I remember an episode of Deadliest Warrior where they pitched a Ming soldier versus a French musketeer. The musketeer won basically because nothing the Ming soldier had could penetrate the steel cuirass while whatever lighter armor the Ming wore was easily penetrated.
Chinese Swords
- Thread starter ABC78
- Start date
I remember an episode of Deadliest Warrior where they pitched a Ming soldier versus a French musketeer. The musketeer won basically because nothing the Ming soldier had could penetrate the steel cuirass while whatever lighter armor the Ming wore was easily penetrated.
I remember that, but that show is kind of stupid, where the side with the better armor and stronger piercing weapon would win.
Where a guy being hit with a hand cannon and not penetrated would be knocked around and most likely clubbed in the face; nor does the cuirass protect arms and legs which could be blown off; especially most Ming hand cannons are 3 barreled and fired en rank.
It is also true that muskets cannot penetrate armor that well, but it can blow off arms and legs easily
Hi all, i would just like to contribute a bit more about swords in general.
Swords to the people who doesn't do a martial art related to swords and does not do competition cutting, will often not know this. With many katana myth believers promoting katanas as the sharpest and fastest swords in the world (or any other sword . Eg, Dao, Shamshir, Khukiri etc).
How sharp as sword is, is all dependent on its edge geometry.
View attachment 12342 View attachment 12343 View attachment 12344
(Far Left Edge is used against armor but might get stuck on soft target like human or tatami matts, the reason being its small edge, hence the edge will less likely to bend or break upon hard contact, but because its not long uninterrupted edge, it might bind onto target)
(Middle Edge is used against unarmored human targets, the blade bulges out in order to part flesh as it cuts, causing the wound to open out)
(The Right edge- is mainly used for competition and demonstration on tatami cutting, how the blade effortlessly goes through the tatami. its because the blade edge geometry is likable to a surgery scalpel, but used against human, its edge will bend and on armor will break no matter what material the sword is made from)
Swords all come down to its weight, point of balance (with the balance more to the tip emphasize on cutting. while point of balance more to the hilt emphasizes thrusting)
there are many beliefs which i believe sprouted from rpg games, where dagger users will attack faster but deal less damage, great swords attack slower but deals more damage. which is wrong.
how fast a weapon is, is dependent on the weapons weight, and the length of the lever (handle) in a push pull movement of both hands to accelerate the tip of the weapon.
Swords to the people who doesn't do a martial art related to swords and does not do competition cutting, will often not know this. With many katana myth believers promoting katanas as the sharpest and fastest swords in the world (or any other sword . Eg, Dao, Shamshir, Khukiri etc).
How sharp as sword is, is all dependent on its edge geometry.
View attachment 12342 View attachment 12343 View attachment 12344
(Far Left Edge is used against armor but might get stuck on soft target like human or tatami matts, the reason being its small edge, hence the edge will less likely to bend or break upon hard contact, but because its not long uninterrupted edge, it might bind onto target)
(Middle Edge is used against unarmored human targets, the blade bulges out in order to part flesh as it cuts, causing the wound to open out)
(The Right edge- is mainly used for competition and demonstration on tatami cutting, how the blade effortlessly goes through the tatami. its because the blade edge geometry is likable to a surgery scalpel, but used against human, its edge will bend and on armor will break no matter what material the sword is made from)
Swords all come down to its weight, point of balance (with the balance more to the tip emphasize on cutting. while point of balance more to the hilt emphasizes thrusting)
there are many beliefs which i believe sprouted from rpg games, where dagger users will attack faster but deal less damage, great swords attack slower but deals more damage. which is wrong.
how fast a weapon is, is dependent on the weapons weight, and the length of the lever (handle) in a push pull movement of both hands to accelerate the tip of the weapon.
Hi all, i would just like to contribute a bit more about swords in general.
Swords to the people who doesn't do a martial art related to swords and does not do competition cutting, will often not know this. With many katana myth believers promoting katanas as the sharpest and fastest swords in the world (or any other sword . Eg, Dao, Shamshir, Khukiri etc).
How sharp as sword is, is all dependent on its edge geometry.
in the following photos, the edge of the blade is at the top of blade's cross section
the Edge above is used against armor but might get stuck on soft target like human or tatami mats, the reason being there are two bevels in order to make the edgee, hence the edge will less likely to bend or break upon hard contact as it is a smaller bout stouter edge, but because its not long uninterrupted edge, it might bind onto target and wont cut as good on unarmored targets
The edge above is used against unarmored targets, the blade bulges out in order to part flesh as it cuts, causing the wound to open out)
The edge above is mainly used for competition and demonstration on tatami cutting, how the blade effortlessly goes through the tatami like butter and how the cut tatami might even hang there for a few secconds. its because the blade edge geometry is likable to a surgery scalpel, but used against unarmored targets, its edge will bend on bone, on armor it will break no matter what material or technique the sword is forged from)
A Sword no matter where its from, is all comparable if its material and shape is similar. its never one sword is better then another if they look and feel similar then chances are they are similar.
