PDA

View Full Version : Chinese sword arts



John Lindsey
3rd December 2000, 16:16
It seems to me that the majority of Chinese sword arts have been reduced to the practice of kata and that the pragmatic use of the sword is not the focus.

We all know of various examples of Japanese sword traditions that are interested in learning to use the sword in combat. Are there any such examples in the Chinese martial art community?

Victor Woo
4th December 2000, 00:29
I am a practitioner of a modern Japanese style of swordsmanship and I don't have much contact with Chinese martial art forms. However, a couple of months ago a highly rank sifu of a Chinese martial art form was in our dojo taking a private lesson from my sensei. The Chinese master was using traditional Chinese swords to cut some test targets. He did not have much luck in cutting half size tatami omote. That must have been an eye opening experience for someone that has been doing a Chinese martial art form for several decades. I think he must be re-evaluating the efficacy of Chinese swordsmanship. However, the master is in a position to change the curriculum and bring Chinese swordsmanship back to a more combat effective martial art. I think that in the next two years we will see Chinese sword stylists compete in our Japanese swordsmanship tournaments.

Best regards,
Victor Y. Woo

INFINOO
4th December 2000, 04:51
I was training with a very skilled chinese stylest. Having studied Aiki type arts and western knife fighting for years I can say that the chinese system of sword and knife arts are very good indeed. At some point I was able to make some direct comparisons to the Aiki and western systems . The thing that impressed me the most was the insistance of realistic attacks that were well centered or over commited. I no longer train with this person but I highly recomend his tapes . Check out http://www.Rovere.com. One of his articals on striking blocks was featured in Inside Kung Fu . I took the photos in the artical even though no photo credit was given. Oh well. Any way, if you want to see the chinese military take on blade arts check out the link. I think the main problem with the west veiw on chinese blade work is all the really good stuff is practiced by the military. And since hardly anyone has access to the information the west thinks the chinese blade work is all Wusu. Which it is not. As far as cutting mats I never understood the connection to that and combat. For instance the big wind up done in many Aiki type sword arts leave a huge openning, for say a simple thrust to the throat. Its interesting that in western knife fighting a test of skill and sharpness of a blade is being able to cut a rolled up newspaper in a tube. Or cut a empty beer can in half. Or the classic one inch hemp rope. When these test cuts are done they are with a quick tight cut, with little or no wind up. As far as cutting harder material like wood . With my Bowie knife, I can spilt a three foot 2-12 spruce with one cut going with the grain. This feat is somthing I have never able to do with a katana. As far as the chinese sword the one I handled are real light and thin, and of course double edged. Not real good for chopping but perfect for how they are used. Which for what I have seen is deflecting strong blows and a quick follow up to the attackers week parts. So in conclusion lets keep everything in perspective. OO

Sheridan
4th December 2000, 05:19
You might want to actually put some time and effort into some japanese sword styles. Some are most definately brute force related (Jigen-Ryu,:eek: ), but many are incredibly subtle. And most REAL japanese swordsmanship schools have and want no relation to the word aiki. Aiki was studied in depth after swords and armor were no longer a societal concern in Japan. INFINOO, every point you've made in your post can be mirrored by a japanese stylist.

And please sign your posts with your full name, it's clearly stated in the e-budo rules. Welcome to e-budo!

:toast:

INFINOO
4th December 2000, 18:31
Thanks for the welcome. Sorry about not signing my name clearly at the end of the post , it won't happen again. . As far as studying Japenese Sword arts. Did I say that I never studied them? Because I have, big deal. I think the original point was that the chinese sword system were ineffective because theyonly cut threw half a mat or whatever. Do you know what that means. As far as the chinese blade arts not being effective. Having gone out on the floor with Rovere more than once I can assure that the chinese military blade system are the real deal. Im a little confussed about what a REAL sword school is anyway. Do you mean its real because some person in another land says its real? Do you mean its real beacuse they used there swords in combat?Or is training over a long period of time good enough. Do they have to wear the floaty pants(hakama)?.Do they have to wear both swords or is one enough? If they practice from seiza with a Katana are they discounted? Do they have to train on polished hardwood floors? Or is it that they have to originate in Japen. I think its high time we begin to think for are selves a little more . What do you think? Im only interested in what an individual can do not a system stlye or what ever.
Gregory Todd Rogalsky Director of Rogalsky Combatives International

Ruediger
4th December 2000, 18:50
Originally posted by INFINOO
Thanks for the welcome. Sorry about not signing my name clearly at the end of the post , it won't happen again. . As far as studying Japenese Sword arts. Did I say that I never studied them? <<snip>>

Gregory Todd Rogalsky Director of Rogalsky Combatives International

In your first post you wrote that you have studied "Aiki type (Sword) arts". With all due respect... Aiki-ken, if this is what you mean, has - mostly - nothing to do with Kenjutsu.

best regards

[Edited by Ruediger on 12-04-2000 at 12:52 PM]

Nathan Scott
4th December 2000, 19:07
Hi all,

I studied a little Gung Fu some time ago, and had assumed a couple of things based on the forms and weapons used:

<center>http://www.wle.com/media/W016.jpg</center>

-The Chinese (double & single) broadswords are very wide and thin, and to me were clearly designed as slashing weapons with limited penetration. In other words, flesh cutters that were not designed to impact on anything harder (like bone or armor). The forms seemed to enforce that. This sword seems to be designed with the monouchi in about the same place as a katana.

<center>http://www.wle.com/media/W021SL.jpg</center>

-The Chinese straight broadsword is relatively thin, but long, double edged and straight. The design and associated forms indicated that it's main purpose is to thrust, rather than cut. If cuts were made, it would likely be with the tip for cutting flesh.

The weapons I have are made from "combat spring steel", and while better than the quality of most Chinese MA grade weapons, I wouldn't think they could be used all that effectively for cutting wara. I always imagined that the blades would have been a bit thicker historically to negate some of the flexing.

