Check out Rodell Laoshi's Book- Ming Chinese Military Swordsmanship: Two-Handed Sword and Saber - Two-Handed Iron Whip - Long Handled Axe: www.amazon.com/dp/B08479KYT1/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Ming%20Chinese%20military%20swordsmanship&qid=1580067546&s=books&sr=1-1&
Manuals and period images are quite helpful, but we need to look at all the available material, including the weapons themselves. Handling old, period blades, they have damage, signs of the combat they endured, that also informs is as to how they were employed. For example, when it comes to Chinese Swords and Swordsmanship, there's no evidence, no signs of damage to the blade, that regular edge parry produces. If there's zero evidence of something, then it didn't exist.
@@mugenGRTC Based off what was seen in the video, I have some reason to question that. Another western swordsmanship video showed that edge damage on western swords was usually ground out during the repair process, which caused very small shallow, smooth and wavy divots (in the vertical and edge orientations) entirely consistent with what I see at 3:59 . Most of what's visible at that timestamp is towards the tip of the sword, which if anything indicates it was the user's opponent blocking with their edge, or meeting a solid shield rim, but there is a bit closer to the handle. Edge damage was rarely just left alone, and western swords with repaired edge damage have that same profile. I can't confidently say that it's evidence for regular edge parrying, but it gives me enough to doubt the claim that it's simply not done.
@@DarkwarriorJ, keep in mind that Rodell Laoshi has not only handled these swords, but a sample of over 3,000. Chinese Swords are a 3 plate construction where the center plate that forms the edge is of very hard, higher carbon steel. This provides for a very hard edge for cutting, but is also relatively brittle and easily damaged when meeting another Chinese sword edge on edge. Note that while there is always some incidental edge on edge contact, examining the forte of literally thousands of Antique, Chinese Swords show no evidence of the sort of damage and polishing out of regular edge on edge parrying.
@@mugenGRTC I will have to defer to the larger sample then, although I'd like to hear more about what specific details were or weren't observed. Another question - what does 'regular' mean in your context? Just to get a sense of what the expected 'frequency' would have to be to qualify here.
It would, but man would that be expensive. There are lots of failures in the quench of such long blades. If memory serves, I recall a smith telling me that about 1 on 3 of such long blades will fail in the quench.
Look up L K Chen swords - they produce some earlier (Chu) longswords (42" blade) and sabres up to the Imperial Guards' Dao (42.5" blade). These swords are not cheap but are reported (see Matt Easton on TH-cam) to be very good. All the best.
@@michaelel650 LK Chen is one of many... another good source for historically accurate Chinese Swords is The Art of Fire & Iron- fire-and-iron.weebly.com/
Great video! Having peered into this manual a bit, I do wonder what relationship its techniques have to what was truly used at the time, combat-wise. Bearing in mind of course that no manual by itself is the infallible word of what was done, as no single source can be. If I remember correctly, certain verses in its "songs" indicated the intent of passing it on and sharing it, moreso than literal military sword drills, as two handed swordsmanship even at that time was an ancient tradition essentially on life support. Specifically double-edge, that is. Long saber still seemed fairly relevant of course. It is peculiar how undamaged the edges of your antiques there are. It makes me wonder exactly who used them and in what context. Surely, even if edge deflections weren't a common practice, would not there be nicks and dings on the flat? Or edge damage from other things, such as striking hard armor or other inevitable edge contact that would ensue from the chaos of battle? If those swords were already used for traditional martial art purposes at their time, that would make sense. But for a sword that has seen war to be so pristine, it makes me wonder. I cannot speak to the greater whole of wu bei zhi since I have only looked at this chapter, but large military compendiums like that if I'm not mistaken also record tactics, weapons and other things that were prototype ideas but never actually saw widespread, if any, use. As well as what was actually done. Sort of an evolution of ideas. At least that's the impression I get from people I've talked about this stuff with. Could be wrong though. Sorry for the long comment. I just love to nerd out about this sort of thing.
Thanks for the through comment... I know that the idea of edge parrying not being a method in Chinese Sword Arts is something some question. But the no-nonsense reality is that we simply do not find any evidence of consistent edge parrying on antique Chinese Swords. I've been quite fortunate to handle over 3,000 period Chinese blades. For example, I once spent a blissful afternoon in the Vault of the State Historical Museum in Moscow handling all their Chinese weapons and more. None of these swords show the kind of edge damage seen on European blades that resulted from edge parrying. We do see some edge damage from incidental edge on edge contact on Chinese Swords. However, it is important to note that none of this damage is consistently positioned in the same area of the blades. In other terms, it appears randomly here and there in the blade. This confirms that edge parrying was not a standard method commonly employed. Given the total lack of physical evidence of edge parrying on period Chinese Swords, the only sensible, logical conclusion is that it did not occur in any fashion that could be considered orthodox. And indeed, the traditional teaching of Chinese Sword Arts is to deflect with the blade flat. Therefore, the lack of edge damage is not peculiar, but expected.