Swords all come down to its weight, point of balance (with the balance more to the tip emphasize on cutting. while point of balance more to the hilt emphasizes thrusting)
there are many beliefs which i believe sprouted from rpg games, where dagger users will attack faster but deal less damage, great swords attack slower but deals more damage. which is wrong.
how fast a weapon is, is dependent on the weapons weight, and the length of the lever (handle) in a push pull movement of both hands to accelerate the tip of the weapon.
i hope i've contributed to the discussion, if anything is not clear, i will try to clarify to my best effort
Swords to the people who doesn't do a martial art related to swords and does not do competition cutting, will often not know this. With many katana myth believers promoting katanas as the sharpest and fastest swords in the world (or any other sword . Eg, Dao, Shamshir, Khukiri etc).
How sharp as sword is, is all dependent on its edge geometry.
in the following photos, the edge of the blade is at the top of blade's cross section
the Edge above is used against armor but might get stuck on soft target like human or tatami mats, the reason being there are two bevels in order to make the edgee, hence the edge will less likely to bend or break upon hard contact as it is a smaller bout stouter edge, but because its not long uninterrupted edge, it might bind onto target and wont cut as good on unarmored targets
The edge above is used against unarmored targets, the blade bulges out in order to part flesh as it cuts, causing the wound to open out)
The edge above is mainly used for competition and demonstration on tatami cutting, how the blade effortlessly goes through the tatami like butter and how the cut tatami might even hang there for a few secconds. its because the blade edge geometry is likable to a surgery scalpel, but used against unarmored targets, its edge will bend on bone, on armor it will break no matter what material or technique the sword is forged from)
A Sword no matter where its from, is all comparable if its material and shape is similar. its never one sword is better then another if they look and feel similar then chances are they are similar.
Swords all come down to its weight, point of balance (with the balance more to the tip emphasize on cutting. while point of balance more to the hilt emphasizes thrusting)
there are many beliefs which i believe sprouted from rpg games, where dagger users will attack faster but deal less damage, great swords attack slower but deals more damage. which is wrong.
how fast a weapon is, is dependent on the weapons weight, and the length of the lever (handle) in a push pull movement of both hands to accelerate the tip of the weapon.
i hope i've contributed to the discussion, if anything is not clear, i will try to clarify to my best effort
wtlh
Junior Member
Also lets not forget that a large segment of "civilian" weapons came out of street performance shows and opera. Wuxia novels and Kungfu movies follows from this tradition.
Note that a large proportion of "masters" in the Boxer rebellion came out from the street performer class, and the weapons they use attribute to that.
One on one duels were on the other hand rather rare. Most fights involved gangs beating up one, or gangs fighting gangs, which would disperse once authorities arrive; just like today.
So-called "civilian masters" are never a match for competent battlefield combatants.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I don't know about that, a real master would have very good combat skills, probably well beyond what your ordinary soldier or even officer would have.
It is also important to remember that civilian martial arts and military martial arts did not develop in isolation. Rather, they developed together, and often fed into each other.
A lot of the Shaoling martial arts were developed by former soldiers, officers and generals who decided to join the temple. Similarly, lords and emperors were known to hold open tournaments, where the winner were awarded posts within the military, usually as instructors to train the troops.
I also think there are many different kinds of civilian masters. You have at the one end effective bandits and outlaws, who often fight turf wars with other similar gangs/outfits.
At the other end, you have your spritualists who partice martial arts to keep fit and probably stave off bordom, and street performers who are more like entertainers than fighters.
In between, you have various martial arts schools, who often fight honour duals with each other, and the family and decendents of famous warriors and generals etc.
Of those, the gangs/bandits and some descents of military families will probably be a lot better than your average soldier or officer in combat, since that is what they trained for and have experience in.
Your spiritualists and street performers might be technically skilled, but they did not train to kill and slaughter, but rather to win honour duals at first blood or to put on a good show. So they would make poor combat troops.
I think another main reason civilian martial arts masters might not do as well as they should on the battlefield would be down to discipline and tactics.
Good soldiers fight together as a team. A pack of dogs can bring down a tiger, so unless those civilian masters can take and follow orders and work with others as team, in combat, they will just get isolated and picked off.