A well made broadsword with a sharp edge swung correctly should have no problem getting through a half mat.

It's interesting to hear some of the Chinese martial artists may be testing their cutting skills now. Probably a bit over due.

<font 1>images borrowed from Wing Lam web page</font>

Regards,

INFINOO
4th December 2000, 22:34
Re Ruediger. If you think Aiki type arts having nothing to do with Kenjutsu than that is your opinion. As for my self, No sword no Aiki. However, I will concead the opposite may not be true. I was always under the Impression that Kenjutsu was the art of using the Katana sword after it was drawn. But if you want to split hairs thats okay to, just as long as there not mine. Any way, Im still waiting for someone to tell me why cutting a mat half way threw is an indication of effectivness in combat.Im not sure what type of matt that was used ,but if that cut was at your elbow , I think it would put your arm out of the fight. Maby not on the floor, but out of the fight for sure.So if two people fight with swords and someone with a little weeker cut but manages to score the first telling blow then I want to be that guy . What about you? When ever a generalization is made about an effectivness of a particualar art based on one person it kind of makes me go HMM. Its Interesting I have a book on Japenese swords and the old ones look like the ones posted (The long thin double edge one) Kind of makes you wonder where the roots of Japenese Sword fighting really are. Jumping to more modern history just for fun maby a history buff on the forum can tell us what happened when these two nations fought in war in close combat.I think this may reveal more than test cutting little mats. Bye for now . Gregory Rogalsky Director of Rogalsky Combatives International.

arioch
5th December 2000, 01:00
I agree, it is very hard to talk about effectiveness based entirely on whether you could / could not cut through a 1/2 goza (about the weight and thickness of an arm) - it completely ignores "how" the style / weapon is intended to be used.
I think all weapons have a symbiotic relationship with the "way they are intended to be used" - how the katana is used is reflected in how it is shaped and how it is shaped has everything to do with how it is used.

Look at the AK-47 vs. the M16 or the 9mm vs. the 45ACP or the european knight vs. the japanese samurai - people constantly debate which is better. However, the reality is that each has the specific "thing" they were designed for and excel at, and when used in a way they aren't intended they suffer when compared to those that where designed in that manner.

On a historical note - I've read in a couple of Turnbull's books on Japanese history, and from what I've read: the Chinese and Koreans took immense beatings by the Japanese during the invasion of korea - even when the Japanese were severely outnumbered. However, in the book Giving Up The Gun it speculates that these victories were based entirely on the strategic use of firearms and not sword.

Whoops...
Rob Lowry

Soulend
5th December 2000, 07:54
hehe..Nathan, are your weapons from the Lungchuan Forge? I have a couple of these.

Yes the original swordsmiths in Japan were most likely Chinese and Korean, as their swords were straight, and almost identical to the design of the "tai chi" swords. Few of these are extant today, but of the examples that are, they are improperly forged. This is most likely due to the age in which they were made, not neccesarily because the forging methods of the Chinese were poor.

Arioch is historically correct. In 1937, Japan and Chinese forces clashed at the Marco Polo bridge near Peking, starting the second Sino-Japanese war. By 1940, the Japanese controlled eastern China and had established a puppet regime at Nanking. By 1941, Japan had penetrated and controlled well over 1,000 miles inland from the Korean border(point of insertion- Japan had occupied Korea since 1910) to west of the Amur river bordering Mongolia. Ironically, it was Prime Minister Konoe Fumimaro that halted the advance, so as to not further escalate the possibility of war with the U.S. Of course, Tojo took over slightly afterward...

Does this validate the superiority of Japanese swords? Of course not.

There are fearsome Chinese and Japanese swordsmen(and women). There are good swords and bad swords. Be happy with your art. Don't worry whether the oak or the maple is a better tree.

hyaku
5th December 2000, 08:59
As far as cutting mats I never understood the connection to that and combat.
....................

Mr Rogalsky With the greatest respect. As no one goes around cutting up people anymore. There needs to be some way to check cutting efficiency.But I think you will find there is a little more to Japanese sword than just cutting mats.

We have a nice group in Shanghai Shihan Daigaku doing quite well with both Chinese and Japanese swords.

Its nice if you can get on without a style or a system and make it up as you go along. Best of luck to you.

PS I only wear "floaty-pants" for demonstrations.

Hyakutake Colin

INFINOO
5th December 2000, 16:21
Re hyaku: Having no way as the way . Where ever you go there you are.
Getting back to the subject at hand . I think the theme of the thread was that because a chinese style was unable to cut all the way through a mat his art is ineffective. However I think that if your going to compare cutting ability then it should be apples to apples not apples to oranges. Consider the chinese sword in question was a one handed double edge design. And without having more facts I assume the katana is a single edge design. That being said, I think its safe to say that the edge geometry is against the dagger type weapon as far as cutting goes right from the start. Bill Bagwell explains this in great detail in his book (Bowie knives, Big knives and the Best of Battle Blades) Now If the person with the katana used two hands and the person with the double edge sword only had one hand for the cut in question. Then I think this might give the Katana even more of an advantage. Of course the handle lenght of the katana makes a big difference in its cutting ability IMO the longer the handle the better up to about 14-18 inches being good for me. . Now being 6'3 and 225 pounds this may not be true for every one. And of course the type of steel, its RC hardness, type of grind(flat, hollow, saber,ect) and the keenness of the edge is another key factor in cutting ability. Not to mention the weight of the swords in question. Its also interesting that no one is comparing the thrusting ability of the edge geometrys in question. According to Fred Perin the french Military just finished some thrusting test into bullet resistant vest.The results of the test where that the tanto point , the dagger all penatrated less than the mighty Bowie with its center line point and its concaved sharpened swag. Getting back to the to the test cut in question it seems( at least to me) that the test in question proves nothing and is completly invalid as far as one persons cutting ability to cut mats better than someone else. Not to mention the effectivness of one's stlye Vs another. Gregory Rogalsky Director of Rogalsky Combatives International

[Edited by INFINOO on 12-05-2000 at 11:01 AM]

Ruediger
5th December 2000, 16:39
Originally posted by INFINOO
[
Getting back to the subject at hand . I think the theme of the thread was that because a chinese style was unable to cut all the way through a mat his art is ineffective. However [/B]

The theme of the thread was NOT that a chinese style was ineffective because..., this (- ineffective style -) was just a "statement" by Victor Y. Woo.
And for Aiki-ken / Kenjutsu... yes... my opinion :), but if you think this is to split hairs..., that's just your opinion.

best regards

INFINOO
5th December 2000, 17:08
Re Ruediger: Your right its was just a statement by Victor Y Yoo. Im sorry for lumping everyone together. Thanks for the clarification.
Gregory Rogalsky Director of Rogalsky Combatives International.

