Discussion in 'Weapons' started by saikyou, Sep 30, 2003.

  1. Cudgel

    Cudgel The name says it all

    Well some of these extremely large swords were carried into battle, but not as weapons, they were battle standards.
  2. Stolenbjorn

    Stolenbjorn Valued Member

    I don't think a proper zweihenders has ever showed up on archaeological diggings of any weastern ancient battlefield: as you say, spears and arrows are the usual finds on battlesites. Hand heald weapons would be scavenged. In Denemark one has found in a moar several hundred weapons from the migration period (500-800ad), that seems to be a offering of the defeated army's weapons (and POW's) to dietys (Probably Odin) as a thanks for victory. Here there are several "vikingswords" as well as spearpoints and arrowheads.
  3. Hyaku

    Hyaku Master of Nothing

    The whole argument about using long against short is a bit of a non starter when it comes to nodachi. That's why one carries two weapons. The short can also be used to throw at someone to keep them at a distance. You work out the maai (distance/interval) and deal with it accordingly.

    Around seven to eight pounds for a mounted weapon. They can be handled with "practice".
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2004
  4. Cudgel

    Cudgel The name says it all

    I believe we had reached the conclusion that 8 pounds was the upper limit of how mucha sord can weigh. POle weaopns can weigh up to around 10 poounds I belive.
    This site lists several medieval and reniasance era weapons from Europe that are now found in museums.
    ONly one sowrd is over 8 and that is a bearing sword ie a sword caried in a parrade made to look impressive. Much like the 30lb o-dahci refered to earlier in the thread.

    And what do you mean by mounted weapon?
    One used from horseback?

    It must also be oted that Japanese swords tend to weigh more than a European sword of equal length.
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2004
  5. Hyaku

    Hyaku Master of Nothing

    No. One with its fittings. Makes quite a difference. Mine has lead in the Tsuka.

    There are limitations as to what can be done on horseback so as not to injure the horse. A lot of thrusting techniques are employed.
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2004
  6. Cudgel

    Cudgel The name says it all

    I had thought so but I had wishe to make sure.
    Now After looking at your site, I hope I am correct in my asumtion that you are the author of the site if not well my error, I fainally actaully paid atention to the conversions of length for the swords listed. I noticed that your sword is listed at being 45.4 inches and weighing at 3.25kg or some where around 7 pounds 2 ounces that is rather hefty for its length, something I already cometed on but I feel like saying it again, Japanese styled sowrds, or rather swords made in a tradtional fasion apear to be on averae sigificantly heavier than a European sword of equal legnth. A European sword of around 45-46 inche would weigh between 2and 3 pounds and is consided by some to be one handed sowrds at that length and weight. where as a Eruopean sword of equal weight would be signifcanty longer. But that is fodder for another thread.
    But to the point while a sword of 3 plus shaku wold be consideed long for Japanses swordplay its about average size for Europeanswrodplay at the same time frame, and in fact looking at some plates from mauls of the late medieval early renisance Europe some of the sowrd being shown in use are quite large. I myself sondier 4shaku or 45.4 inches to be short, but then again according to one renaisance maunal the perfect length for a one handed sword's blade is over 37 inches inlength the same for a twohanded sword.

    I agree that controlling distance is important. Other wise why pick a larger sword?
  7. munkiejunkie

    munkiejunkie sanity's requiem

  8. Cudgel

    Cudgel The name says it all

    I belive that link has been posted already in this thread.
  9. Domenico

    Domenico Valued Member

    Oh my God, where to begin....

    Wow, there is a doozy of myth and misinformation out there.

    Caveat the First:
    Being that I know none of you personally or professionally, I'm going after the bad data, not the people posting it, so in no particular order, let us begin...

    Caveat the Second:
    I have no knowledge of the specifics regarding Japanese weapons of war, their tactics, techniques, or fabrication, ergo I'll limit my focus to the Western Arms that were brought in kicking and screaming into this discussion, Metallurgical data (which does not distinguish between Oriental and Occidental), and lastly, 12 years of practical study in the practice and study of Renaissance era European Weapons and Warfare, and the kinetic behavior of various weapons forms ("forms" meaning knives, swords, pole arms, etc., irrespective of the particular flavors of training with same).

