This makes sense because it looks like, in every case, the German with the heavier sword is holding it in a way that requires less muscle exertion.
Edit: Or a position which better spreads out the exertion because there is more of it.
There's barely any difference in weight. Also, even the huge "zweihanders", claymores and such weren't that heavy. Like 2kgs max. People make a big deal out of the weight, despite the fact that you were expected to be slashing the air with it for a very long time - standing in a doorway for instance. What the difference is - is the existence of the crossguard. German / italian longsword uses them extensively. Katanas almost don't have it.
The interesting thing is polearms though. Japanese naginata masters adore the halberd for instance. You can use most of the techniques you already know, plus the added utility of hooking someone's leg, and the spike at the end.
Iirc the weight is less important than the distribution, longer swords are more front heavy so it can help to have leverage.
I think most of the differences are to either take advantage (make it cover more incoming strikes) or accommodate (keep it from poking you in the head) the cross guard.
It'd be interesting to watch a sparring match between Masters of these two different culture swordfighting styles.
it'd be hard to realistically compare them because both styles were designed due to different circumstances. Western sword styles were designed to combat heavily armored units, so they tend to favor power, while due to the lack and poor quality of japanese steel/armor, japanese sword styles favored quick strikes as targets were more often than not, lightly armored, so it's a question that if you willingly chose to put the fighting styles against each other, whether or not the competition is lightly armored or heavy armored basically affect whose more likely to win the match.
Western styles weren't meant to combat heavily armored units. You aren't getting through heavy armor with a sword. Unless you use it as a mace (mordhau) or use it as a dagger by half-swording(grabbing the middle of your blade to act more like a dagger) and getting through the squishy bits. At which point, why not use an actual dagger. Also, there are loads of manuals talking about fighting unarmored opponents while you are also not wearing armour.
No idea if they're masters https://youtu.be/vcaO-NBEvtM?si=vysLbioC7s9okm2_
Fun rabbithole to visit
Next best thing is a kendo master trying various western weapons. One episode on Youtube he tried a longsword for the first time.
Surprisingly little ego and no bias (beyond personal bias from years using a single type of sword).
If that sounds interesting to you, then you would probably love the old TV show called Deadliest Warrior.
Form follows function.
It’s interesting because Star Wars saber battles were very clearly inspired by Samurai duels, yet if you asked me which one looks like a Jedi holding a lightsaber I would point to all the pictures of the European swordsman.
Inspired doesn't mean much. "Jedi" fighting is useless and made to look cool in extended duels. No actual techniques from historical martial arts are being used
THEY'RE THE SAME THING
Might be because the fights choreographer for the original Star wars films was an Olympic Fencer so from a western tradition
I've done a bit of fight choreo with the German style, it's very fun and surprisingly versatile compared to the standard Italian.
Depends on what you mean by standard italian. Most people study Fiore, with his flower of battle book. And it's anything but "standard", it's full of tricks and "dirty" plays. Like Liechtenauer / Meyer would be the "default", and Fiore being the "krav maga" version.
German school of fencing has a bunch "master strokes", like the zverchhau, krumphau etc. But italian has all of that and so much more
Uh oh. Two of these guys looking the wrong way.
Coincidence? I think not
Whats that, sonny? Pasta Sieve?
