Hank Reinhardt's The Book of the Sword

by Hank Reinhardt

  An abrupt edge (top) and an appleseed or rolled edge (bottom).

  BLADE VS. ARMOR

  But how effective was the new appleseed edge on a katana or tachi against Japanese armor? Well, remember not all armor was uniform. One thing that must be kept in mind is that the richest warriors got the best armor. For all of you egalitarians, I'm sorry, but that simply is the way it was.

  In general, Japanese armor was lighter and more flexible than European plate armor. It was usually of lamellar construction and, although single steel plate breastplates were known, they were rarely used. Leather lamellae were not infrequent in Japanese armor. Leather, properly hardened and lacquered, is a pretty tough substance. It can resist a sword blow fairly well; not as well as steel, but then it is lighter and not as expensive as steel. Mail was also used. Japanese mail can follow the normal international mail pattern, but it also has many variations, with some being connected and frequently using double rings of butted mail. As the old saying goes, "you makes your choice and you takes your chances!"

  Lamellar armor construction.

  A katana with a rolled edge could cut mail if the blow was solid and square on. One that strikes at an angle is likely to skate or slide off. It is unlikely that a katana could cut through a steel plate, but that also depends on the thickness of the plate itself.

  There are a few paintings that show a helmet being split by a katana. While I will grant the possibility, I will also add that it is highly unlikely. I have only examined a few original Japanese helmets. As with most metal helmets across the world, one of the helmets I examined had quite thin plates, but I was unable to determine if the plates had been tempered hard. If not, it would be possible to cut through. There was one that had to be close to 1/8 inch in thickness, and there was no way that anyone was going to cut through that helmet. These were the two extremes that I have been able to actually pick up and look at. The remainder fall between these two. It might be possible to cut into the helmet, but not through the helmet.

  Since the samurai did not carry a shield, he relied on the armor for protection. Since he did not carry a shield, he was able to use both hands on the sword, and also to train to hit specific points on the armor that were areas of weakness. These areas of weakness would vary with the style of armor, but a warrior would be able to see them immediately. This might consist of an area protected only by mail, or a gap between sections of armor.

  Remember also that the katana, while primarily a cutting sword, still has a very effective point, a point that could penetrate mail and possibly even thin plate. Certainly I have done this, and have seen other demonstrations of the effectiveness of this rounded and/or angled point.

  There are good indications that after the Mongol invasions, the Japanese made their swords slightly heavier. The Khan's army was known to be heavily armored, and such armor would be more resistant to sword blows. Whether admitted or not, the two invasion attempts were quite scary for the Japanese, and they made every effort to see that they would come out on top if it happened again.

  Combat without armor is a different issue entirely.

  COMBAT WITHOUT ARMOR

  "Kendo" is the Japanese version of fencing. Proper kendo requires the attacker to call the target: wrist, throat, etc. The calling of the target is to sharpen the reflexes, and to put you in mind that you are fighting an armored warrior. Cuts to the leg are not used, as they are considered invalid in the use of the katana, as mentioned earlier.

  Whereas European fencing contains attacks, blocks, parries, counterattacks and deceptive moves, and some nice sneaky tricks as well as set-up moves, Japanese fencing has very few of these. They do have their blocks and parries and deceptive moves, but the essence of combat is lightning swift strikes and full commitment to the attack. When two trained and competent samurai fought, the duel was quite brief. Movie fights, which show cut and parry, cut and parry, and all sorts of fancy and acrobatic moves, are there to entertain and to forward the plot of the movie. The reality was a quick and bloody fight. Very quick, and quite, quite, bloody.

  The Japanese were great ones for testing their swords, but the way they did it would not be politically correct in today's world. One of the favorite methods was testing it on the bodies of the dead. The head was removed, and various cuts were made on the body to ascertain the cutting ability of the sword. There are written instructions on how to position the body for the various cuts. There were special handles for the swords, and specialists who did the cutting. Curiously, they would not do this if the body was tattooed. I have no idea why, but I have a feeling that had I lived in those times I would have been quite heavily tattooed.

  If that method of testing your sword strikes you as a little strange, you ain't heard nothing yet. Testing on live criminals was rather common. There are instructions and drawings as to how the criminal is to be held for which particular cut. In The Sword and the Same the author tells of the chapters in the Yamada School of Tameshigiri. How to catch a live man and cut him through, how to position the body for various cuts: all rather straightforward, if rather unpleasant. Simple beheadings were not done. No, there were diagonal cuts to the left and right, horizontal cuts across the chest and abdomen, and even one across the hips.

  There is the story of the puppet master who entertained by day and stole by night. When he was caught he was condemned to death. When he saw the executioner approaching with a sword, he asked him if he was going to test the blade on him. When told that he was, he replied. "That is too cruel, to test a sword on a living man."

  "Nevertheless, that is what is going to happen," the executioner responded.

  The prisoner answered, "If I had known this, I would have swallowed some rocks and ruined your fine sword."

  No further comment is mentioned.

