The Cut

The cut is a very profound act. It is essentially a rending of a material using a wedge of another material and is quite interestingly an act ingrained in our very existence. We cut things practically everyday: paper, snack bags, fruit, vegetables, meats, wood, metal – the list goes on into infinitude. Every time we take a bite of food, the process is at work via our incisors. But how many of us (martial practitioners included) truly meditate upon the dynamics of the cut?

This occurred to me quite abruptly one morning when I was instructing a young boy in the proper way to exfoliate a fallen tree that it might be taken in as firewood. I explained the importance of angle and of control – and emphasized that these were to take precedence over force. Though some force is required, the proper cut needs only the minimum necessary to drive through the target material, no more and certainly no less. Often it is our underestimation of the cutting capacity of a given instrument that causes us to exert undue effort at the sacrifice of control.

Imagine a carrot, if you will. It is quite hard and proportionately brittle. A chop can easily sever it, but what about a slice? A slice will barely pass half way through a fresh carrot before the root literally begins to split apart at the site of the division on its own. A skillful chef anticipates this and therefore applies only the pressure needed to cut the carrot to that splitting point, allowing the carrot to merely snap apart of it own accord. This allows the chef to quickly cut many carrots many times without getting tired or slipping. Let us think about this. Why is a saw good for cutting wood, but not fabric? Why is an axe used to split firewood, but a machete used to cut away underbrush? How is a grosse messer able to rend flesh and bone, but not a wooden targe? These are all questions of cutting dynamics.

During my youth, it was a chore of mine on occasion to slaughter an animal for meat. This also meant that it was necessary for me to skin and quarter the animal for butchering. A heavy knife was used for flesh and bone and a lighter, more nimble blade was used for removing the skin and entrails. Both were extremely sharp and not too different in size, but in shape they varied greatly. One was a long, curved fillet knife and the other was a cleaver. Their shape determined their use as well as the techniques used in their employment. Size would add another factor to this difference in technique and would work to change the cut dynamics of each differing blade yet further.

The sword is the same in that it comes in various shapes and sizes and (excluding the edgeless thrusting weapons) are all used to cut via techniques adapted to their respective shapes. The techniques of swordplay have always been molded to suit the requirements of the given sword, not the other way around – this means that, though there may be a unifying theory linking all schools of the sword, there is no universal set of techniques that will suit any and every sword. The cutting dynamics determine the efficacy of the techniques, and the blade geometry determines the cutting dynamics. Now, since many sword types exist – one can use one’s needs to determine the weapon that should be chosen, and adopt a school of technique to suit that weapon. This is the way of sword tactics. This must be understood thoroughly before progress can be made in any school of combat arts.

For the purposes of my own pursuit of the most effective tactical use of the sword I have chosen, I would focus upon cuts that I will call the draw, the whip, and the chop. Note here the exclusion of the slash as an effective combat technique. The slash is essentially a swing of excessive force used to drive an enemy back and is equally effective with or without an edge. Any excessively forceful blow with an edged weapon could be considered a slash, and slashes have very little use from a tactical/strategic standpoint.

As I noted once in the past, the ideal weapon would be both capable of thrusts and cuts, would be relatively light in relation to its length. A grip that could accommodate one or two hands with equal ease and dexterity would be ideal as well, along with a guard that offers ample protection to the hand as well as a shape that lends itself to both eastern and western techniques. As I noted, only a few historical weapons meet this criteria – certain Katana, sabers, and obscure medieval weapons could be used as examples. This duly noted, one might ask why this hybrid weapon never saw regular use on the battlefield. The answer is actually quite simple and is written above. The defenses of the enemy determine the most effective offense. Slices defeat unarmored foes and beasts, thrusts and chops defeat light plate and mail, and blunt impact defeats heavy plate.

