3 ms·

I know there is a lot of mythology around the steel in katanas, but how good are they really? Could you make a better sword using modern techniques? How would t

I know there is a lot of mythology around the steel in katanas, but how good are they really? Could you make a better sword using modern techniques? How would they fair against a European sword from the same era?

walt_grata 3y ago
Good for the materials available. You can very much do better with modern techniques and materials. About even, I think Europe might have had crucible steel and pattern welding before the Japanese did, but didn't use them as much because they had access to more raw materials.
sandworm101 3y ago
Not good. The perceived quality of Japanese steel is tied to its actual value at the time. Iron ore was rare. Making steel in japan was difficult. They melted it down from river sand. So finished swords were valuable enough not to be buried with people. Compare Viking swords, which were equally as intricate and probably better overall, but were easy enough to make that they could be buried with their owners. The mythology of Japanese swords also increased as polished steel was rare enough that simply seeing it would a bit of a shock. If you live in a brown village where the only metal is black iron, someone pulling out a shiny katana is akin to someone today pulling out a light saber.
kayodelycaon 3y ago
Europe had far better materials and forging methods. Double-sided swords were common. There’s a reason Japan’s best swords were single sided. Katanas require so much work just to get usable steel. The reason for the way they hardened one side and softened the other was so low quality steel wouldn’t break.
hangonhn 3y ago
I think there is a lot of mythology that surrounds the katana. European and other Asian swords were pretty comparable and sometimes even better than katanas. What is impressive to me, and not mentioned in the video, is that the available sources of iron in Japan is actually quite poor as in the iron sand quality is not that uniform. That they can start with such low quality material and get something like the katana is very impressive. I think the scarcity drove the innovation in techniques. That said, India and the Middle East also produced some incredible swords with various techniques. The katana has its aura partly because of its association with the samurai class. After the "sword hunt" initiated by Toyotomi Hideyoshi, wearing a sword became a status symbol because only the samurai class could have swords. In neighboring China, no weapon gained such reverence simply because in Chinese philosophy the practitioner is more important than their weapon and the best weapon is the one you have on hand. I am certain modern techniques could produce far better swords since the European and other Asian countries already could produce swords of comparable quality before the advent of modern science and engineering. I think the big difference is one of culture and philosophy. Other countries don't revere the sword as much as Japan.
- Tuna-Fish 3y ago
  > European and other Asian swords were pretty comparable and sometimes even better than katanas. If by sometimes you mean "consistently". Across history, the kind of swords that were made in Japan were inferior to what was being produced in Europe or especially middle east and India at the same time. By the time the "final form" of the katana, as described in this video, had been developed, European swords were being made of spring steel, and were substantially longer, lighter and stronger.
gadders 3y ago
Thanks all for your comments. Interesting to know.
maxglute 3y ago
I think the question is, does it matter if it's better if countries with more resources can equip 10 soldiers for the labour it took to equip 1 samurai.

walt_grata 3y ago

Good for the materials available. You can very much do better with modern techniques and materials. About even, I think Europe might have had crucible steel and pattern welding before the Japanese did, but didn't use them as much because they had access to more raw materials.

sandworm101 3y ago

Not good. The perceived quality of Japanese steel is tied to its actual value at the time. Iron ore was rare. Making steel in japan was difficult. They melted it down from river sand. So finished swords were valuable enough not to be buried with people. Compare Viking swords, which were equally as intricate and probably better overall, but were easy enough to make that they could be buried with their owners. The mythology of Japanese swords also increased as polished steel was rare enough that simply seeing it would a bit of a shock. If you live in a brown village where the only metal is black iron, someone pulling out a shiny katana is akin to someone today pulling out a light saber.

kayodelycaon 3y ago

Europe had far better materials and forging methods. Double-sided swords were common. There’s a reason Japan’s best swords were single sided. Katanas require so much work just to get usable steel. The reason for the way they hardened one side and softened the other was so low quality steel wouldn’t break.

hangonhn 3y ago

I think there is a lot of mythology that surrounds the katana. European and other Asian swords were pretty comparable and sometimes even better than katanas. What is impressive to me, and not mentioned in the video, is that the available sources of iron in Japan is actually quite poor as in the iron sand quality is not that uniform. That they can start with such low quality material and get something like the katana is very impressive. I think the scarcity drove the innovation in techniques. That said, India and the Middle East also produced some incredible swords with various techniques. The katana has its aura partly because of its association with the samurai class. After the "sword hunt" initiated by Toyotomi Hideyoshi, wearing a sword became a status symbol because only the samurai class could have swords. In neighboring China, no weapon gained such reverence simply because in Chinese philosophy the practitioner is more important than their weapon and the best weapon is the one you have on hand. I am certain modern techniques could produce far better swords since the European and other Asian countries already could produce swords of comparable quality before the advent of modern science and engineering. I think the big difference is one of culture and philosophy. Other countries don't revere the sword as much as Japan.

Tuna-Fish 3y ago
> European and other Asian swords were pretty comparable and sometimes even better than katanas. If by sometimes you mean "consistently". Across history, the kind of swords that were made in Japan were inferior to what was being produced in Europe or especially middle east and India at the same time. By the time the "final form" of the katana, as described in this video, had been developed, European swords were being made of spring steel, and were substantially longer, lighter and stronger.

gadders 3y ago

Thanks all for your comments. Interesting to know.

maxglute 3y ago

I think the question is, does it matter if it's better if countries with more resources can equip 10 soldiers for the labour it took to equip 1 samurai.