![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 685
|
![]()
1. Ariel,
Quote:
2. GT Obach, Thanks for that link on brittle failure - Made for good reading. Here is another one: http://www.sv.vt.edu/classes/MSE2094...w/ballard.html 3. There are many other relevant topics that are a bit difficult to adequately cover in a setting like this. For example: The origination of micro cracking, crack propagation and arresting, residual stresses and their role in assisting or inhibiting crack propagation, notch sensitivity of steels and so on. 4. As to the perennial and recurring question as whether these swords were better or inferior to their Western European counterparts, that entirely depends on how they were deployed and the theatre of war. For one, the Mongol hordes did not use very high quality weapons, yet they were remarkably successful. 5. As an aside, for those interested in Japanese swords and their style of fencing, as assessed from the European perspective, there is wonderful little book written by F.J Norman and titled The Fighting Man of Japan. Norman was a Brit cavalry man who taught the Japanese in the 1870s and was probably the first Englishman to seriously study their style of swordsmanship. He made a number of very interesting and astute observations re the merits of the two styles. He opined that whilst a top class Euro duelist could perhaps beat a Japanese in a one to one contest on favourable ground, on the battlefield he felt that the Euro sword of his times was too cumbersome for unmounted use. He also observed that notwithstanding its shorter blade, the Japanese sword did not lack reach because of its longer handle. He was sufficiently level headed to acknowledge that whilst he considered the Japanese sword and its wielding very good, nevertheless both could have been improved. Cheers Chris Last edited by Chris Evans; 20th October 2006 at 09:17 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|