  Some of the samurai had a disconcerting habit of testing their swords on simple peasants who happened to be passing by at the wrong moment. Frankly, I think that this is a little much. But nevertheless, it happened, and it happened more than once. There is the tale of the martial arts master who noticed a samurai lying in wait. He suddenly turned several back flips. As the samurai stared in astonishment, the master thumbed his nose at the samurai, and went about his business. But it wasn't just peasants. Sometimes the samurai made a mistake. The story is told of the master sword polisher who was found dead one morning. He'd been cut down by a samurai who was testing his sword. It created quite a stir, and I'm sure that the samurai were lectured and told to be more careful.

  Not all of the Japanese approved of these practices. Many Japanese were opposed to this, and protested quite vigorously. After all, this is not a type of behavior that will win hearts and minds and influence people.

  For those of you who wish to pursue the study of Japanese warriors and weapons, I have listed some books below. For a broad overview of feudal Japan there is no better book than Secrets of the Samurai. Don't let the title fool you. This is a scholarly work filled with vital information. It also contains some of the finest line drawings I have seen. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

  Suggestions for further reading from Hank:

  Bottomley, I. & A.P. Hopson, Arms and Armor of the Samurai: The History of Weaponry in Ancient Japan. Crescent Books, New York, 1988.

  Hakuseki, Arai, translated by Henri L. Joly and Inado Hogitaro, The Sword Book in Honcho Gunkiko and the Book of the Same Ko Hi Sei Gi. Holland Press, London, 1913.

  Joly, Henri L., Japanese Sword Fittings. Holland Press, London, 1912.

  Knutsen, Roald M., Japanese Polearms. Holland Press, London, 1963.

  Nagayama, Kokan, translated by Kenji Mishini, The Connoisseur's Book of Japanese Swords. Kodansha International, Tokyo, 1997.

  Ratti, Oscar and Adele Westbrook, Secrets of the Samurai: The Martial Arts of Feudal Japan. Castle Books, Edison, 1973.

  Robinson, H. Russell, Japanese Arms and Armor. Crown Publishing, New York, 1969.

  Sato, Kanzan, translated and adapted by Joe Earle, The Japanese Sw
ord. Kodansha International and Shibundo, Tokyo and New York, 1983.

  Sinclaire, Clive, Samurai: The Weapons and Spirit of the Japanese Warrior The Lyons Press, Guilford. First published 2001.

  Turnbull, Stephen, Battles of the Samurai. Arms and Armour Press, London, 1987.

  11: Eastern Two-Handed Swords

  JAPANESE SWORDS

  In the Far East there is always some confusion about what constitutes a two-hand sword. The Japanese katana is almost always used with two hands, but is essentially a single-handed sword. Although the medieval Japanese were quite small in stature, usually in the area of 5 feet 2 inches, the katana is certainly light enough to be used easily with one hand.

  The great Japanese swordsman Miyamoto Musashi (1584–1645), perfected his two-sword school, using the short waskazashi in one hand and the katana in the other. So you can see that even then it was known that the katana was not a true two-hand sword.

  However, the Japanese did have a true two-hander, and it was quite a ferocious weapon! This was the no dachi, as mentioned in the previous chapter. The sword shape is the same as the katana; it is just really big, with an overall length of from five-and-a-half feet to well over six feet in length. It was carried in a scabbard, but never worn, just carried. The scabbard was thrown aside when the action started, and like the Scots and others, the feeling was that you could always find the scabbard if you survived, and if you didn't, who cared?

  I have read of a sword in a Japanese museum that is so large that the owner needed a companion to help him unsheathe the sword! I don't think that qualifies as a two hand-sword, but rather as a two-man sword.

  The Japanese referred to these swords as "field swords," or usually, "horse killing swords." Certainly they would be big enough to kill a horse and rider if it hit the two right. Both names strike me as pretty accurate. Certainly in the wild melee and confusion of battle, a large cutting sword could be most effective. There are reports of these swords with blades over 4 feet in length and grips of 3 feet! That is seven feet of sword! These are pure battle swords, and from what I have been able to gather, there was no real "technique" in using them, other than swinging hard and fast.

  What I find interesting, and have never been able to get information on, is the forging and tempering of these swords. I have been able to examine two of these swords, both in the area of six feet in length, and the blades were as attractive and well finished as any of the old katanas. The temper line on both swords was a soft wave pattern, and was quite distinct. Both were quite beautiful. Obviously these were not cheap, readymade swords, but had been well made, and to even my untrained eye, made for a high-ranking individual.

  Curiously, the Japanese never seemed to have used hand-held shields. They have shields, what the Europeans would have called mantlets or pavises, upright shields for archers to protect them from enemy arrows. Even in the proto-historic age of Japan the warriors seem to have developed armor more and excluded the shield. This would explain their devotion to the two-handed weapon.

  CHINESE SWORDS

  The Chinese were not reluctant to use shields, both for their foot soldiers and their cavalry. As a result, they had many one-handed swords, both sabers and what is now referred to as the "tai chi" sword. But a large number of their swords have grips that were easily long enough for two hands, but were light enough for use with one hand. Unfortunately there has not been a serious detailed study of Chinese edged weapons. This is a shame as many of their swords are quite beautiful.