Scott, i've really been enjoying your videos. Instructive as well as giving a good historical background to things. However, i have to ask: Has anyone mentioned you look and sound like Kevin Sorbo? I say that with a smile (but not as an insult). I just occationally find myself thinking "are they related?" Peace. :)
You make a really good point that no matter HEMA guys or swordsmanships guys try to interpret manuel or understand arts from Asia, they try using POV of Europe especially German and Italian. But they kind of forgotten there's still lineage of martial arts and swordsmanship in these places. And they kind of use their own preconception to read those stuff which is a non-sense as the "context", they always mentioning are totally different.
One of things that is completely different between Chinese Sword Arts and HEMA is that the Chinese Arts didn't die. They came close, but are still here. So we aren't interpreting from old books, we're reviving the tradition.
@@a.m928 That is true of many lineages, but please take a look at the work we've been doing for 3 decades now, training that has always included full-contact swordplay with historically accurate weapons. There are also regular tournament thru the Traditional Chinese Sword League where there are no off limit targets and strikes and throws are allowed.
@@mugenGRTC I think our discussion better end here as we will end up in the classic traditional martial arts are uselss, unrealistic and impractical debate. And with respect as it's Mr. Rodell channel it's his decision for how deep is his video showing and sharing, especially nowaday people seems not to treasure such knowlodge and tradition.
@@mugenGRTC Gonna say at least those arts spread across the world and most people treasure and preserve it far better than Chinese themselves. Hong Kong, Taiwan, South East Asia, Japan and various China town in Western world. If it was not those places, those arts must have been dead.
Hello , I’m curious, did the Chinese every used any blunt weapons with shield , to break opponents armor. The full Ming coat of plates , looks impervious to sword cuts.
Yes, both single handed and two-handed blunt Iron Rods were used. And yes, you can't cut through armor. Wouldn't be any point to wearing it if you could.
Thank you very much for sharing with the community, just out of curiosity, what measurements are the wooden sword that you are using in the video? Is that wooden sword based on some historical piece?
Kind of sounds to me that the 4 general categories presented are like in reality two categories and its counters ... The striking cut methods and the blocking cuts to neutralize them ... The thrusting methods and the washing methods to neutralize them ... I believe it is logical to assume washing parrying was meant to solve thrusting attacks as that way no edge damage was incurred. Using washing parry to strikes may cause incidental unwanted edge collision, but the blocking cut would capitalize and take advantage of the opponents opening to generate a powerful strike ... On the contrary, a thrust attack is not so open nor it haves the broad trajectory that makes blocking cuts possible, yet washing seems a more natural way to deflect them ... or maybe I'm just inventing things myself? ... what do you think?
Absolutely, these 4 types of cuts can also be divided into 2 types of methodologies. Those 2 being Active and Passive, or actions where one is in the tactically superior position and can cut, and actions where the duifang is in the superior position tactically and one must neutralize before counter-cutting.
The Antique Swords are from Rodell Laoshi's personal collection. As a dealer of Antique Chinese Swords for 3 Decades he collected a few for himself (his company is Seven Stars Trading Co.). The Wooden Jian was made by Tiger's Den, but they are no longer in operation. Try Santosh Weapons in Canada.
need more. maybe the differences in usage or technique between shuangshoujian and miaodao. or between danshoujian and shuangshoujian. or maybe you can use this for taiji jian form, with some adjustment
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. This was already a long one, but a comparison between two-handed Jian and Dao could be an interesting future video. I'll forward the idea to Rodell Laoshi.
Check out Rodell Laoshi's Book- Ming Chinese Military Swordsmanship: Two-Handed Sword and Saber - Two-Handed Iron Whip - Long Handled Axe: www.amazon.com/dp/B08479KYT1/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Ming%20Chinese%20military%20swordsmanship&qid=1580067546&s=books&sr=1-1&
Thanks to everyone that helps crank out these videos!
It’s so good to talk about these issues. Many use images and manuals as “gospel” but it’s so often misunderstood. These videos are great!
