So basically it's a manual on Japanese sword techniques. The fact that the Chinese wrote the manual doesn't make it Chinese.
Hi 19thlohan, if we do this, it's gonna take a looooong time. There are also Japanese styles, which if you investigate, have their roots in Chinese style. I prefer to focus my attention and energy on good training. Regards, Jack Chen
Actually, as I am writing this I have OTAKE opened on the desk in front of me. Why do you ask? Is there something about TKSR I should know that somehow justifies whats being represented here? Best Wishes, Bruce
Past experience with wild claims of historical connections in the misty pass usually signal that a given resource has run out of wiggleroom. In the KMA, for instance, discussions about historical connections peter-out rapidly the minute a claimant is presented with clear and pointed questions about biomechanics and applications. I sense the same thing happening here. Prior to General Qi's campaigns against the WA-KO there are no references to a two-handed sabre as one of the MING fighting systems. If you have some resource, say, the Veritable Record of the Ming, noone should be more interested than I. In the meantime, MAO Yuan-I's encyclopedic work on Chinese military systems does not record the item and its attempted use on the Northern Frontier was a failure given the successful invasion of the Manchu. The Ching armies that supported the CHOSON Dyn during the Japanese incursion (see: IMJIN WAERUM 1592 to 1598) used single-handed sabres, and the use of the two-handed sabre by Korean UBIYONG forces seems to have been limited to captured items (see: Turnbull). The only other introduction of the SSANGSOODO was the Japanese Occupation of Northern China, Manchuria (aka MANCHUKO) and Korea. During that period the use of such an item was mainly adopted by individuals who collaborated with the Japanese such as Korean officer candidates in Manchuria. Long answer/Short answer: There does not seem to be a provenance for representing what is in these clips as Chinese Long Sword material since no vital system existed and there seems to be only as group of wishful thinkers who rather hoped it did. FWIW. Best Wishes, Bruce
I'm just wondering how familiar with the ryu-ha you are, as an outsider will only have a very limited view.
If you get a chance to go to E-BUDO and check-out their archives you will find some very stirring discussions on the nature of the KAGE-RYU and SHINKAGE-RYU as it relates to the swordsmanship of the island of Honshu and specifically to the SATSUMA clan. Members of the various clans associated with the island of HONSHU as well as disparate groups arising from various coastal towns and villages were fomative to the WA-KO albeit moreso of the northern groups which preyed on northern Chinese and Korean targets. The WA-KO of the Southern Chinese Incursions were less Japanese and more Chinese and European in their composition. There is a long-running tradition that General Qi took a significant number of Japanese prisoners and tortured the secrets of their swordsmanship out of them. Like the story of weapons being forbidden in Okinawa, I am sure that these stories will be revealed to be constructions rather than historical fact. Until that happens, color me unimpressed with the scholarship (Or the lack there of) in supporting the idea that Chinese miltary leaders established a tradition of two-handed sabre. FWIW. Best Wishes, Bruce
Bruce, Just because the individuals in the photo are doing something similar to hashi-kakari, that doesn't mean that they are doing something from TSKSR. A lot of warring states period sword schools had this tactic against spearmen or enemies with polearms. Kashima Shinto-ryu, Takenouchi-ryu, Shibukawa-ryu and Katayama-ryu all have this tactic in their mokuroku.
Agreed....... my point had less to do with assigning the execution of a technique to a particular RYU as it did to suggesting that a particular technique underscored the lack of cultural context for a particular item. Best Wishes, Bruce
Hi Bruce, INSIDE the manual, you will see that everyone in the drawings is wearing a Cross-bow. In the manual, it says that the Longsword (or literally Single-Saber) is 5-feet long overall. Here comes the interesting part for you. The manual also specifically says that for those who's primary job is to use the Cross-bow, shall carry an overall-length of 3.7-feet version. Shorter version to facilitate using the cross-bow. This suggests that the Chinese troops were indeed outfitted with the Longsword (or Single-Saber). If you haven't gotten yourself a free copy of the manual, please visit www.chineselongsword.com Or, shameless plug here, the English-translated copy: http://www.chineselongsword.com/translation.shtml (page 11 is where it mentions about carrying the sword for the crossbow-men) Hope this helps. =) Jack Chen
I should mention that Taisha-ryu (タイ捨流), a an offshoot of Kage-ryu & Shinkage-ryu was founded by a bushi, Marume Kurando had a 2nd generation headmaster that was a Chinese sailor named Denribo. He was so noted and distinguished in his exploits that he was allowed into the bushi caste. Denribo's influence can be seen in a number of techniques in Taisha-ryu, particularly the manipulation of polearms and unarmed techniques.