[Edited by INFINOO on 12-05-2000 at 01:00 PM]

Michael Becker
5th December 2000, 18:45
To answer the original question, yes, some traditional Chinese martial arts schools do teach the sword as a combat weapon.

In the school that I study, we are taught sabre counters to spear techniques, for example.

The historical relevance is that the spear was the main battlefield weapon of the footsoldier in China, so it would be the most likely weapon you would have to counter.

I dont think that Japanese test's of sword cutting have any relevance to Chinese arts, because technically they are different.

The single hand sabre is not going to cut through a tatami, nor is a double edged sword. They werent designed to work in the same manner as a katana.

The Chinese instructor that tried to use such weapons to cut a tatami strikes me as someone who perhaps doesnt understand how to use them correctly.

I suppose the only exposure most people get to Chinese weapons is at demo's, where the performance of a dynamic form is eye pleasing for the audience.

Just like the koryu, traditional Chinese instructors do not display their secrets in public. The performance of a solo form gives very little away, except to someone that is already an expert, ( I realise that there are numerous subleties in the two man kata of the koryu that only the trained eye could pick up. My point here is though that with a Chinese MA instructor, the ONLY thing an outsider will see is the solo form ).

The Japanese may very well have taken the sword to it's technical zenith, but how many koryu today can say that they still teach in a combat effective manner?

I recall a thread not long ago where someone made the statement that out of a group of koryu masters assembled at one time, the only one that could adequately perform a cutting test was the late Kunii Zenya, Headmaster of the Kashima Shin ryu.

I think Ellis Amdur's teacher also made the comment that some koryu are museum relic's and not practical anymore.

Across the board, it is probably safe to say that swordsmanship practiced in its original effective form is a rare art indeed.

Nathan Scott
5th December 2000, 19:27
Hi,


hehe..Nathan, are your weapons from the Lungchuan Forge? I have a couple of these.

Actually, they were apparently Sifu Chan Poi's (founder of Wah Lum Gung Fu) - though I was studying Northern Shaolin Long Fist. Don't know where they came from, but it was quite a few years ago.

In regards to Mr. Woo's statement, He is a regular contributor here and I don't believe he meant any offense.

I for one am not interested in "which art is better" type arguments.

However, the idea of test cutting was likely performed in China as well as Japan (as it was in Europe), though the materials and formalities were surely varied.

test cutting is not swordsmanship, it is simply test cutting - testing your technique to ensure that it is tuned correctly. Of course proper tactics and technique is of more importance than cutting experience in combat, but why limit yourself in cutting/thrusting potential intentionally by not testing technique?

As mentioned, the weapons and methods are different, and the test cutting should reflect this. Japanese soaked straw tatami mats were developed as a reasonable replacement for cutting people. I see no reason why a Chinese stylist could not make use of this medium to test their technique, as long as the targets and weapons were used as they were intended to be used.

With all due respect, those that claim that test cutting has no real benefit are invariably those that have not gained significant experience with test cutting. There is quite a bit of very important lessons that can be learned from testing technique.


I think Ellis Amdur's teacher also made the comment that some koryu are museum relic's and not practical anymore.

That is undoubtably true. Some koryu are in a state of "stagnant preservation" (at best), while others are very much alive and practical. Some have been largely "reconstructed" from the ryu-ha's mokuroku and makimono, which is a very sketchy thing. It is hard to generalize about this kind of thing.

Regards,




[Edited by Nathan Scott on 12-05-2000 at 01:31 PM]

Michael Becker
5th December 2000, 21:30
I am sure tatami could be used to test some techniques.
However, since the techniques with single hand held swords are for slashing or stabbing and not cutting a person in half, you could not expect the same sort of spectacular results.

To compare the two different methods on that basis is not appropriate.

I cannot speak for Chinese two handed sword methods because I have not practiced them.

Kit LeBlanc has posted elsewhere that he did see some similarity between these Japanese and Chinese sword techniques. Kit is a student of Ellis Amdur and has also studied Chinese MA in China, so he is qualified to make some comparison.

No one method is 'better', they were just designed to work under different circumstances.

INFINOO
5th December 2000, 22:51
I have a translation of Huang Po-Nien book Hsing-i Fist and Weapon Instruction first published in 1928. There is a section on two handed saber technique. From what I can tell from the text and the photo's(which are very good by the way) these methods look nothing like any Japenese methods I have seen, or studied. There is a rifle and bayonet section as well, but again completly different than the japenese methods I have seen. Having seen the Yang stlye Tai-chi sword form ,to my eye its completly differnt to. Has anyone else got the book Im refering to?. Maby they can post there opinion, as Im sure many other's here have more experience with both systems than myself.
Gregory Rogalsky Director of Rogalsky Combatives International.

[Edited by INFINOO on 12-06-2000 at 09:44 AM]

Michael Becker
6th December 2000, 04:48
Here is what Kit posted.

"The book Hiden Kenjutsu, Gokui Tojutsu, as made available thru Mugendo books, deal with the influence and cross fertilization of Chinese and Japanese swordsmanship. I don't read Japanese, but I do read enough kanji (in Chinese) to get the gist.