    “…that falls under the classification of 'SLO' or sword like object…”

    Thank you for adding that word to the lexicon, as it’s impact is enormous. Folks, I sure hope you remind yourselves that referring to stats, techniques, and behavior of weapons in film, video games, and the like is kind of like comparing Apples and the sound Green makes. It’s irrelevant, impossible to examine, and rather pointless. Just my .02. If you truly want to waste your time in a pursuit of Mental Masturbation, might I recommend
    Now *there* is a classic SLO

    “a sword like that would break at the junction between hilt and blade…not enough material at a high stress point…”

    Point of note, quantity of material does not necessarily a good sword (or tang) make. You can have a slender tang that will withstand the best of abuses, but the instant you add bad craftsmanship or engineering, all bets are off. If it’s got a sharp radius, it’s going to be weak, if it’s a weld, it’s going to be weak, if it hasn’t been properly heat treated to give a springier temper than say the edge, it’s going to be weak.

    The “rat tails” referred to are indeed as bad as alluded to, but don’t equate the failure rate to the quantity of metal involved, it has much more to do with the *quality* of material, fabrication technique, and skill of the craftsman that will make or break a good blade, every sort of pun intended.

    “…legends and entertainment are the causes.”

    Too true. No disagreement here, I just wanted to see it stated again… :)

    “…there were a few large swords used in northern Europe that exceeded 11 pounds, such as the claymore, but they were wielded by massive individuals and even then were fairly impractical…”

    You’re suffering from the myth about the weight of two handed swords. Keep reading this thread, and all will be revealed….

    “…they (Claymores) were used by foot soldiers where as the scots would use them to cut the feet off of a enemy horse and then decapitate the enemy once he fell to the ground and got up such as seen in the movie braveheart…”

    Oh my, are you actually citing a Hollywood film as a testament to how things were done? First off, if you know anything about the Scots, you know that Horses are worth more than Gold (…or Tin at the very least… :) and their Battle tactics invariably include getting away with anything that isn’t nailed down…

    Secondly, the two handed sword is actually a most effective tool against large masses of polearms. The billhook, halberd, and pike become the prominent tools of war from the mid 14th century through the 16th century, and the two handed swords come into their own during this period, and decline along with it. Like any sword, the 2 hander is a tool, a tool that can allow you to exert great amounts of leverage, and summarily wrestle your way through a nest of pikes, stab at the poor sots holding said pikes from a fair distance away, fairly well remove all manner of digits and hands wielding said pikes, and all in all, wreak general mayhem amongst a tightly masses group of bodies not wielding shorter, faster, or more flexible weapons.

    God help some poor shmuck getting nailed from a full roundhouse swing into him by one of these blades, but that is not the way they were really utilized. Watching a Zwiehander be wielded in the manner it is suited to is like watching some Judo practitioner armed with a Barracuda… something very grounded, involving lots of leverage, momentum, and not just a bit of sharp and nasty wherever you turn… The Claymore is a similar beast, designed to plow into the masses of the English Brown Bill.

    BTW, please no citing the ability of any of these blades to cleave the heads off of pikes. If you’ve ever held a 16 foot long piece of Ash that’s more than an inch in diameter, you’ll realize trying to get a cutting stroke against it is kind of like trying to catch fog. (There are more visually satisfying allusions, but they involve fornication with pasta, and are best left to the imagination)

    “…i have seen a few actual claymores and they aren’t 6lbs, try more like 15 or 20lbs in some cases even heavier.”

    No, what you’ve seen have either been Bearing swords, or really lousy reproductions:

    Here is a classic example:

    This blade is made of Tool Steel (A1, 5160 or O1, I can’t recall), is hand forged, and carries a lifetime guarantee by the maker. Does that make it a quality reproduction weapon? Nope, that makes it a quality SLO. This thing, at 13 pounds, in no way shape or form resembles the original weapon it attempts to mimic, and is in fact damn near unusable.

    “…they were smithed by 3 or more blacksmiths at a time because the blade was so long and they had only a limited time to hammer and shape it.”

    Ah, I see you’ve never swung a hammer either. You do realize that making a blade involves shaping about two inches at a time if you’re lucky, right?

    “…ok now we have a problem do you mean 6lb or something else beause 6lb isnt very heavy thats pretty light for a broadsword especially a claymore.

    This is going to get ugly for a bit…

    “…the 6lb sword that you held was not a actual sword it was most likely a cheap remake that some company like the Noble Collection passed off as "real" claymore”

    “…I did not say 6lb swords are cheap remakes i simply stated "the sword that you said you held was most likely a remake being that it is nearly impossible to find a real claymore and not a remake" meaning it would be more feasible that if you held a claymore it was most likely a remake…”

    “…I never once stated that light swords are dangerous and wall hangers, show me where i did say that.”