Manuals and period images are quite helpful, but we need to look at all the available material, including the weapons themselves. Handling old, period blades, they have damage, signs of the combat they endured, that also informs is as to how they were employed. For example, when it comes to Chinese Swords and Swordsmanship, there's no evidence, no signs of damage to the blade, that regular edge parry produces. If there's zero evidence of something, then it didn't exist.
@@mugenGRTC Based off what was seen in the video, I have some reason to question that. Another western swordsmanship video showed that edge damage on western swords was usually ground out during the repair process, which caused very small shallow, smooth and wavy divots (in the vertical and edge orientations) entirely consistent with what I see at 3:59 . Most of what's visible at that timestamp is towards the tip of the sword, which if anything indicates it was the user's opponent blocking with their edge, or meeting a solid shield rim, but there is a bit closer to the handle. Edge damage was rarely just left alone, and western swords with repaired edge damage have that same profile. I can't confidently say that it's evidence for regular edge parrying, but it gives me enough to doubt the claim that it's simply not done.
@@DarkwarriorJ, keep in mind that Rodell Laoshi has not only handled these swords, but a sample of over 3,000.
Chinese Swords are a 3 plate construction where the center plate that forms the edge is of very hard, higher carbon steel. This provides for a very hard edge for cutting, but is also relatively brittle and easily damaged when meeting another Chinese sword edge on edge.
Note that while there is always some incidental edge on edge contact, examining the forte of literally thousands of Antique, Chinese Swords show no evidence of the sort of damage and polishing out of regular edge on edge parrying.
@@mugenGRTC I will have to defer to the larger sample then, although I'd like to hear more about what specific details were or weren't observed.
Another question - what does 'regular' mean in your context? Just to get a sense of what the expected 'frequency' would have to be to qualify here.
Nice video! That 6lb two handed jian looks massive. It would be fun to get a reproduction and do some cutting with it!
It would, but man would that be expensive. There are lots of failures in the quench of such long blades. If memory serves, I recall a smith telling me that about 1 on 3 of such long blades will fail in the quench.
Look up L K Chen swords - they produce some earlier (Chu) longswords (42" blade) and sabres up to the Imperial Guards' Dao (42.5" blade). These swords are not cheap but are reported (see Matt Easton on TH-cam) to be very good. All the best.
@@michaelel650 LK Chen is one of many... another good source for historically accurate Chinese Swords is The Art of Fire & Iron- fire-and-iron.weebly.com/
i love Chinese longswords!
Civilian verses Military Sword Arts - Q & A on Chinese Swordsmanship Series: th-cam.com/video/lAcFDUinfnA/w-d-xo.html
Great video! Having peered into this manual a bit, I do wonder what relationship its techniques have to what was truly used at the time, combat-wise. Bearing in mind of course that no manual by itself is the infallible word of what was done, as no single source can be.
If I remember correctly, certain verses in its "songs" indicated the intent of passing it on and sharing it, moreso than literal military sword drills, as two handed swordsmanship even at that time was an ancient tradition essentially on life support. Specifically double-edge, that is. Long saber still seemed fairly relevant of course.
It is peculiar how undamaged the edges of your antiques there are. It makes me wonder exactly who used them and in what context. Surely, even if edge deflections weren't a common practice, would not there be nicks and dings on the flat? Or edge damage from other things, such as striking hard armor or other inevitable edge contact that would ensue from the chaos of battle?
If those swords were already used for traditional martial art purposes at their time, that would make sense. But for a sword that has seen war to be so pristine, it makes me wonder.
I cannot speak to the greater whole of wu bei zhi since I have only looked at this chapter, but large military compendiums like that if I'm not mistaken also record tactics, weapons and other things that were prototype ideas but never actually saw widespread, if any, use. As well as what was actually done. Sort of an evolution of ideas. At least that's the impression I get from people I've talked about this stuff with. Could be wrong though.
Sorry for the long comment. I just love to nerd out about this sort of thing.
Thanks for the through comment... I know that the idea of edge parrying not being a method in Chinese Sword Arts is something some question. But the no-nonsense reality is that we simply do not find any evidence of consistent edge parrying on antique Chinese Swords. I've been quite fortunate to handle over 3,000 period Chinese blades. For example, I once spent a blissful afternoon in the Vault of the State Historical Museum in Moscow handling all their Chinese weapons and more. None of these swords show the kind of edge damage seen on European blades that resulted from edge parrying. We do see some edge damage from incidental edge on edge contact on Chinese Swords. However, it is important to note that none of this damage is consistently positioned in the same area of the blades. In other terms, it appears randomly here and there in the blade. This confirms that edge parrying was not a standard method commonly employed. Given the total lack of physical evidence of edge parrying on period Chinese Swords, the only sensible, logical conclusion is that it did not occur in any fashion that could be considered orthodox. And indeed, the traditional teaching of Chinese Sword Arts is to deflect with the blade flat. Therefore, the lack of edge damage is not peculiar, but expected.
