Swords

Roman sword or Japanese sword, which was stronger?

Question by Hræsvelgr: Roman sword or Japanese sword, which was stronger?
Say, between the most finely crafted roman and japanese swords, which were the most powerful
And Damascus Swords?

Best answer:

Answer by Gakupo
From what i have observed, the Japanese swords are far superior to roman swords.

What do you think? Answer below!

Related posts

3 Thoughts to “Roman sword or Japanese sword, which was stronger?”

  1. Skitzweasel

    Roman swords were much heavier and could deliver more force but Japanese swords were made from folded steel so were very strong and much sharper.

  2. jpizzle

    The Kitana (Samurai sword) is one of the finest weapons humankind has ever produced.

    If you are talking about one to one combat, the Kitana wins. The Roman sword was short. It was used for fighting in a formation. The Romans fought closely grouped with a large shield protecting the ranks. They used the short sword to stab from behind the shield.

    The Kitana was developed for man to man combat.

  3. Alex

    In a one-on-one duel, a guy with a katana (Japanese samurai sword) would easily kill a guy with a gladius (Roman infantry sword) simply due to the fact that a katana is much longer. A katana is also much sharper and much better for chopping off heads, arms, etc. A gladius is better for stabbing and thrusting. As for which is “stronger,” a gladius is shorter and much thicker, so it would probably take more force to break a gladius than a katana. But katanas can bend pretty far without breaking, so if you are talking about which would break first in a clash of swords, I really don’t know.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.