Re: [HIST] Japanese Culture shock

--- KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, John Leary wrote:
> > The Japanese are using the equal of the
> saber/simitar, and history
> > has shown the outcome of that fight.

> Could you elaborate, please ? I guess you mean that
> sabers are inferior to straight swords ? How has
history shown this ?

Elaboration as requested!

The purpose of the weapon is the real deciding 
factor in the discussion!   The sabre/simitar/katana
are basic butcher knives, designed to cut meat, 
by slicing.   The straight sword/broadsword/
hand and a half/ect. are designed to smash through
and destroy by forch of impact, consider them the 
kitchen equal to the cleaver.	(It should also be 
noted that the straight sword is more accurate 
in the act of stabing, since the point is directly
down the center of the blade, this will also provide
a grater penetration because more mass/force is
behind the attack.)
     If one has a well protected chicken in chain-
mail, will the butcher knife cause more damage by 
cutting or the cleaver by crushing?
     The crusades provide a large number of 
examples of the armored knight with sword vs
the lightly armored simitar using arab.
The arabs did not do well, even if the knights 
were dramatically outnumbered.
     While it is possible to make the claim that
the Japanese armor is superior to the arab, this 
would only reduce the overall advantage the knight
has, not eliminate it.	 So a knight could (and did)
fight at odds of 10 to 1 against arabs, perhaps the 
Japanese could be fought at odds of 2 to 1, or 
even 1 to 1, but the knight will still have a 
better than even chance to win the combat.
The preceding was a personal opinion.

Bye for now,
John L.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup