Hello. What are the sames and differences between the Chinese and European swords?

er....... which age are you talking about ?

Huangshoudao vs Spatha ?
Changdao vs Crusader sword ?
Zhanmadao vs Claymore ?
Wenjian vs Rapier ?
Yaodao vs Saber ?

Both categories 'Chinese' and 'European' cover thousands of types of sword.

The only real difference that I can think of is that Chinese weapons never developed the complex hilts and guards that appeared in Europe in the late 16th C.

I beg to differ

I think it depends on what you mean by 'complex'.

If you are talking about just the object, then you statement can hold true. But in terms of uses, I can't say I agree

The jian guards we see today contains a vast number of possible grips that assists the use of the sword. On the other hand, European swords such as the rapier, while elegently designed, contains only one to two methods of grip which greatly limiting the techniques that could be used.

Yet Chinese swordplay never develop methods a actaully attacking with the guard itself of which have existed since the middle ages in the west

The fancy guards is the only thing that really stands out as differences. Different techniques of forging would also each take up their own thread (and we've had treads about those around...)

on attacking with the guard though... you sure? It just seems intuitive 'hit the guy with the solid bit if you can'


I also don't think Europeans ever used 1:1 blade:grip ratio blades, but Chinese did.

Both Chinese and European swordplay does have the technique of attacking with the pommel, but Chinese never developed the guard attack. My guess is that the shape of the guards in China just doesn't seem convinient to do something like that.

What do you mean by the "1:1 blade:grip ratio blades" ? You mean like the modern zhanmadao type ?

when you say hitting with the guard do you mean hitting with the point of the guard? That would explain why this one european sword I saw had pointy guard. And about chinese doen't hit with the guard, what about those ancient bronze swords with spikes around the guard?

No what he ment was that rapiers, foils, some claymores and others had a guard that protectet the whole of the hand, and you could also use it up close and personal as a brassknuckle, instead of trying to stab or sliceClick to view attachmentClick to view attachment

Actually, I ment both

This Cardinal believes it does not matter whether the sword is location-centric.

It's [the weight & the structure of the implement ] and [the well-being of the implement player] that determines the sword techniques that one learns with it.

/// Well-being means the totality of one's physical, mental and spiritual state.

Where the terrain, the climate and the quality of the opposition determines the strategy of how the implement'll be used.

Weapons are weapons.

All about preferences and situations.

A good place to start is the way they had changed from the ancient weapons to the high ones. Western swords went from the short dagger of the Greeks, to the short stabbing sword of the Romans (later replaced by the gladius), and then to a longer weapon similar to what barbarians carried. Then in the middle ages, swords became lighter, requiring the user to be more deft. The sword then became less important because of steel armor.

Ancient Chinese swords were long and light to begin with, and developed from there. I don't know if they were for stabbing to begin with, but the later ones look better for cutting with the weight behind them.

Aside from the issue of simple hilts vs. complex guards, the main basic difference between Chinese swords and European ones would be that the former are differentially heat-treated (hard edge & soft body), whereas the latter (at least the homogenous steel ones produced from 10th century onwards) are usually given a stiff "spring" temper throughout the entire blade.

There are pros and cons to each design.