Gotta say that I believe that at least half of the Katana's reputation is hype.
IMHO (and I've only owned a few, but always enjoyed tesing them on bamboo and rolled mats) Japanese swords are rather beautiful, interesting pieces of art.
But in the great scheme of weapons evolution, little more than eccentic foibles.
I'm not going to argue that the Katana's level of 'sharpness' is going to be hard to match, but as for 'combat worthiness' or pretty much any other measure, it's (for me) just a non-starter.
A good european sword is so much more fit for purpose (Why the hell did they choose a broadsword for comparison, so all but the most ill-imformed viewer would recognise it?).
But hey, lets start with the basics.
How many man-hours does it take to 'create' a good Katana?
How many 'good' broadswords could be created in the same timeframe?
Katana Vs unarmed peasant/bound POW/Criminal etc = Excellent
Katana Vs light armour (leather/fabric/thin laminated wood/V thin metal) = Medium results.
Katana Vs Medium/heavy armour = potential catestrophic damage to blade, as does any even glancing blow to solid object etc.
European sword on the other hand.......
Hack and freaking slay all day then (potentially) bang the kinks out with a lump hammer and sharpen to a good and bloody lethal ragged edge with some random smooth rock from a stream!
|