempering made steel very flexible, without compromising on hardness (much), thus negating the need to leave one side of your sword soft, to act as a shock absorbent.

Basically, tempering is a far more advanced method of heat treatment.

[Zyamaman]

@Plato86

This is getting tiresome...

Read what I wrote one more time, specifically the part about the differences between between ordinary heat treatment (differential, or otherwise), and actual tempering.

See how what you said has nothing to do with what I was talking about?

Differential heat treatment is NOT tempering, ergo, "hamon" is not proof tempering.

See this video for a demonstration of what tempering is, and how it differs from regular heat treatment:

watch?v=Uo72dL7uDuc

[Plato86]

European smiths used uniformed tempering, where the whole blade is heated up and then quenched. In contrast Japanese smiths used the Chinese method of differentiated tempering, where thick layers of clay are placed on most of the blade while the edge is either not covered in clay or is covered in a thin layer. The "hamon" or white smoke line directly above the edge of the katana is proof of tempering. Really how do you not know this?

[Zyamaman]

@Plato86

I do, actually - you don't.

What you're talking about is heat treatment.

Tempering is a form of heat treatment, but not all heat treatment is tempering.

Tempering consists of two sets of heating/quenching, whereas Japanese smiths preformed only one.

Additionally, tempering occurs on much lower temperatures than what the Japanese did - when tempered, the steel never gets to the point where it starts to glow.

If it does, the blade is ruined.

[Plato86]

I did not mean you personally. Japanese swords were tempered, tempering simply means heating the metal up and then quenching it quickly. Really do you know what you are talking about?

[Zyamaman]

@Plato86

My point is that the video is unscientific - you cannot draw an conclusions from it.

Also, in one sentence you say that unless I personally conduct the tests, I cannot attest to the conclusions, yet in the very next sentence you do the exact thing yourself!

Hypocrisy much?

I know of what I speak because European swords, while having the same carbon content as the Japanese ones, were tempered, while their counterparts weren't.

How do YOU know of what you're speaking?

[Plato86]

The long sword appears to be dull yet it manages to cut through the cabbage with ease? The man handling the katana is also a amateur so what is your point? How do you know how much tensile strength a genuine katana has if you have never tested it? The fact is that European longswords broke and they broke very often.

[Zyamaman]

@Plato86

What I mean is that when you take two historical blades, and conduct genuine scientific tests on them (as opposed to the sham that is the video you're referring me to), you will see that tempered European blades have far more tensile strength than their untempered Japanese counterparts.

As for the video - it's bollocks.

The test subjects are of very questionable quality, the longsword appears to be unsharpened and the handler is an amateur - his strikes are very inconsistent.

[Plato86]

What do you mean that European blades " outdid" their Japanese counter parts in balance and flexibility? You make it sound as if in the ancient world knights and samurai compared their swords in an objective test and the European blades were more flexible. There is a video on YT comparing modern remakes of the longsword and katana cutting various armors and blocks of ice. In all test the katana outshined the longsword by a mile. Check it out.