Thread:Kazanshin/@comment-35617681-20190410143410/@comment-27358240-20190413155209

First of all, thank you for putting so much faith into my knowledge to the point where you trust me to answer your questions. Fell free to ask any questions related to Japanese warfare, I'll do my best to answer them.

1: The uchigatana wasn't typically a horseback sword. The main sword used by a samurai on horseback was the tachi, while the uchigatana was made almost strictly for Kachi-ikusa (foot war). However, if push comes to chove, I don't think it would do much worse than the tachi considering its similar build and length. While it's difficult to find direct sources about how powerful the two swords are specifically on horseback, we know that in tems of sheer sharpness the very best katanas know as Meitou "named swords" can be extremely sharp and deadly, such as the Douji Giri "Child Cutter", which is recorded to have cut through the body of six criminals. Obviously, not all uchigatanas are of this quality, and most wouldn't be even close to this level. I apologize for not being capable of giving a solid, concrete answer, but my guess is that it would be similar in power to cavalry sabers from other countries, such as napoleonic ones, turko-mongol ones and such. As for the dual wielding alongside the wakizashi shortsword, it was done but only by very few an very skilled swordsmen, notably Miyamoto Musashi.

2: This is a much easier question to answer. This is because untl Toyotomi Hideyoshi attempted his invasion of Korea, the de facto government of Japan, the Ashikaga Shogunate, didn't have any real intentions to invade Korea, and relations were actually quite amiable. The Shogunate and the Joseon Kingdom sent representatives and gifts to each other and were overall pretty friendly both between each-other and with Ming China. After that, if you want to know why the invasion of Korea by Toyotomi Hideyoshi, aka. the Imjin/Bunroku war failed, that was largely due to the naval superiority of Korea, which lead to the incapability to supply the Japanese forces correctly, and the intervention of Ming China which could field far more numerous and better quality land forces than those of Joseon Korea.

3: If we are to take in account historical records, yes it can. The Yumi as it's known, or the Wakyu as we call it in Japanese, is unfortunately very underestimated and underrated on forums and wikkis such as this one, mainly because of estimations made with modern Kyudo bows and a comment made by Miyamoto Musashi. Truth is, the Wakyu likely had penetrating power just as strong, if not stronger, than say the English longbow. The main reason why thinking the Yumi had no armor piercing power is ludicrous is that it was employed as the main weapon of an army that was mainly consisting of elite heavy cavalry armored in heavy lamellar armor. Oyoroi lamellar of the Kamakura era was extremely strong, with steel lamellae overlapping and lacquered together to form a solid cuirass, effectively forming an armor similar to plate armor. We have several accounts of arrows penetrating through Oyoroi with one even stating that a powerful bow could penetrate through two armors at once (Oyoroi+haramaki) and I doubt plate armor was overwhelmingly superior to a combination of Oyoroi and haramaki armor. So, from a short distance (up to 40m), fired by a strong archer, a powerful Wakyu such as a Gonin Bari (five-man bow) could very likely penetrate plate armor to a certain extent.

Sorry for this overly long answer, I hope it's not too much of a pain to read. Anyways, I'm happy that we now have members from all of the three big boys of Eastern Asia (China, Japan and Korea). I'll be looking forward to your activity on this wiki.