At face value, Jack, that would seem to resolve the problem.....if the manual published is what it says it is. Seems to me----I'm just guessing now..... that if this manual is what it says it is, it would be written in Ming Chinese. And even if it were a re-print accomplished in the Ching Dyn, the characters would still be the older Chinese rather than the simplified, wouldn't you think? The reason I mention this is that I wonder if you have an exposure to Ming Chinese that allows you to translate or transliterate the five-line verse---which btw don't seem to be inevidence here. Or is this a Ching Dyn republication? As far as the actual item itself, I have rechecked both Dr. YANG Jwing-ming (see: Ancient Chinese Weapons) and the classic by E.T.C. Werner (see: "Chinese Weapons"). My sense is that if the item under discussion were actually carried by the Ming or Ching Armies it would certainly have been mentioned in either of these books, or in Mao's WU BEI SHI. I think you may have been had. BTW: I'm a pretty fair hand at digging around and I am curious that the only reports of the "Dan Dao Fa Xuan" its author or its material come back to you and only to you. There are no cross references to the Library of Congress, or even to the University of Chicago which is a pretty fair resource in its own right. This leaves me with the following: a.) An unlisted book with an unlisted author. b.) The report of a Chinese fellow in the Ming Dyn learning a Japanese art from a Japanese and then representing it as a Chinese practice. c.) The reported of the use of a weapon by the Chinese military which is not noted in Chinese resources other than the single resource under discussion here. You can kinda see what I might be concerned about. Are you sure you folks aren't just playing fast and loose with the folks on this thread? Best Wishes, Bruce
Hi Bruce, thank you for your enthusiasm =) 1) The manual was written with traditional Chinese characters rather than simplified. The grammer is classical too, which makes it more difficult for me to translate as well. At our Facebook page, you can find one of the few original raw-scans of the manual: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Chine...p?pid=157325&id=125270094183728&ref=fbx_album The raw-scan clearly shows traditional Chinese characters. 2) In "Shou-Bi-Lu", written by "Wu Shu" also has 2-handed saber techniques. Furthermore, the names of the 2-handed saber stances in his manual are named similarly to "Dan Dao Fa Xuan" stances. 3) There's a Japanese book, titled: "Hiden Kenjutsu, Gokui Toujutsu", written by Hirakami Nobuyuki (Japanese Martial Arts Researcher) and Kasuo Kyouji (Chinese Martial Arts Researcher), published by Hiden. This is the cover page: http://www.chineselongsword.com/hiden1.jpg The cover image IS a stance from "Dan-Dao Fa-Xuan". In this book, it talks about the exchanges of Chinese and Japanese martial arts, and their similarities. While Hirakami (JMA researcher) dishes out Shinkage Ryu, Kage Ryu, Niten Ichi Ryu etc..., Kasuo (CMA researcher) puts "Dan-Dao Fa-Xuan" onto the table for discussion. If the Japanese themselves think of "Dan-Dao Fa-Xuan" as Chinese enough to put it up for discussion as a Chinese piece, I think that says something. Here's a page from the book: http://www.chineselongsword.com/hiden2.jpg You can see that this page talks about the similarities between Niten-Ichi-Ryu's Moji-gamae and Dan-Dao Fa-Xuan's Low-Watch-Stance. 4) In a thread over at SwordForum: http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t=101950 Landau Lau provided several references to modern Chinese books and modern Chinese MiaoDao practitioner who based their works on Dan-Dao Fa-Xuan. 5) www.chineselongsword.com may be the only English website that talks about 單刀法選 (Dan-Dao Fa-Xuan). This is the reason why I took up this translation project, so that English-speakers can get to know of Dan-Dao Fa-Xuan. Please copy this: 單刀法選 , and paste it into Google. You'll find many other Chinese-language websites that talks about "Dan-Dao Fa Xuan". Hope this helps =) Jack Chen
Very interesting discussion here fellas. Nice to see this on MAP. It's exactly the type of thread that MAP needs more of. Well done.
Thanks, Jack. Coincidentally I have that book and find it a curious read (see: ISBN 4-89422-327-9; Plum Publications, Calif). As much as it makes reference to days of yore and passed history, apart from suggesting a connection between Japanese practices and Chinese practices there really is no sound documentation. I am reminded of an article in Journal of Asian Martial Arts which briefly examined parallels between the use of the European Longsword and the Japanese KATANA. The comments were provocative and the observations well made...but noone suggested a connection between the two. In the case of the material at hand I sense that there is also more being made of similar parallels between Jap and Chi traditions. There is one point that would be a huge help for me, if you could. I have read numerous threads which continue to cite General Qi having written about the SSANGSOO DO and its use in military formations as well as its handling. Having copies of both of the late gneral's books I have not been able to find any entries in his writings about the item under discussion. Perhaps you could give me a hand and provide a ref, yes? Would be much appreciated. BTW: There have been a number of MIAO DAO (aka: "barbarian sword") threads over on the Sword Forum International. I'm wondering if you would be interested? Best Wishes, Bruce
Hello Bruce, I haven't started studying/translating General Qi's books in details yet, so please pardon me if I can't be of big help. In General Qi's "Lian Bing Shi Ji" (Journal of Training the Troops) Under: Scroll One > Section Training Part One > Calvary Troops > Part 6: Calvary Troops' Equipment. There is a line that say: 鳥銃手每名明盔一頂甲一副鞓帶一條長刀一把 This is translated as: "Bird-Gun Users: Everyone gets a helmet, a suit of armour, a 長刀 (Chang Dao, The Long-Saber)" So it seems like General Qi did arm his troops with the Long-Saber here. When I've studied the manual in detail, I shall do my best to share more information. By the way, in "Dan-Dao Fa-Xuan", there's 2 pages in the manual that describes its "Tao-Lu" routine. A very long routine that's very typical of the Chinese, whereas Japanese kata are usually short and sweet. Modern Miao-Dao routines are influenced by Dan-Dao Fa-Xuan's routine, and I see many similarities. =) Jack Chen
I've only ever heard the term Chang do used to describe long handled sabers like pudao and the like. Da dao is the name commonly associated with the more traditional Chinese big saber which is usually wielded with two hands but looks nothing like a samurai sword.
Hello 19thlohan, From the book, 中国武术大辞典 (Chinese Martial Arts Big Encyclopedia), under the "Miao Dao" section, it says that "During the Ming-Dynasty, this is referred to as: 单刀 (Dan-Dao, Single-Saber), 倭刀 (Wo-Dao, Japanese sword), 长刀 (Chang-Dao, Longsword/Longsaber)" I agree with you, in today's terminology, a Da-Dao will be the huge version of the boardsword. I have a Guan-Dao manual here with me, and in it they refer to it as Da-Dao. =) Jack Chen