In pitched battles, you also have tactics and formations that are completely unknown to your average martial arts master. One guy with a sword, no matter how skilled, isn't going to be able to do much against a shield wall, pole arms and crossbows.
As such, it would be unfair to take a civilian master and just throw him into combat. You would still need to give him basic military training, but after he graduates boot camp, he should far better than your average soldier (however, sadly, being taken from civilian life and thrown directly into combat with little or no military basic training to prepare them for what they might face probably often did happen, which would explain their poor showing).
In terms of skill set and capabilities, I would suggest that your civilian martial arts master-turned-soldier would be more like today's special forces. So I would employ them as such rather than as ridiculously over-qualified line troops.
They would make excellent body guards, assassins, and line breakers etc.
The tool has to fit the purpose, I mean, if you used special forces like SEALs, SAS, Alphas and the such like regular line troops, they would do better than your average line soldier, but they would not be operating at anywhere close to their full potential.
However, I fear we may have drifted somewhat off topic now...
might i just add onto PLAWolf
there are many types of martial arts in china, to distinguish which martial art is civilian or warfare orientated, often you just need to look at their philosophy and main weapon of choice.
plus its a good way to know how authentic the master is, as most authentic martial arts their unarmed techniques and weapons technique are very closely tied.
styles like Xing Yi Quan形意拳, it is credited to the creater, Yue Fei of Song Dynasty, a basic run down of this martial art is, Straight Forward, burst of Power with no notice, and weapon of choice is spear.
but what makes spear staple battlefield weapon but not weapons with shorter reach such as Jian, Dao used by them selves is, because spear has reach. It becomes quickly obvious, on an open battlefield what becomes a superior weapon is, ease of use and training, range and versatility, which spear and many other pole weapons fulfill. Single handed swords are often a sidearm, used by itself (without shield) against someone who is a spear (even if a master) will probably get skewered, as spears don't just aim for the chest, their main targets are actually the knee, wrist, elbow, face and neck.
Few swords that are a soldiers primary weapon would be Miao Dao, WuJian, ZhanMaDao to name a few, are used because of their length, and niche role especially for the ZhanMaDao (used by vanguard force in loose formation against approaching cavalry, they would beend low and chop the horses legs).
ZhanMaDao was very popular when appeared in Han Dynasty, as it was an effective counter to the nomad horsemen (which contrary to belief didn't just have horse archers). the ZhanMadao was adopted by the Japanese .
this is believed to be Han Dynasty ZhanMadao
this is believed to be Song Dynasty ZhanMaDao, it could also be MiaoDao, as there are to many controversies.
excuse my writing style, still new to this.
this is just what I've learned, probably not all 100% fact proof
there are many types of martial arts in china, to distinguish which martial art is civilian or warfare orientated, often you just need to look at their philosophy and main weapon of choice.
plus its a good way to know how authentic the master is, as most authentic martial arts their unarmed techniques and weapons technique are very closely tied.
styles like Xing Yi Quan形意拳, it is credited to the creater, Yue Fei of Song Dynasty, a basic run down of this martial art is, Straight Forward, burst of Power with no notice, and weapon of choice is spear.
but what makes spear staple battlefield weapon but not weapons with shorter reach such as Jian, Dao used by them selves is, because spear has reach. It becomes quickly obvious, on an open battlefield what becomes a superior weapon is, ease of use and training, range and versatility, which spear and many other pole weapons fulfill. Single handed swords are often a sidearm, used by itself (without shield) against someone who is a spear (even if a master) will probably get skewered, as spears don't just aim for the chest, their main targets are actually the knee, wrist, elbow, face and neck.
Few swords that are a soldiers primary weapon would be Miao Dao, WuJian, ZhanMaDao to name a few, are used because of their length, and niche role especially for the ZhanMaDao (used by vanguard force in loose formation against approaching cavalry, they would beend low and chop the horses legs).
ZhanMaDao was very popular when appeared in Han Dynasty, as it was an effective counter to the nomad horsemen (which contrary to belief didn't just have horse archers). the ZhanMadao was adopted by the Japanese .
this is believed to be Han Dynasty ZhanMadao
this is believed to be Song Dynasty ZhanMaDao, it could also be MiaoDao, as there are to many controversies.
excuse my writing style, still new to this.
this is just what I've learned, probably not all 100% fact proof
wtlh
Junior Member
To my knowledge (I could be wrong), Miao Dao is a modern creation. Modern being during the Republic era. It is called "Miao" because of the katana-like shape of the blade resembling a grass shoot.
Obviously Miao Dao had inspirations from Imperial era weapons, but its particular name and form is a product of the Republic.