There is a great deal about the miao dao (grain leaf saber), a Chinese military sword which was similar to a large katana (and which I mentioned in another post on this board), and a comparison of stances and techniques using photos and drawings from classical Chinese and Japanese sources. The book seems to pretty much cover swordsmanship, though there is stuff on Chinese polearms and Japanese equivalents. There are some cool large size bokuto and katana used in some of the representations of Japanese arts.

From the perusing I have done, the majority of the book is describing a now rare MILITARY tradition of Chinese armed martial arts. We probably see vestiges of this in some of the spear forms today, the miao dao, and some of the large (2H) swords used in Ba Gua, Xing Yi, and some other arts. Those that have not turned into basically pointy bamboo or tin foil swords being whipped around by a a little 98 pound girl during her gymnastic routine, or some of the lame posturing forms found in so many schools today.

*****

I remembered that from time to time I have heard tell that the Kage-ryu, I believe (not sure if it is the LARGE sword style that Colin Hyakutake is a member of...) made it to Chinese shores and was practiced in China. I know that during Ming the Chinese were avid importers of Japanese blades. No doubt they imported some Japanese weapons skills to go along with their own (curved) sword tradition.

There is also mention of one of the Kashima Shinryu/Jikishin Kage-ryu ancestors, Ogasawara Genshinsai, who studied some in China and brought back what he had learned. Dr. Friday could no doubt give us the details which I don't have."

glad2bhere
6th December 2000, 13:33
I know this is a little off to the side of the discussion, but I also know that we humans seem to have a propensity for getting into comparitive discussions in order to define which is "best". Not having any background in the Chinese MA I have no standing to comment of their efficacy in combat. I thought I would mention, though, that there are some interesting points to be drawn from the Japanese Incursions of the later 1500-s into Korea.

Citing letters and military reports sent back to Japan by H Toyotomis' son, an officer in the venture, the attitude of the Japanese was often an underestimating of the Korean opponent. This was not a function of the Korean military, which for all intents and purposes did not exist as an organized, concerted effort. Rather, the Japanese were repeatedly surprized by the sheer tenacity of the Korean guerrilla efforts. On the other hand, the Koreans' Park and Lee in commenting on the inclusion of Japanese Forms in the MU YEI TOBO Tong JI (COMPREHENSIVE ILLUSTRATED MANUAL OF MARTIAL ARTS) indicate a very high regard for the aggressive nature of Japanese sword form as demonstrated by the battle-hardened Toyotomi warriors.

I share this b/c I think that circumstances and the individual deportment of the warriors involved are as much responsible for the efficacy of the art as the art itself.For myself I suspect that I have less to fear from a bored, distracted Ken-jitsu student regardless of style, than from an enraged street-person with a Louisville Slugger, yes? In the case of the Chinese art mentioned, I suspect that here, too, the intent and resolve of the individual is not something easily identified in either the Form or the cutting exercises.

Best Wishes,

Bruce W Sims
http://www.midwesthapkido.com

Jon Palombi
1st June 2006, 04:11
There is, in fact, a wealth of historic Chinese swordsmanship still being practiced, today. Granted, most of what we see in Kung Fu, Taiji Quan, and espcially Wushu, is not combat-effective swordsmanship. However, given the specific conditions in China, after the end of the Dynastic period, the battle-proven techniques were driven underground. Under the watchful eye of Govermental restrictions, swordsmanship became more formalized. The
real movements adapted, to suit the censure of the changing times. The martial warriors became martial artists. Lethal techniques became stylized.
I have studied sword-related martial arts traditions for 30 years. I have searched Gumdo, Iaido/Kendo, Olympic fencing, and Taiji Quan, for the essence of combat-effective swordsmanship. For the last 2 years, I have been learning Yang-style Michuan swordsmanship, with Scott Rodell. Never have I been so frustrated, and ineffective, as when I have crossed wooden swords with my teacher. I have tried everything I know, even trying-not-to try, without landing a solid cut or thrust. Granted, the better swordsman/ swordswoman always wins, but there is a substantial amount of historical technique responsable for the end result. Techniques not lost to Time and conventions. Please refer to www.video.google.com, or www.grtc.org, to see Scott's cutting demo or the application video. The proof in the pudding is in the tasting.
I am not so naive or single-minded, as to believe any one system is superior to another. We can all learn the depth of swordsmanship through studying the various traditions. Specifically, there is much to learn about genuine, historical Chinese swordsmanship.

Yours in Martial Spirit, Jon Palombi

renfield_kuroda
2nd June 2006, 06:08
I really don't want to get into a "samurai versus knights (versus Chinese warriors)" debate, but dude, please. I watched the videos. I have no idea if your teacher is good or not at his art, but I am quite certain that his technique is no better or worse than any other style of swordsmanship based on arcane techniques for a type of fighting that you cannot possibly encounter in modern times. Also, his technique assumes, as does mine, that his enemy uses a similar weapon and style.
As this is a Japanese budo forum, it may be totally unfair but I can judge him by the standards of my own art and find his technique lacking. There is a 360 degree spin leaving his back totally exposed, some of the cutting was excellent and some was sloppy (and all was on thin green bamboo)...then again I am sure my technique when judged by his standards would also be lacking; huge straight arm movements, linear motion, etc.

Regards,

r e n

hyaku
2nd June 2006, 06:27
You might want to actually put some time and effort into some japanese sword styles. Some are most definately brute force related (Jigen-Ryu,:eek: ), but many are incredibly subtle.