  Original Chinese late Qing dynasty sword, 31.5 inches overall length. HRC553.

  After the Boxer Rebellion in the early 19th century, many Chinese swords were brought back to the US and Great Britain. These are wide-bladed swords with almost no point, but terrific cutting weapons. With a two-hand grip they have the power of a good hefty axe when they connect. There is some confusion with Chinese names for these blades, which happens with a language as complex as Chinese and with so many dialects. Over here they are frequently referred to as "war swords."

  Chinese beheading swords were always two-handed, and were much larger than the European version. The average is a very large and scary sword. The total length was often about five feet, evenly split between blade and handle. I had one many years ago, and in holding it you could easily see that it was only good for a downward blow, and far too clumsy to be a fighting sword.

  KOREAN SWORDS

  One of the most ignored swords of the area is the Korean sword. Now, I do not think anyone can say for sure whether the Japanese influenced the Koreans, or the Koreans influenced the Japanese, and they seem to argue about it incessantly. But the two swords are very close and hard to tell apart.

  The Korean sword usually has a smaller tsuba (guard) and the blade is often slightly less curved than the katana. Each has devoted adherents and each country had many schools of sword play (and still has a few). The katana has so dominated the modern sword scene that the Korean sword is either ignored or considered just another katana. This is another sword that I would like to see studied more thoroughly.

  INDIAN SWORDS

  India made and used two-handed swords, but not to a great degree. Since the left hand was often used to carry the shield, two-handed swords were fairly rare. But they were used, and are rather strange looking swords. Not at all like you might expect, given the Indian preference for the curved sword. These are straight, double-edged swords with a blade well over 2-1/2 feet in length, and a handle length about 20 inches. What is curious about these swords is that the grip is often separated with two additional pommels that create three grip sections. This allows you to extend the sword's length, and also to close up on it and use it as a shorter weapon. These globular pommels are usually fluted brass and are brazed to hollow steel grips. A common practice in India was to put a small pointed knife into these hollow pommels.

  Indopersian shield, circa 1850. HRC534.

  The Nagas of Assam, located in the eastern part of India, had two-handed swords that were also somewhat strange. These were slightly shorter, generally about 4 feet total length, with blade lengths just over 2 feet. The grip was divided into two sections, each with a crossguard. The blades were slightly curved, single-edged, with good sharp points. The Nagas are considered an aboriginal race and their swords were rather primitive in construction and not near as finely made as most of the Indian metalwork of the period.

  Curved Indo-Persian talwar, circa 1850, 33.5 inches overall length. HRC509.

  There is a lot of discussion regarding two-handed swords among sword nuts. Is a two-hander better than a sword and shield? Which is the best sword—katana, Swiss/German two-hander, etc.? This is one of those endless arguments. In this day and age of .45s and .223s it may be foolish, but it sure is fun.

  Assam two-handed sword.

  Antique Indopersian helmet, circa 1850. HRC525.

  Suggestions for further reading from the editors:

  LaRocca, Donald J., et al., Warriors of the Himalayas: Rediscovering the Arms and Armor of Tibet. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Yale University Press, New Haven, 2006.

  Rawson, P.S., The Indian Sword. Arco Publishing Company, New York, 1969.

  12: Exotic Blades

  AFRICAN SWORDS

  Properly this subject needs to be dealt with in two sections; North African and sub-Saharan African. Although there is some overlap both in weapons and geography, there is enough of a distinct difference to warrant this.

  African musele short sword, 20 inches overall length. HRC555.

  North African work is frequently confused with work from Arabia, but this should not be so. Prior to the conquest of North Africa by the Arabs, and the destruction of the Christian societies, there was a lot of European influence and many of the weapons in use were of common shape with European blades. These were generally long straight swords, with some of the more curiously shaped Egyptian weapons still around. The actual knowledge of these swords, from written and excavated sources, is quite spotty.


  Islamic sword, quaddara, 22.5 inches overall length. HRC517.

  You will often hear that the swords used in parts of North Africa—the Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, etc.—are not only descended from the sword of the Crusaders, but that many are even actual Crusader blades. This is sheer nonsense, and arose from the erroneous concept that all Near Eastern swords were curved. Although curved swords were known and used at times, the vast majority of Near Eastern blades were straight and double-edged. The Arabs carried large double-edged straight swords, sometimes quite long, and this was the primary sword in use during the Arabic expansion under Mohammed and his immediate successors. It was not until the influx into the Middle East of horse archers from the steppes of Central Asia in the 13th century that the curved sword became popular, eventually just about completely replacing the older straight sword. (Arab weapons will be dealt with later in another section.) [Editor's note: Hank never got a chance to write that section, even though those swords were some of his favorites.]

  One of the most curious of swords is the flissa used by the Kabyle Berbers. There have been many suggestions as to the origin of this sword, from the Egyptian kopesh to the Turkish yataghan. Although it bears some resemblance to the yataghan, it strikes me as being a very inferior weapon.