Scott, i've really been enjoying your videos. Instructive as well as giving a good historical background to things.
However, i have to ask: Has anyone mentioned you look and sound like Kevin Sorbo? I say that with a smile (but not as an insult).
I just occationally find myself thinking "are they related?"
Peace. :)
Thanks, and yes. And also David Carradine!
You make a really good point that no matter HEMA guys or swordsmanships guys try to interpret manuel or understand arts from Asia, they try using POV of Europe especially German and Italian. But they kind of forgotten there's still lineage of martial arts and swordsmanship in these places. And they kind of use their own preconception to read those stuff which is a non-sense as the "context", they always mentioning are totally different.
One of things that is completely different between Chinese Sword Arts and HEMA is that the Chinese Arts didn't die. They came close, but are still here. So we aren't interpreting from old books, we're reviving the tradition.
But the tradition hasnt been used för so long.
Just look at Chinese kungfu etc its so unrealistic and impractical. Its been watered down
@@a.m928 That is true of many lineages, but please take a look at the work we've been doing for 3 decades now, training that has always included full-contact swordplay with historically accurate weapons.
There are also regular tournament thru the Traditional Chinese Sword League where there are no off limit targets and strikes and throws are allowed.
@@mugenGRTC I think our discussion better end here as we will end up in the classic traditional martial arts are uselss, unrealistic and impractical debate. And with respect as it's Mr. Rodell channel it's his decision for how deep is his video showing and sharing, especially nowaday people seems not to treasure such knowlodge and tradition.
@@mugenGRTC Gonna say at least those arts spread across the world and most people treasure and preserve it far better than Chinese themselves. Hong Kong, Taiwan, South East Asia, Japan and various China town in Western world. If it was not those places, those arts must have been dead.
Hello , I’m curious, did the Chinese every used any blunt weapons with shield , to break opponents armor.
The full Ming coat of plates , looks impervious to sword cuts.
Yes, both single handed and two-handed blunt Iron Rods were used. And yes, you can't cut through armor. Wouldn't be any point to wearing it if you could.
@@mugenGRTC多謝你。
Thank you very much for sharing with the community, just out of curiosity, what measurements are the wooden sword that you are using in the video?
Is that wooden sword based on some historical piece?
It has a 31" blade as that this the max length allowed in the Traditional Chinese Sword League Tournaments. Period Shuangshoujian have longer blades.
@@mugenGRTC thank You very much.
Kind of sounds to me that the 4 general categories presented are like in reality two categories and its counters ... The striking cut methods and the blocking cuts to neutralize them ... The thrusting methods and the washing methods to neutralize them ... I believe it is logical to assume washing parrying was meant to solve thrusting attacks as that way no edge damage was incurred. Using washing parry to strikes may cause incidental unwanted edge collision, but the blocking cut would capitalize and take advantage of the opponents opening to generate a powerful strike ... On the contrary, a thrust attack is not so open nor it haves the broad trajectory that makes blocking cuts possible, yet washing seems a more natural way to deflect them ... or maybe I'm just inventing things myself? ... what do you think?
Absolutely, these 4 types of cuts can also be divided into 2 types of methodologies. Those 2 being Active and Passive, or actions where one is in the tactically superior position and can cut, and actions where the duifang is in the superior position tactically and one must neutralize before counter-cutting.
Where did you get that two handed Jian from both real and wooden?
The Antique Swords are from Rodell Laoshi's personal collection. As a dealer of Antique Chinese Swords for 3 Decades he collected a few for himself (his company is Seven Stars Trading Co.). The Wooden Jian was made by Tiger's Den, but they are no longer in operation. Try Santosh Weapons in Canada.
need more. maybe the differences in usage or technique between shuangshoujian and miaodao.
or between danshoujian and shuangshoujian.
or maybe you can use this for taiji jian form, with some adjustment
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. This was already a long one, but a comparison between two-handed Jian and Dao could be an interesting future video. I'll forward the idea to Rodell Laoshi.
@@mugenGRTC looking forward to it :D
Excellent video. Two handed swordsmanship is a neglected part or Chinese Martial history
Many Thanks!