Having spent a short time in the Jigenryu heihosho and having been connected with them for quite a few years, I would be interested as to how you arrived at that conclusion. :)

Fred27
2nd June 2006, 13:27
Having spent a short time in the Jigenryu heihosho and having been connected with them for quite a few years, I would be interested as to how you arrived at that conclusion. :)

Not sure you will get an answer from him..he hasn't posted in 5 years :)

glad2bhere
2nd June 2006, 15:15
There is, in fact, a wealth of historic Chinese swordsmanship still being practiced, today. Granted, most of what we see in Kung Fu, Taiji Quan, and espcially Wushu, is not combat-effective swordsmanship. However, given the specific conditions in China, after the end of the Dynastic period, the battle-proven techniques were driven underground. Yours in Martial Spirit, Jon Palombi

Dear Jon:

With your kind permission I would like to add one other piece to your comment. In addition to you fine comments about Scott (Rodell) may I also say that the attitude with which one practices makes a considerable diffence in the result. In my own case, when I teach Kum-Bup, I do not pretend that I am doing some artsy activity for the purposes of developing some higher state of consciousness. Rather I am teaching the sword as a weapon. If this practice, in turn, produces some higher effect noone should be better pleased than I. In the meantime, though, I am still training people to use the sword as a weapon and not a gymnastic. I think an example of the point I am working to make would be to compare, say, the kata of the MJER with those of the Toyama Ryu. To my eye there is something particularly stark and utilitarian about the TR material when bumped up against its more artistic cousin. Certainly I am no expert in either art, so no offense is intended to practitioners of either art if I am mis-stating myself. My only point is that utility and practical necessity seem to produce practitioners with a different execution than those who train with an eye only focused on artistic expression. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Charles Mahan
2nd June 2006, 17:20
THis has got to be some kind of record. This thread was nearly 6 years old.

Kyro Lantsberger
2nd June 2006, 19:07
Greetings, I seldom post here, as the bulk of my training isnt in the Budo styles, but I share a deep devotion to the works of Donn Drager and I respect those arts and styles deeply.

Someone previously posted Scott Rodell's website, www.grtc.org, and he is probably the premier sword scholar/practicioner in Chinese arts today.

I have done almost 15 yrs of Hsing-I/Tai Chi/Bagua, and have learned some Dao and Jian forms along the way, as well as a bit of combative material, but I think Scott has approached these weapons in the most systematic and professional way of anyone.

In many Tai Chi schools which still practice Jian, the weapon has become an extension of push hands practice, using it as a tool to feel pressure and intention through the blade. Ive done some of this and enjoy the practice. The Chinese are light on theory, and heavy on tactile sensation. Ive done this training, and you do develop an idea of parries and centerline, much like how western fencing has the angles of prime, segunda, tierce, quarte, etc.

In many ways, the Chinese Sword arts mirror exactly the issues in Chinese unarmed styles in that there is massive inconsistency between schools and instructors. Even teachers of the same lineage show a great deal of variance with each other. All in all, I think the Japanese ryuha maintained a bit more consistency.

Hope this contributes. My post in one line - Check out Scott Rodell

gendzwil
2nd June 2006, 20:59
I'm with Ren. I've seen those videos before, and been duly unimpressed. Two brand new accounts pop up to revive a six year old thread and plug the website - pass that bag of salt, please.

Kyro Lantsberger
3rd June 2006, 01:28
I'm with Ren. I've seen those videos before, and been duly unimpressed. Two brand new accounts pop up to revive a six year old thread and plug the website - pass that bag of salt, please.

I GIVE MY REGARDS to your 1,000th post. I am not a student of Scott Rodell's. As a matter of fact, I would question some of his Tai Chi. In certain of his teaching methods I dont see emphasized certain principles that I would consider indicative of internal methods, although his Jian work is probably the most advanced of any mainstream teacher. I merely saw this thread, and since Mr. Rodell has published more on Chinese swordsmanship in the last 10 years than anybody else, I thought it would be a contribution to re-iterate him as a source for these methods.

I AM ON THIS FORUM primarily as a researcher and enthusiast. I am not a practitioner of Budo styles. I have devoted a good portion of my life to the internal Chinese styles, as well as crosstraining in MMA/Submission grappling. I come on here for a few reasons: to do searches for TaiKiKen, a Japanese internal system that interests me deeply due to my internal background, for Kosen Judo, as the traditional newaza is an interesting subject. I was a youth during the '80s when the "Ninja Boom" hit, and I have used this forum to find out where they all are now, and whose claims have stood up the best over time.

SWORDSMANSHIP is a deep interest of mine. In college, I checked out a book on the history of western fencing, and showed it to a Bagua master whom we had brought out for a seminar. He was highly impressed with the ink plates of the Italian Renaissance Masters, particularly Capo Ferro. It would seem that there were many similiarities in body mechanics between the Chinese schools and the Italians. Ive trained Jian and Dao within CMA, and recently found a group which practices Italian Rapier in a nearby city that I am trying to make a connection with. This refreshed interest in swordplay has brought me back here again, just to satisfy my curiousity about the Japanese sword arts, and how they fit into this puzzle.

MY CREDENTIALS include the JFK Special Warfare School, I was an Honor Graduate in PSYOP, Class 03-99. I am a decorated veteran of SFOR 8 in Bosnia - Hercegovina(2000/01)--mostly based off of Camp McGovern, as well as OIF 03 (Iraq), Camps Bucca, Adder, Bushmaster, Dogwood, and Cropper.

I APOLOGIZE(?) for my profile. My full name is Kyro Lantsberger, I accidentally typo'ed when I made this account. If you google my name, you will see that I have done some freelance writing in the areas of politics, religion, and literature. I plan to do some freelancing in martial arts publications, so my integrity and knowledge mean more to me than others, and in light of this.


I'm with Ren. I've seen those videos before, and been duly unimpressed. Two brand new accounts pop up to revive a six year old thread and plug the website - pass that bag of salt, please.

I DEMAND and expect a full, unqualified apology from Neil Gendzwill. I will not be labeled a groupie of an instructor whom I dont even personally know or train with on a thread that has had 1500+ views.

renfield_kuroda
3rd June 2006, 02:17
I DEMAND and expect a full, unqualified apology from Neil Gendzwill. I will not be labeled a groupie of an instructor whom I dont even personally know or train with on a thread that has had 1500+ views.
Demand?

