What are the main advantages and disadvantages of the three main shapes of sword and knife blades?

Straight Blades: such as a European Broadsword, Rapier, etc.

Forward-Curved Blades: such as the Turkish Yataghan, Nepalese Kukri, etc.

Backward-Curved Blades: such as the Indian Tulwar, Persian Shamshir, etc.

Well one HUGE advantage I can think of with straight bladed european designs is versatility. Thrusts and cuts were both easy to utilize, but the main aspect was the ffact that the back edge could be used as well. Foreward and backward curving blades generally could not do the types of cuts availible to a straight, double edged sword.

Some advantages with backward curving blades (and my also apply to forward curving ones as well) is that that naturally give a slicing motion because only one point of the blade touches the target while the rest has to perform a draw cut. Arguably a more effective slicer, but I haven't noticed much difference. Maybe someone with more experience could shed light on this?

If you had to thrust, a curved blade (like a scimitar) may prove to be a disadvantage, though don't quote me on that. Anyone with experience on curved blades care to elaborate?

One advantage to some straight blades (emphasis on some) is the option of half-swording: grasping the blade with one hand for a more powerful and controlled thrust and/or for close-quarters combat (i.e. your opponent is right in your face). I think Grayson touched on a good point (pun intended! :p ) about versatility. Straight blade designs can vary considerably in profile taper depending on the typical tactics and defenses of the given period. Certainly a straight blade would be optimal for thrusting just like the world's most efficient thruster: the rapier.

By contrast, some of the world's most legendary swords are curve-bladed. Here, the Japanese katana certainly is among the first to come to mind. :idea:

In Spada, in the part on the hungarian curved sword, it seems that using the curviture to do a hooking stab was used.

Curved swords could thrust. Most rhusting motions are actually curved, anyway, and you only need to suit the motion to how deep the curve is. What really matters in terms of thrusting capability is not really the curve of the blade, but its stiffness and the design of its point.

Replying to the original post, I don't think there's really an easy way to establish the comparative advantages and disadvantages of blade types. Straight blades are usually better at chopping cuts, curved ones at slicing cuts, and forward/reflex/whatever-curved ones like the kukri tend to be monster chopper. But, on one side, there's the fact that all cuts combine chopping and slicing motions, and on the other there are obviously straight swords that are no good at cutting at all, such as certain kinds of nearly edgeless smallswords.

We can have a more fruitful comparison by examining two specific blades rather than over-generalizing about the properties of blade types.

Hi!
I was just thinking that you don't have to draw a cut for the slicing motion, thus shortening yourself. If the the point is a bit late in the motion, the sword makes contact like a guillotine does, which is a quite effective cutter as we know. A curved blade like a sabre has an evil advantage in doubling :)
Regards!

I'm under the impression that in several cultures, the curved and straight swords enjoy different reputation. The straight (generally double-edged) sword being seen as more 'noble' in a way, more technical in its handling, and the curved sword being seen as an overgrown cutting tool, more popular among common soldiers.

I have a book about chinese weapons where the author says just that. Relatively simpler, more straightforward techniques with the dao (curved saber), and very refined techniques with the jian (straight sword). But it seems to me that in Europe it was partly the case as well: nobility favouring straight blades, and curved weapons more common among soldiers. Most of the symbolic of the sword was attached to the straight forms as well.

And it remains somewhat true today: what do we see in the hand of the Orks in the Lord of the Ring ? Some sort of falchions, hooked blades, etc. While the all the heroes of course use straight swords.

There are some curved blades, in this regard, that are still seen as straight ones are. I'd say they are straight swords that became slightly curved: for example the katana, and some cavalry sabers. In fact, the katana is designed both as ken (the kanji is close to the chinese for jian) and as to (whose ideogram is the same as that of dao in chinese) as far as I know.

I'm pretty sure my view could be overwhelmed with counter examples from various parts of the world, but since it is coherent with what I know about the handling... I'd like to hear the members' point of view about that.

Note that it is also coherent with what has been said in this thread: the advantage of the curved blades is being extremely good at what it is obviously made to do. The advantages of straight blades are more hidden, technical uses not necessarily obvious at the first sight.

I'd like to point out that both weapons cited as forward curved have in fact a double curve: forward at the base, then backward near the tip. Since most hits are delivered with the portion close to the tip, you could consider, from the point of view of the blade, that is is backward curved. The difference may lie in the balance, they seem to be build to be blade heavy. Difficult to judge without handling one...

There is one more thing I'd like to add:

Jeroen Zuiderwijk wrote:

Due to the curvature of the edge, the force is distributed over a shorter length of edge, resulting in a deeper penetration.

This does not ring true to me. Most targets on a human have a curvature far higher than the typical curved blade. Even if you find flat parts, you have sharp angles between those, and you will hit the angle instead of the side. This is readily apparent when you attack cardboard boxes with a sword ;)

Regards...

Backward-curved swords are easier to cut with at close range. Due to the curve, you need less space "to pull the sword around your body."
With a deeply curved sword, like some sashmirs, you could stand toe to toe with the foe, and still deliver an effective drawcut.

