Roman Katana

I'm still not convinced of their utility as a stabbing sword. Since it is a curved sword, a large portion of the force applied in stabbing with one wouldn't be directed into the blow.

I will point out some people mistakenly call the Tachis a Katana.
Tachis have a much more noticeable curve, making them fairly dificult to stab with.
Stab/skewering attacks are used, can't cut through Armor, just stab him in an opening right?

Although I am not sure why people only think that Legionaries stabbed. In fact, slashing attacks were also a part of the Roman repetoire. I wouldn't actually say that the length of the sword is really what matters. I don't know enough about the difference in length between the average Katana and say, a standard spatha used by later troops. The spatha didn't really change Roman tactics that much, so I don't know what a katana would do.

I don't know much about Roman swordsplay....
Spatha were between 75 cm to 1 meter.
Katanas were 60-73 Cm.

so it's a 2-27 Cm difference in blades.
 
As said they're a cavalry sword...And not magically better. Someone making a curvy sword won't automatically turn the Romans onto cavalry though.

Katanas and stabbing- yeah, you can do it (seppuku?) but its not as good as with a straight sword. Especially a dedicated stabbing sword
Katanas were not used in seppuku except by whoever is there to assist in the seppuku and behead the person committing suicide, who usually used a tanto (a small dagger) to do the deed.

I'm going to chime in and agree with pretty much every one up to now: the katana would not have been a useful weapon for the Romans, because a good quality one took a long time to produce (although they could be mass produced), and the gladius was better for infantry fighting in block anyway I think.
 
Katanas were not used in seppuku except by whoever is there to assist in the seppuku and behead the person committing suicide, who usually used a tanto (a small dagger) to do the deed.
Technically yes but not the point.
1: Though it wasn't a katana the smaller Japanese blades still tended to be curved.
2: In WW2 for instance many would be forced to use larger swords due to that being all they have to hand. They still managed to stab themselves.
 
Personally, if I were to re-arm the Roman Army, I would give them the Han Dynasty style jian; call it the gumum. The gumum minorum would be the perfect size to swing crowded in the front row with a shield, yet still effective with two hands if need be if the shield is somehow lost, while the gumum majorum would be used in the second and third ranks, and by cavalry and officers, due to its longer reach while still being light enough to swing one handed.

Course, I would also have them use spearthrowers with the pilum to put some mustard on their flight, and equip their cavalry with stirrups and either Korean-style recurve or hinge-type compound bows.
 
Personally, if I were to re-arm the Roman Army, I would give them the Han Dynasty style jian; call it the gumum. The gumum minorum would be the perfect size to swing crowded in the front row with a shield, yet still effective with two hands if need be if the shield is somehow lost, while the gumum majorum would be used in the second and third ranks, and by cavalry and officers, due to its longer reach while still being light enough to swing one handed.

Course, I would also have them use spearthrowers with the pilum to put some mustard on their flight, and equip their cavalry with stirrups and either Korean-style recurve or hinge-type compound bows.

Why precisely was this necro necessary?
 
Top