With cutting dynamics in mind, ancient tacticians equipped their troops with specialized weapons that would defeat the defenses of their enemies. The samurai were not big on full suits of armor, (though interestingly, they seemed to be coveted by certain of the royal class prior to the Meiji Period) so weapons that could swipe off an arm, leg, or head with little cutting resistance were favored for close combat, leaving thrusting to the yari (infantry spear).
They would have a hard time facing off against fully armored opponents with such light, curved blades, even though they be shaving sharp and differentially tempered from habaki to kissaki. The yari, on the other hand, could make quick work of plate armor once it found its way to a joint or gap. So the Europeans created very long spear-like swords that could cut when necessary, but were geometrically focused upon gouging through a heavily armored opponent. To take it even further, the Landzneckts of Germany, through many years of competition with the Swiss mercenaries, adopted weapons like the flamberge; an enormous sword used to compete with pikemen on the battlefield.
Later, as armor gave way completely to firearms, the fierce penetrating swords of that bygone ear were cast off in favor of weapons more like the katana – cavalry sabers – that could sever limbs or eviscerate unarmored foes when the gun had been discharged. As the swords changed, so did the tactics; and techniques were adapted and refined to meet the new needs of an ever-changing battlefield. Universal swords were rarely developed because the principle of “right tool for the right job” was in effect. Imagine it this way: a Swiss army knife is excellent if you need a compact tool that will help in a pinch. However, if you need to drive a lot of screws, get a screwdriver; if you need to saw a plank, get a saw. This must also be understood before one could truly hope to understand the capacity (and limitation) of the universal sword. So we reduce our terminology to the draw, whip, and the chop (with the thrust being excluded since it is not a ‘cut’).

The draw is a good cutting maneuver at close and intermediate range, and is favored by a curved edge. In the draw, one makes quick contact with the target and draws the blade across, creating a very long and potentially very deep cut. Though this cut has tremendous slicing ability, it is no good for hard materials like bones and is therefore best for close-quarters attacks to the lower torso or across the throat. The drawing cut is very effective at close range, because it uses lateral motion to effect the cut rather than impact force. In fact, the best drawing cuts generally do not require one to ‘swing’ the blade at all. The drawing cut is almost always used with the intent to kill.

The whip is the practical opposite of the draw in terms of dynamics and favors a light, straight blade. In the whip, one swipes the blade at the target, meeting it to make a light cut, then immediately returns to a defensive position. This usually creates very shallow but painful cuts and is primarily effective as a warning or a feint. Unless one happens to knick a vital artery, one should not expect to defeat an opponent with a whipping cut. It is primarily used to unsettle an opponent’s rhythm or to cause distracting injuries to more accessible portions of an opponent’s anatomy (fingers, the forehead, knees, shoulders, etc.) The whipping cut is almost never lethal, but has its use in practical application.

The chop is perhaps the most common and widely varied cut in terms of its uses and effects. It can sever limbs or shear through an opponent’s midsection; slice through an opponent from collar to groin, or cleave through a cranium. The chop has no favorite blade geometry, but his most common with straight (and often front-heavy) blades. Imagine the handling and damage-dealing capacity of a common axe: Axes can only chop – to draw or whip with an axe is practically impossible. When one uses the sword with the spirit of handling an axe, one is most assuredly chopping. The sword, however, is able to make plays upon the finish of its chops and is therefore more resolute in its chopping ability. For example, the chop can be a complete maneuver in itself, or it can be finished in a drawing cut. They can be performed to the side or even upward from below, but the most common and most powerful chops make use of gravity; this means they strike at angles which proceed toward the ground. Historical martial arts the world over have shown us that the principal technique of the long sword is the chop that flows downward. It is designed to split or to sever and is most commonly geared toward the sturdier targets – like the shoulder or the skull – which might offer considerable resistance to any cutting attempt. This as opposed to the drawing cut, which could be expected to stop at the bone in most cases.

In all of these cuts, one must also remember the tactical usage of the cut in single combat. The cut is designed to upset the mechanical systems of the opponent: to damage muscles, sever limbs, or to defeat the body’s general integrity through the letting of blood or the loosing of the contents of body cavities. This manner of sword work can be expected to severely damage or disable an opponent, but despite its grievous affects on the anatomy of the opponent, should not be depended upon for the instant kill. This is primarily because the cut in itself is easily defeated and the geometry of its performance is somewhat predictable. For the sword to be truly effective, one must also be versed in the art of the thrust. The aspiring swordsman should think carefully about this fact and the many ways in which it applies.