    (Umm, I think we’ve addressed what you said or not, don’t you? You get off the hook from what you said vs. what you implied, but I’d be very careful about your facts and the manner in which you present them. You strike me as an argumentative and fairly misinformed individual, and are very likely to get swatted like this again in the future).

    WTF? Ummm, hi there…
    My Atar Reiterschwert made by Jim Hrisoulas (
    at 48” weighs in at just over 2.5 pounds, is capable of reducing most other blades into a saw in mere seconds, and while not an exact museum design, is essentially true to the general designs of a 16th century hand and a half sword. What part about this makes it not real?

    BTW, before you even think about going there, I just wanted to apprise you that Dr. Jim (Yes, a PhD in Metallurgy) does have the distinction of being “the man who wrote the book on making swords:

    “…As for finding you a real sword that is made for fighting thats not too hard if you are ever near scotland go to any museum that has swords and you will eventually find a broadsword maybe even a claymore lol and museums wont let anyone touch them because chances are if they have a actual claymore then it is most likely 300 years old or more and will be locked in a case.

    Actually, most Museums are happy to allow you to handle their pieces, you may need to wear cotton gloves, and you usually need to arrange it ahead of time, but most collections are quite “handle able”

    “…Guess what they dont weigh 6lbs because 6lbs is really light for a 6 or 7 ft long sword where the blade is nearly half an inch thick, almost 2 inches wide at the base wider in some cases. as well as the handle being close to a ft long and almost 1 inch round. being that you think actual claymore is 6lb leads me to beleuve you have never seen a real claymore. Oh and good luck finding a actual batle ready fully functional claymore or broadsword beause the only way you will find one is by paying a blacksmith anywhere between 4 -$6,000 and up.

    Wow, you don’t see many blades up close, do you? Most European blades are *RARELY* over ¼” thick, and ½” is way off target.

    “…i would really love to see some info and pics on your so called battle ready sword because a actual hand made claymore made right that cant take alot and not break will cost you $3,000 and up. also if you think you have found one e-mail the company or the person who makes it ask them something like - if i was to run head on against my opponent and swung this sword would the blade or handle break? Chances are if you have found a battle ready claymore that you are interested in buying that is made by a company and not by a blacksmith or swordmaker it will most likely hurt or possibly even kill you or anyone around you. also if this so called battle ready sword is actually battle ready it will cost you more then $3,000. id advise you to physically be there and watch the sword when it is formed out of metal.

    Wow, the fear of the almighty dollar. Most bladesmiths will charge between $800-1200 for a quality forged weapon. Go check out Atar, Red Troll Forge, and others.

    ”…on this link
    in the first row of swords shown there is a picture of a two-handed sword from Venice, Italy numbered 2162. In the last sentence of the specs - "Length overall 162cm. Weight 3700gm." 162cm = 5.314961 feet (63.779527 inches.) 3700 grams = 8.157105 pounds.”

    Ummm, you do realize that this is a replica based on a Museum piece, right? That is not the weight of the original, that’s the weight of his piece. BTW, having used Fulvio’s blades for many years, let me be the first to say that while his designs are historically accurate, and his craftsmanship is durable, they are almost always about 10-15% heavier than their historical counterparts. Fulvio has a good warranty, as his wares are most often used be re-enactors that tend to abuse them, so he makes them slightly beefier than would be practical.

    “…and finally on this link -
    is a picture and description of a two handed highland sword which is 56 and a half inches long (4.708333 feet) and 12 pounds”

    Again, you are quoting the weight of the Replica, as well as you are failing to notice some of the fine print… “OVERALL: 56-1/2" - slightly bigger than its historical counterpart of 54 - 1/16".

    So, for starters it’s about 5% larger (which would shave off half a pound, more or less), and at $269.00 is a fairly safe bet that this is your typical Indian crafted crap, and therefore lacks the lightness of a well crafted blade due to it’s propensity to compensate with added material to counter it’s ****ty fabrication. They simply hammer some leaf spring into a familiar SLO shape, and pawn it off as hand forged (Warning, it’s just as likely to be poorly made my hand as it is by machine, if not more so…).

