Unguard…Touché!

Before guns were created, the sword was the most common weapon used on the battlefield. Each country had its own unique style and qualities when it came to designing these swords and using them. Even though each country had its own idea on how a sword should be forged and what sorts of qualities it should have, it is clear that each continent had an overall common conception on these weapons. The swords that were created in Europe all have similarities to them, and the swords that were created in Asia have similarities to them as well. However, these two continents had vast differences in opinions when it came to these weapons.

European swords were typically meant for brute force. The swords were often crafted for doing a lot of damage by stabbing, hacking, and slashing, but the speed of the weapon was reduced drastically simply because of how heavy the swords were. Though each type of sword has its own weight, the average European sword weighed at least three pounds, but a lot of the swords weighed more than that. For example, the Claymore, a type of Scottish sword, would weigh at least 4.9 pounds. Even though that doesn’t sound like much, one has to take into consideration the duration of use, the amount of force put behind each swing and thrust, and the amount of resistance that the blade faced. Then there’s the type of edge the blade of the sword had. The most common type of blade that the European swords used were the double edged swords, however, they did use single edged swords, but these were typically the soldier’s back up weapon. Another thing that the Europeans used when creating these weapons was the cross-hilt, the two metal rods that ran perpendicular to the blade and was where the handle and blade met. The cross-hilt was meant to protect the user from injuring himself on his own sword as well as preventing the user from punching the shield of an enemy, and it was fairly long.

The design of the Asian swords is different than that of the European swords. For one thing, Asian swords were typically lighter and were created with speed and agility in mind. The blades tended to be single edged blades used more for cutting rather than stabbing. The blades were also curved, though the angle of the curve of the blade differs for each sword. For example, the Katana, a Japanese sword that was used by samurais during the Muromachi period has a slight curve to it, whereas the Shamshir, a Persian sword that was used by the Persians from the 12^th century throughout the 16^th century, has a radical curve of at least 5 degrees from tip to tip. This is a great difference from Asian swords to European swords since the Europeans used straight blades. Another difference between the two continents’ swords is the cross-hilt. As I mentioned before, the European’s cross-hilt was fairly long, but the hilt of an Asian sword is quite small, and in some cases it is a circular piece of metal that protects the warrior’s hand all the way around on the top.

Overall, the Asian sword is better simply because it is designed for speed and cutting rather than the hacking and slashing of the European sword. Also, since it is lighter, the warrior would be able to fight with it a lot longer without getting tired than the warrior who would use a European sword. Although both swords are quite different in the way they are designed, they still served the same purposes. These swords were weapons that the warriors used to defend and protect their nation and the people that lived there. They were used for the destruction of any enemies that threatened their well-being, and they were each regarded highly in the society they were created and used in.