While straight swords fencing involves a lot of movement, angles, and techniques with the point, curved swords are better suited to straight to bind, grapple and slice.
Early Sashmirs where cavalry weapons; riders fighting each other with swords have litte posibility for tactical movement or large blows, so a drawcuting sword might be preferable, at least in a context where armour is scarce.

There is also the issue of having a thicker back edge with the curved sword (and on backswords as well) which reinforces the cutting edge with extra weight in the cut. A 2-edged sword does not have this robust feature, since both edges must be thin and sharp. I don't know how this effects cutting ability overall, it might be a minor difference in two-handed style of weapons (like the longsword and katana), but most likely makes a bigger difference in single-hand swords. Because of the mechanical advantage when using two hands to cut with, some of these performance differences will start to become much less pronounced when talking about two handed use. Comparing the cutting ability of a longsword and katana, for instance, there will be much less difference in the ultimate performance as there would be comparing a Jian and Dao in the same test.

Another thing to think about when speaking of handling and use, the cruciform sword is unique because it is entirely symmetrical and can be used as such, making ample use of both edges and point from various angles. Curved swords, like the saber, katana, shamshir, etc... seem to be oriented at making strong cuts with some thrusting ability, but of course there isn't a false edge (on some sabers, falchions, etc... there is a short false edge at the tip) to use on the other side. While the curved sword can thrust, and do plenty of damage in that thrust, there are certain angles and thrusting options that aren't really as useful with them. The thrust is not nearly as accurate with a curved sword as well, due to the curve. Of course there is also the "curved" thrust, giving the curved sword the ability to thrust "around" another sword, a very useful tactic.

What would be the ideal blade shape/type for a sword to have both a versatile (equal) cutting and thrusting ability? :\

Any examples of an almost perfect sword used for both cutting and thrusting? :confused:

Small point. With some forward curved blades (e.g. falcata, shallow curve kukri etc.) the angle between handle and tip gives a very natural 'pointing' position (rather similar to what is said about the handle on a Luger ) so that they can be good thrusters (particularly to face and throat) as well as choppers.
Geoff

Interesting thread! While agreeing with all the caveats pointed out by others, I'll "take a stab" at making some gross generalizations here.

Justin Pasternak wrote:

What are the main advantages and disadvantages of the three main shapes of sword and knife blades? Straight Blades: such as a European Broadsword, Rapier, etc.

Early European "broadswords" such as the Viking type swords, the German Migration -era swords, the Roman Spatha and Celtic 'long' sword, were (in most cases) primarily cutting weapons always meant to be used with a shield if possible. I would also put a rapier in something of a category of it's own - a specialized civilian thrusting weapon. But a European longsword or later era arming sword or cut-thrust-sword has the following advantages:

Seem to be equally effective as cavalry or infantry weapons

1) Extremely versatile
2) Generally greater reach for the same length blade.
3) False edges (people who haven't done or at least seen real Historical European fencing simply cannot grasp how important and lethally effective the false edge cut is)
4) Enhanced precision in the thrust
5) Half-Sword ability, which at the basic level enhances thrusting and close-in grappling ability, at more advanced levels allows for brutally effective disarms and deadly counters

Also:
Often more substantial cross-guards / hand protection. Usually a closer to the hilt balance point making for greater agility

Quote:

Forward-Curved Blades: such as the Turkish Yataghan, Nepalese Kukri, etc.

FYI, apparently invented by the Greeks or Spanish, then brought to India and Central Asia by Alexander

These are usually relatively short.

1) Are usually infantry weapons (at least the earlier varities seemed to be)
2) They seem to have greatly enhanced chopping ability (physics are somewhat like a hand-axe)
3) Good at close range

Not particularly good at displacement / parrying (arguably) Historically they were usually used with shields.

Quote:

Backward-Curved Blades: such as the Indian Tulwar, Persian Shamshir, etc.

Usually cavalry weapons

1) Enhanced draw-cut (arguably)
2) Better weapon retention when cutting from horseback
3) Single handed versions often feature canted grips to further enhance weapon retention
4) Arguably better at cutting at closer ranges

Don't seem to be as good for displacement (arguably)

Frankly I think the ideal cut-and-thrust weapon is something like an Oakeshott XVIa like the Brescia Spadona
[ Linked Image ]
I admit this is really little more than a personal hunch :)

J

The very hetrogenity of sword design is proof that there is no "ultimate design". If there where, all swords would look the same.
In the end, the sword is a tool, and the skill/attitude/dumb luck of the wielder is more important to the outcome of a fight than the properties of their blades.

A nice post that covers a few points that I would have made, there are specialized swords that have been made; however, it would seem that many versatile swords have been made that fit the role of a sturdy, all around tool. Some would pick a long-sword designed to be capable at both the cut and the thrust, or perhaps a good side-sword. Personally, I would prefer a Swiss Sabre. It would seem that it's slight curvature would make it well balanced between cutting and thrusting and the long, fully sharpened clip that appears to be common on many examples would have made it capable of the angles of attack utilized by long-swords.