    “…I have one that weighs 12lbs which i might add is a replica of a museum piece and the museum piece was used in a battle which i spoke of on this site”

    “…ok i stated a broadsword or a claymore a claymore would be heavier then any other broadsword except for a zanbatou simply because claymores are so huge. But if you lack the skills to go to a library or even look on a search engine about the size and weight of a claymore then there is no point in you even replying to this post.”

    “…also remember scots were 6ft tall sometimes taller and 200- 250lbs almost all muscle that right there would mean they could easily weild a 6ft claymore with a 1/2 thik handle nearly and inch and a half wide and almost a 1 inch round handle which weighed 10 lbs or more.”

    ” its a good idea to have some evidence which disproves anything i have said.

    If you would prefer to talk about actual historical examples and quality of craftsmanship, we shall:
    Most of these blades average 4’ in length, and weigh between 3.3 and 4.7 pounds. While not the two handers of note that we started on, I think it’s safe to say that even if you were to double these blades en toto, they would still hardly exceed 8 pounds. Unfortunately, Claudio was unable to get the weights of the Claymores he has posted, and the German two handers are processional pieces, but they are still not the monstrosities of steel people imply.

    Here is where I will offer some data from an excellent article that Cudgel posted on another thread. From:

    Anthony Shore writes:

    “…The weight question! How much did the actual historic weapons known as the two handed great swords really weigh?

    I addressed this question to a number of European museums and armouries and, from those that responded I learned quite a bit. Robert C. Woosnam-Savage of the Royal Armouries at Leeds writes: "The fighting two-handed sword, weighed (on average) between 5-7 lbs. I give the following three examples, randomly chosen from our own collections, which I hope are adequate to make the point:

    Two-handed sword, German, c.1550 (IX.926) Weight: 7 lb 6oz.
    Two-handed sword, German, dated 1529 (IX.991) Weight: 5 lb 1oz.
    Two-handed sword, Scottish, mid 16th century, (IX.926) Weight: 5 lb 10oz.
    (I know another of this last type, in a Glasgow Museum, that weighs in at 5 lbs exactly!)."
    In an e-mail correspondence with Mr. David Edge of the Wallace Collection in London, Mr. Edge states,

    "Original weapons are indeed far lighter than most people realize? 3lbs for an 'average' late-medieval cross-hilt sword, say, and 7-8 lbs for a Landsknecht two-handed sword, to give just a couple of examples from weapons in this collection. Processional two-handed swords are usually heavier, true, but rarely more than 10 lbs. The heaviest and most enormous sword in our entire Armoury only weighs 14 lbs and was probably ceremonial."
    David Edge [Acting Head of Conservation, and Armoury Curator/Conservator]

    Henrik Andersson, an archives librarian at the Royal Armoury of Stockholm, offered a detailed categorized list of some of their collection. Below are some of the examples in the armouries collection of two-handed weapons, their weights and dimensions and approximately when they were made or commonly used. Mr. Andersson supplied this list in metric so I have included the vitals translated into U.S. Standard.

    Two-handed sword
    (Germany) Fifteenth C.
    Length: 1375 mm (54.21 inches)
    Blade: 920 mm (36.2 inches)
    Weight: 1600 gr (3.5 lbs)

    Two-handed sword
    (Germany) 1475-1525
    Length: 1382 mm (54.40 inches)
    Blade: 1055 mm (41.53 inches)
    Weight: 1550 gr (3.41 lbs)

    Two-handed sword
    (Germany ) end of Fifteenth C.
    Length: 1473 mm (58 inches)
    Blade: 1066 mm (41.97 inches)
    Weight: 2720 gr (5.99 lbs)

    Ceremonial Two-handed sword
    (Munich) 1575
    Length: 1643 mm (64.69 inches)
    Blade: 964 mm (37.95 inches)
    Weight: 3500 gr (7.72 lbs)

    Ceremonial Two-handed sword
    (Germany) end of Sixteenth C.
    Length: 1817 mm (71.53 inches)
    Blade: 1240 mm (48.81 inches)
    Weight: 3970 gr (8.75 lbs)

    (Germany) end of Sixteenth C.
    Length: 1893 mm (74.52 inches)
    Blade: 1313 mm (51.69 inches)
    Weight: 4830 gr (10.64 lbs)

    Ceremonial Two-handed sword
    (Germany) end of Sixteenth C.
    Length: 1422 mm (55.98 inches)
    Blade 1029 mm (40.51 inches)
    Weight: 2700 gr (5.95 lbs)

    Ceremonial Two-handed sword
    (Germany) c. 1600
    Length: 1275 mm (50.19 inches)
    Blade: 1000 mm (39.37 inches)
    Weight: 2330 gr (5.1 lbs)

    One-and -a-half-handed sword
    (Germany) c. 1475-1525
    Length: 1153 mm (45.39 inches)
    Blade: 932 mm (36.69 inches)
    Weight: 1320 gr (2.91 lbs)

    Two-handed sword
    (Germany) c. 1500
    Length: 1340 mm (52.75 inches)
    Blade: 955 mm (37.6 inches)
    Weight: 1390 gr (3.06 lbs)

    “…also we all know the main reason for the claymore when it was comprehended back in the highlands was to make the enemy fear the size of it hence they were made to be big.”