Regards,

r e n

gendzwil
3rd June 2006, 03:24
Apologise for what? I'm still munching on my salt.

Kyro Lantsberger
3rd June 2006, 03:34
Mr. Gendzwil,

I took your post as an accusation of something that I was/am not. The reason that website got "plugged" was because that school was relevant to the question.

If this had been a thread about home improvement suggestions, there would be no conspiracy involved if numerous people mentioned Bob Villa.

I likewise, as a Chinese internalist do not see "those videos" as stellar performances, but as a sword enthusiast, I came across this thread, saw a question asked, and answered it.

I was offended not by your critique of the level of the material, which at this point is as irrelevant as Bob Villas, but at your insinuating that I joined this forum as a "plug" or an advertisement, and yes, you do owe me an apology for insulting me for trying to advance a discussion in which I have a background to contribute from.

DCPan
3rd June 2006, 09:17
Someone previously posted Scott Rodell's website, www.grtc.org, and he is probably the premier sword scholar/practicioner in Chinese arts today.

I don't practice the Chinese arts myself, but I don't think Scott Rodell is in the same league with these guys:

Adam Hsu:
http://www.adamhsu.com/

Yang Jwing-Ming:
http://school.ymaa.com/about/about.php

And here's a non-Chinese person to boot:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Salzman

Also, just as reference, you can see these untrained swordsmith demonstrating the cutting ability of their weapon...I don't think Mr. Rodell was doing a much better job of cutting than these guys:
http://www.zhengwutang.com/

Just my opinion....

Kyro Lantsberger
3rd June 2006, 14:31
Thanks DCPan for returning this thread to academic discussion. Adam Hsu is a masterful individual. The way he can manipulate his body at his age is truly the acme of skill. Yang Jwing Ming is also another high level individual, however, when he writes history he often mixes Chinese legend and MA folklore along with it. I mentioned Scott as a source because he has done the most writing in the last few years, and his background is the most fleshed out in terms of metallurgy, hisorical sword study, and antique/historical blade work.

The examples you mention highlight one of the issues in Chinese Martial arts, the internals in particular. Even among students of the same teacher, there is a vast difference in skill and teaching style. This is good and bad. Good, in the sense that there is diversity in the art. Bad in the sense that uniformity suffers, and oftentimes consistency. For an example, I think if arts are not grounded in combat, they are not truly living arts at all. Whenever I teach, I always emphasize the physical attributes, and applications. Others who trained with the same intstructors at the same time as I did teach in a more meditative, soft manner. I do not see this as the case in the Japanese styles, where I think the teaching is fairly well standardized.

Thanks for the serious discussion. I do still feel my integrity as a life-long martial artist and my honesty have been questioned here, but I hope I can show myself to be an articulate enough individual that Im not labeled as a troll.

gendzwil
3rd June 2006, 17:40
Kyro, I believe you're not associated with Rydell. Relax. Breathe.

Kyro Lantsberger
3rd June 2006, 18:56
Apologise for what? I'm still munching on my salt.



I'm with Ren. I've seen those videos before, and been duly unimpressed. Two brand new accounts pop up to revive a six year old thread and plug the website - pass that bag of salt, please.

Mr. Gendzwil, Scott Rodell has nothing at all to do with this at this point. I understand that I may come off strongly, but I do draw income as an instructor, and I am preparing to be published. In such a situation, I simply cannot allow my integrity to be derided in a true-name public forum.

After expressing myself without profanity, cheap shots, or the repetitive use of a disparaging slogan, you refuse to so much as excuse yourself, or even qualify yourself as should be expected in civil and scholarly discourse, as I believe is expected here, especially after your remarks. You have demonstrated the caliber of gentleman which you are, and I do not expect any more from you.

glad2bhere
3rd June 2006, 19:11
I don't know if this will help or hurt the discussion however I think a comment may be worthwhile regarding Scott Rodell and his contributions to the (Chinese ) sword community.

Having spent a bit of time over on SWORD FORUM INTERNATIONAL, having a modest understanding of Korean (Yedo) sword, and having had some interaction with Scott as well, I would think a level of appreciation is due him for his contributions. I am aware of how much garbage is currently circulating in the MA community, especially with the recent (last 10 years) surge in Asian swordwork. In contrast I find Scott's writing on the Chinese sword to be well-thought-out, insightful and informed. In like manner I have found his efforts to provide authentic weapons to dedicated practitioners through SEVEN STAR TRADING to be a refreshing alternative to the crap available on E-BAY or to be found on weapons racks at one's nearest MA supply store.

Since I am not a practioner of Chinese sword and have not had the honor of training under the masterful eye of one such as Adam Hsu, I can offer no comparison between Scott and the other gentlemen mentioned. What I can say is that one could do much worse than to spend a couple of days with Scott and getting the benefit of only a portion of what he knows. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Alex Dale
3rd June 2006, 20:35
...but I do draw income as an instructor...


Is this how it is traditionally in Chinese martial arts?


Just curious.


Regards,

DDATFUS
3rd June 2006, 20:56
In such a situation, I simply cannot allow my integrity to be derided in a true-name public forum.


Derided? It seemed to be a pretty innocent thing to me. I mean, you came on here and resurrected a thread that had been dead for what, six years now? endorsing a particular instructor. Someone said that, given the circumstances, he would take the recommendation with a grain of salt (okay, a whole bag of salt). You explained your MA background, and that was that.

I think you might be overreacting just a bit. As an observer, I would not form any sort of negative impression of your integrity after an exchange like that. The way that you choose to respond or not to respond to anything that is said here is much more likely to influence my opinion of you than any passing comment made by someone else.

You seem to be getting very offended over a really trivial thing. This is an online forum, open to both serious martial artists and annoying preteen anime otaku who try to tell everyone how awesome Musashi was when he killed all those demons (fortunately, the latter are somewhat rare). People generally take what they read here, and what is said about them, with a large grain of salt and try not to take everything entirely seriously.

