And this is what happens when a masterfully crafted katana collides with a masterfully crafted longsword.
Suck it, katana
And that is what happens when a masterfully crafted scalpel collides with a masterfully crafted guillotine.
Does nobody understand that longswords and katanas are two different kinds of tool?Longswords are essentially sharpened fucksticks designed to destroy the shit out of anything resembling armor that comes their way. They shatter bone, jelly flesh, and essentially fuck people up by sheer inexorable force of being a goddamn sharp steel bar.
Katanas don’t do that.They’re not meant to withstand collision with armor or a brick wall or a charging fully outfitted warhorsebecause the circumstances of its development didn’t call for that. It’s a precision instrument. It’s designed to be lightweight, outmaneuver, and find weak spots, not go barreling into people hack-n-slashing your way to victory. It’s a specialized tool.
In a sense this reflects a core difference between cultures; katanas are a shitton of work and preparation to make the execution as efficient and streamlined as possible, while longswords are more durably and simply made in response to a climate that would require a soldier to be a one-man battering ram in battle.
I have seen this and talked about this post before.
These weapons are two very different tools with very different jobs. Elaborating on the above post;
The Japanese didn’t have as much access to metal as Europe did, simply due to smaller landmass. As a result, the Japanese armor and weapon craftsmen had to create armor and weapons using as little metal as possible. The result of this was that rather than doing what European soldiers did, Japanese soldiers were protected by a set of leather ‘plates’ with thin iron ‘scales’ attached to them. These plates were crafted to cover the vital areas and weak points in the wearer’s physiology, such as the knees and shoulders. Some did not even have metal components and were simply made with hardened, toughened leather ‘scales’ in their place. Large single pieces of metal in armor weren’t developed until later into Japan’s history, when exposure to the western world opened trade and allowed for more metal, and exposed them to western armor techniques and most importantly, the development of the firearm.
The katana was made as a blade to fight this type of armor. The gentle curve and length of the blade would allow more force to be applied to the cutting edge on the spot struck, which would hopefully be on a thinly armored spot with a minimum of metal - the katana would hopefully cleave through the leather. This is a job the katana excels at, it’s a slicing tool that is incredibly, nearly OVERLY-exact in what it does, because it begins to lose effectiveness at other roles a sword might play in combat.
The European longsword was a tool designed for an entirely different task. In Europe, easier access to metals allowed for more metal to be used in warfare. This resulted in heavier, metallic armor that offered superior protection to well-equipped soldiers. The result was that weapons had to be designed to smash metal. Even the swords.
The longsword is less of a cutting weapon in use against armored opponents than it is a bludgeon. The blades were made heavier and stockier - in some cases left unsharpened beyond a basic grinding. The longsword’s use against plate armor was not to cut holes in the armor, but rather to deliver force to the flesh beyond the armor. When used properly two armored knights forced to use blades (That’s right; The longsword was not the preferred weapon for armored opponents,) would end up bludgeoning each other with the flat of the blade, delivering a vicious bruising and wearing down the opponent and slowing their ability to move. In many cases extremities or joints in the armor would be aimed for, not to penetrate them, but to try to find structural weakness and pop connections or damage the metal to lock the joint up.
Also, I’ll point out something else: That picture is entirely unrealistically executed. Not only because swords were never meant to meet edge to edge - even when parrying, when done properly a sword is slapped aside with the flat of the blade - but because of the situation.
That longsword is strapped into place. It is braced so solidly you could use it as structural support. Meanwhile the katana is slammed straight down onto it at an angle that would damage even another longsword if used in that situation. That kind of impact is not a realistic impact for swords to expect. The katana is essentially destroyed because it’s not meant for that kind of use, not because it’s inferior to the longsword. If you try to use a wrench as a hammer there’s a good chance you’ll damage the wrench.