    Wow, you slay me…

    ”…I don’t know where you get these ideas that a smith or smiths spent anywhere from one month up to 2 years to make a sword just for it to be used as decoration.”

    No, really, I’m dying here….

    I’m not going to refute your Nodachi claims and citations, as I have no experience or expertise regarding these weapons, but as a rule, the larger a blade, the harder to wield. Looking at the designs of these weapons (Nodachi), I would not be surprised to find out if it is used in a manner like a staff. Holding it near the middle would seem to make the most sense (about where the handle ends and the blade begins), as it will probably be close to the balance point, and pushing 16 pounds from the rear would make the 16 pounds at the front pivot fairly well. Awesome tool, I’ll grant you that. My reason for so heartily jumping onto this is the blatant errors regarding the Western swords, which rarely go over 6 pounds.

    ”…Anyone who doubts whether any nodachi was used in war can take a look at a movie which Akira Kurosawa filmed in 1954 called "Seven Samurai"

    Again with the film as a Primary source, you scare me, you know that…

    …Yes i have a 12 lb claymore that i have trained with and i am rather used to it, it is 56 inches long. However if i was to actually go into combat against someone else i would not use that sword. I would choose a katana which i am more used to and i have trained with longer then any other sword that i own. The katana i would choose is a miyamoto musashi katana at 45 inches long and weighs 2lb 15 ounces.”

    A shred of sense, I’ll give you that. Please, oh please stop thinking a 12 pound sword is meant to be used in warfare. Please? See also below, as it may help mend the rift in thinking

    “…And I still think that no one would actually carry a 12 foot long sword weighing 32 pounds into battle as a weapon.”

    Here I’ll have to defer to the data and suggest that they do appear mildly prolific, but I’d suggest viewing them as a SLO. I can recognize it has a “katana-esque” shape to it, but dismiss of thinking of it like a sword, and look at it more like a polearm. Now we can all be happy… :)

    “… As i have many swords some old and some replicas (im not too into replicas because as history has proven they tend to be heavier then the actual sword the replica was modeled from was).”

    ”…To me 12lbs is nothing because i have swung the claymore i have many many times which weighs 12lbs.”

    ” the remake will always be heavier and cost less then the original sword, such as the case as we see in the Marto swords which are made out of 440 stainless steel, versus an original Japanese sword being folded…”

    Ummm, yes and no, but I want to make sure we clarify the whys….
    First, modern blades are for the most part (though certainly not always) heavier due to one simple concept, they are poorly made. They are *NOT* being used to save your life on a daily basis while walking to work, they are *NOT* being used to demark new borders in your country, they are *NOT* being used to defend the wronged, avenged the oppressed, right the wrong, or rule the world.

    They are simply made for geeks like us to feel like we’re men, in touch with our Hunter/gatherer roots, in touch with our forebears, to impress chicks, or any other number of inane reasons. Simply stated, “he who makes the prettiest, cheapest, most culturally appealing, durable enough for the average idiot to not break SLO in the highest volume wins”

    The second point is actually a gentle reminder to clear your mind when making comparisons. The reason the blades are different is not because one is made of 440 and the other is folded. You could fold 440 all you want, and it’s still a ****ty blade, and the 440 isn’t what makes it heavy, it’s the lack of a well designed and executed blade.

    Please, oh please, chant this Mantra:

    “Folded <> Better, it just means it’s folded”
    “5160 <> better, it just means I have more Carbon and Molybdenum in my steel”
    “Hand forged <> better, it just means someone could have made all the same mistakes in a much slower manner”
    “Stainless Steel = A bad choice for anything designed to hold an edge.”