Best,

Jon Palombi
4th June 2006, 05:35
My appologies to Renfield Kuroda and Neil Gendzwill, for not making my comments clear enough to be seen in the light in which they were intended. My intention was to express my enthusiasm for finding a tradition of historical/ combat-effective Chinese swordsmanship. Never, was I trying to promote an infomercial for Scott Rodell. He is devoted to traditional Chinese swordsmanship, and frankly, the finest fencer I have faced. Granted, I have spent many more years practicing Japanese, Korean, and European traditions of the sword. This puts me at a disadvantage on many levels, when responding to the variety of cuts used in Chinese fencing. However, I feel I have grown as a swordsman from these experiences. These historical techniques have been developed over thousands of years, on the battlefields of ancient China. I simply felt inclined to share my discovery.
I, too, honor and practice Iaido/Kenjutsu. My comments were never implying that one tradition was better. All knowledge is useful. All sword traditions contain the battle-tested, authentic, essence of the Way. I feel you may have misunderstood my statements. It isn't about personalities. It isn't about how flimsy a piece of green bamboo is. I can cut tatami mats with a katana. Who can't cut bamboo with a katana? When you can cut bamboo with a Chinese jian or dao, one handed, then criticize. I'm too busy practicing these methods to get bogged down in debates. As with all of the valid schools of the sword, it is in the discovery of these teachings, that we gain mutual respect. Polish your own Spirit, without losing sight of Another's right to do as, as well. We are all traveling the same direction. (Towards Honor.) Thank You, guys.

Yours in Martial Spirit, Jon Palombi

renfield_kuroda
4th June 2006, 12:02
I can cut tatami mats with a katana. Who can't cut bamboo with a katana? When you can cut bamboo with a Chinese jian or dao, one handed, then criticize.

http://flickr.com/photos/renfield/sets/72157594147479760/show/

http://flickr.com/photos/renfield/sets/72157594147475440/show/

http://flickr.com/photos/renfield/sets/669816/show/

One-handed cutting ain't all that.

Anyway no need for an apology, just keep in mind there is always someone else, something else. Better? Who knows. Different? Definitely.

Regards,

r e n

Nathan Scott
4th June 2006, 19:56
Mr. Lantsberger,

As someone who has been posting on internet forums for the past 10+ years, for better or worse, I would just offer that, if you intend to be a "public figure" (someone who has a webpage and/or posts to the internet) you'd be best served by growing a bit thicker skin. That's not to say you have to sit back and let others slander you, but if a misunderstanding comes about based on something you've written it is usually sufficient to simply subtantiate your point rather than drag a good thread off-topic with personal issues (we do have PM enabled here if you care to address someone personally). Others reading will understand the nature and resolution of such forum interactions without the need for public apologies for misunderstandings that other readers have quite likely also been thinking.

If you are a very conservative person who is extremely concerned with how you are spoken to, then the internet and such public forums are probably not for you. Although e-budo is more mature than any other MA forum I've visited, the internet is simply not a very "formal" place, and unsolicited stuff like ranks and other bio info doesn't mean much unless you've established yourself through a number of quality contributions.

FWIW,

Jon Palombi
5th June 2006, 01:28
Thank you, Renfield, for sharing your awsome cutting demos. This is great display of speed, velosity, and good form. Nice cutting tchnique!
I think we all can agree, that 1000 years ago, warriors in Japan, China, Korea, and Europe all must have practiced fencing. Obviously, cutting targets (mats, bamboo, wood, straw, even saplings) would have been part of training. I confess, my katana has thinned-out a few small trees...
I originally found this website, searching the net for sword-related information. Even though I'm 47, I'm new to computers. Since November, 2005. My excitment was brimming-over when I saw the thread on Chinese sword arts! Being a new practitioner of Chinese sword, I jumped-up to the plate, hoping to dispell the myth that there is no Chinese fencing. I have had the bruises, swollen knuckles, and raised welts to testify. Much the same as sparring with boken. I also felt the need to mention the video clip with cutting. Many Chinese stylists never fence or explore cutting with traditional Chinese arms. I just can't get enough of this stuff!
I would like to thank the all people responsible for this fine Website. I truely appreciate the chance to share my experiences. Whatever tradition we call "our own", we can all benefit from mutual respect. Which, Renfield, I have gained for you. Out of loyalty to Scott Rodell, I can only say:" if you ever meet Scott, shake his hand, ( he is a nice guy, and one hell of a fencer.) politely request a match, and watch out." I'm certain it would enrich both of you. Thanks for giving a damn, and for practicing the Way of the sword with such intense focus. It's up to us to keep the flame alive. Even as the flame keeps us alive

Yours in martial Spirit, Jon Palombi

P.S. Oh, yes, the rude guy...salt is used to purify the atmosphere. Don't you follow Sumo? Let's agree to disagree. Or, behave like men, not boys.

Kyro Lantsberger
5th June 2006, 04:20
Hey, I got caught a bit blindsided and on a bad day, good enough......

There have been some terrific posts by Palombi on this thread, and I think there is a point to discussing Chinese swords on a Japanese Sword forum. I have a good amount of experience with Jian-Chinese straight sword, (quite) a bit less with Dao(Chinese single bladed cutter). And, like Mr. Palombi, I have in the last couple years gotten deeply involved in swordsmanship, and done a small bit of training in Italian Rapier and German Longsword. With the amount of technical training, fencing, and academic study that I have done, I find the following items to be of interest, some of which I have a bit of knowledge about, others of which I seek clarification on, all of which I think some people may find interesting:

-The Japanese Sword arts are the only ones to have truly survived in a connected, robust manner into the present, all the way from forging to training. Chinese sword systems have usually been adjuncts to empty hand systems and a mere piece of larger weapons array. Certain lineages and instructors have placed more of an emphasis on blade training, but very, very few have made it a core discipline. However, even before firearms and the modern battlefield, I see very little "crossover" between not only systems, but even in weapon design and metallurgy. The Jian has a reputation of being a "Scholar's Weapon", and the Dao has a bit of a connotation of being a peasant weapon, or a common fighter/soldier's blade. This distinction can be born out in the following examples- a Jian, especially in the internal systems is manipulated in a somewhat sophisticated way, with the point, tip, true and false edges used in attacking along shifting angles and positions. The useage of the Dao is a bit more limited, its design as a weighted cutting sword dictates its function....granted, there may be someone out there who is a wizard with this weapon, but no matter how masterful one might be in this handling, a Jian will always be more nimble.