    Now, there are competent smiths out there, and they certainly do earn their keep, but getting a well-made blade by a competent smith isn’t as bad as it sounds, and certainly doesn’t require you to spend thousands. Jim’s blades go for $400-$800 on the simple designs, and will creep into the thousands with the Pattern welding. Check out the list of Journeymen and Master Bladesmith’s at the American Bladesmith Society:

    “…I would advise you to read up on a subject like metallurgy, so you understand what goes into the making of a sword, the materials that are used, and how it is done.”

    As would I. More importantly, I’d advise a shred more humility in your manner, maybe some practical experience making blades, and a little more exposure to the Western Sword forms and methods before you ever come swinging into a thread like this again.

    Wow, 8 pages, but it was worth it… :)

    D. Matthew Kelty
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2004
  10. Cudgel

    Cudgel The name says it all

    No wwhile I aprreciate it when one with much greater knowledge of such things posts much better information I must ask"why resurect this beast that has been long slumbering?" The person who had the strongest opposition has not been posting here for a uite a while.
    But in any case welcome to MAP.
  11. Domenico

    Domenico Valued Member

    My apologies. A friend had pointed me to it a few days ago, and it worked it's way into my brain. After two days, the frothing had reached it's zenith and I couldn't contain myself... :)

    Besides, Hyaku demonstrated that even old threads get read now and again, and we couldn't let some dimwit's data stay unchallenged, it was a moral imperative... :)

    Thank you, and aside from the singed Epoch bits, I hope you found some good data in there... :)

    Take care,
  12. Anthony Shore

    Anthony Shore New Member

    Ahhh, perhaps I can explain...Maestro Domenico was unaware of such that the originator (s) of various comments may or may not have been still active when the need to respond came over him...much as myself would have done had I not been informed ahead of time by yourself in another incarnation.

    The good Maestro responded rightfully with plenty of very good and very useful information on the premise that this was still an active thread and that those involved were still tossing about the ideas expressed.

    Although said originators of certain comments are no longer posting, I believe that the spirit of good information and contributions to the general knowledge pool are still welcome on this subject.

    We realize that there are certain individuals who seem "impervious" to the submissions of solid, informed, verifyable data but, to those who seek such out, here it is. :cool:
  13. Domenico

    Domenico Valued Member

    Maestro? MAESTRO? Sheesh, that kind of word could go to a guy's head... :)
  14. Anthony Shore

    Anthony Shore New Member


    Hey, he's YOUR alter-ego...not mine. ;)
  15. Cudgel

    Cudgel The name says it all

    quite understandable
    And ofcourse I found good data in there.
  16. Maetel

    Maetel New Member

    Deleted sure, you can carry your 11lb sword to battlefield and make a swing at it, but your usual medieval battles european or japanese don't last only for 5 mins, it last for hours, why would any one try to lug around a 11lb dead weight that tires you out after swinging it for couple minutes. sure u can kill some one with one hit from that heavy sword but then what? get pinned down by lowly peasants with yari or shot dead by arrows because you're too tired from swinging your giant sword to get yourself away? lugging around a weapon that weights 11lb is simply ineffecient and stupid, you can easily trade in that weight for another 2 or 3 weapons for back up purposes, unless you're specialized in heavy weapons and are assigned such task to bash people with it carrying a inpractical weapon to the battlefield not only endanger yourself but also become a liability to your fellow soldiers, because then they'll have to watch your back more than concentrating on their own fightings.

    1) Please do not say things like that about other members. 2) Please do not swear, even if the profanity filter masks it - Gaskell
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2004
  17. Sqaul_Leonheart

    Sqaul_Leonheart New Member

    only read the first page of the thread so I'm not sure if anyone already told you this.the zanbatou was a real weapon used in the meiji era in japan.Only 6 people in history have mastered its techniques.

    and the sword sephiroth used in final fantasy VII was also a real weapon called a diye katana, not sure if I spelled that right but thay where real.
  18. Cudgel

    Cudgel The name says it all

    first off this thread is ancient.
    Second off read the entire thread and be educated
    Thrid of all back up your claims with books or legtimate websites containing this information.
    Fourth the spelling would be dai katana
  19. splice

    splice New Member

    Fifth, if you combine the kanji for dai/ou and tou/katana, you don't get daikatana, you get daitou, which is just another word for longsword. A normal katana is a daito. No such thing as a "dai katana", except in games and books (and the minds of people with a lot of imagination).
  20. Cudgel

    Cudgel The name says it all

    ANd wouldnt the correct term for a longer than normal sword be o-dachi? Which is differnt from no-dachi

Share This Page