Continued to 2nd point.

Kyro Lantsberger
5th June 2006, 06:16
cont..

Even with a pair of widespread bladed weapons, neither shows much influence from, or carried to the Katana.

A point I find very interesting is the longevity of the Japanese design. Over the same years, Euro swords developed literally dozens of differing types/subtypes (see Ewart Oakeshott), many of which exist simultaneously, even in the same country. In China, the Jian goes from being a Roman Gladius type weapon, to having a narrower, longer blade, and the techniques for its use change accordingly.

There is a point which I think is shared by the Chinese swordsman and the Euros-esp. pre-Renaissance and that is it seems as though the sword was just part of the warrior's curriculum. The German manuals from the late 1400s include numerous bladed weapons, daggers, staff work, as well as wrestling and joint locking. Likewise, swordwork among the Chinese is a part of a greater whole. In my opinion, there is a shift that happens in the European styles during the dawn of the rapier where fighting with swords becomes swordfighting. The earlier rapier treatises show the offhand either holding a side weapon, or in position to bat aside the opposing point, or control the grip, pommel, or grapple/disarm the opponent. As the rapier is eclipsed by the smallsword, it seems as though the spectrum of technique narrows to the blade engagement itself.

This is a specific area where I am curious about the Japanese styles. Many Aikido/Aikijujitsu styles include swordwork, but it is my understanding that some take the swordwork to different levels than others, is their technique comparable to the kenjitsu ryuha?

Also, I think it is pretty well established that Chinese and Japanese bladework is performed differently, and the weapons are crafted in differing manner. But do we have much in the historical record about weapons used in combat? I dont want to get into a Samurai vs. X issue, but I believe that there are in existance accounts of Portugese swordsman fighting off pirates in Asia and commenting on their bladework, is anyone aware of any situations where such skirmishes may have taken place?

DDATFUS
5th June 2006, 06:50
Many Aikido/Aikijujitsu styles include swordwork, but it is my understanding that some take the swordwork to different levels than others, is their technique comparable to the kenjitsu ryuha?

This can be a contentious issue, but the experts in koryu swordwork generally seem to agree that the swordwork of Aikido (Aikiken) is designed to teach students principles of empty-hand combat rather than actually develop kenjutsu technique. If you do a google search you can pull up an old Iaido Listserve message written by Meik Skoss on the subject of Aikiken. He's about as qualified an expert as you'll find on the subject. Ellis Amdur has recently made some interesting posts over on the Aikido Journal blog, discussing some of the different sword forms in various branches of Aikido.

As far as Aikijujutsu goes, according to Pranin's books some branches of Daito Ryu practice Ono-ha Itto Ryu, a koryu kenjutsu style. I don't know anything more than that, though.



Also, I think it is pretty well established that Chinese and Japanese bladework is performed differently, and the weapons are crafted in differing manner. But do we have much in the historical record about weapons used in combat? I dont want to get into a Samurai vs. X issue, but I believe that there are in existance accounts of Portugese swordsman fighting off pirates in Asia and commenting on their bladework, is anyone aware of any situations where such skirmishes may have taken place?

On the International Hoplology Society's website, there is mention of an old Chinese work that compiled data on sword styles extant at that time. The book discusses some Japanese sword schools, including Kage Ryu. This might be a good resource for you to look into if you want to find out about historical records of Chinese/Japanese styles in combat.

Jon Palombi
4th July 2006, 05:24
Back from the seminar on Chinese Swordsmanship in Hadley, Mass, and finally able to move my fingers again. This, of course, makes it difficult to type-out a message on the internet. After an inspiring 3-day event on the practical aplications of jian and dao sword, I felt compelled to add one more comment...
Swordsmen of several traditions showed up to cross wooden blades. There were Japanese-trained kendo practitioners, European 2-handed broadsword students, Olympic-sport fencers, Kumdo students, and many traditional Yang-style Taiji Quan teachers and students. Regardless of linerage, there was a spirit of co-operation and an open-minded learning enviornment. The swordsmanship of Yang-style Michuan Taiji Quan, from my vantage-point, seemed to have just about everything you could need to defend and subjugate anything thrown-up against it. Please, understand, there was quite a bit of respect given the explossive attack of the katana. Which, in-and-of-itself, generated many unique exchanges. After a number of challenging bouts, it occured to me that the sole function of any swordsman/woman is to improvement, improvement, and improvement, ( just a little bit more). In the moment of engagement, combat-effective sword techniques flow through the movement of the cut and thrust, slice and deflection. Learning something from each fencer I bouted with, I am inspired to pursue this practice with renewed dedication. By the way, I learned a few 2 person kendo drills that made me think of you guys. There is just so much to understand about the use of the sword. Practicing kata, cutting targets, engaging in fencing bouts.
Initially, this was a responce to an old post. There were many erroneous statements. Granted, much of the Chinese tradition of genuine swordsmanship and technical-applications, are somehow absent. However, there are many secret schools and some offered to the public, that educate the student in the battle-proven techniques. After stating my opinion, I was drawn into the discussion, for which I can only say, " Gone are the days when the narrow path is the highest road. Today, and for tomarrow, we must learn from the reflectiion we see when observe ourselves in the other."

Yours in Sword Spirit, jon Plaombi