Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bvieira
In the "Wubei Zhi" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wubei_Zhi) there is a reference to this kind of weapon, but this book was done in 1621 and patterns and names change with time, but this is clear indication that the imperial army use this kind of weapons.
There is also a reference to the "spade", that as said earlier and pointed by Fernando in the monks version usualy has a shovel.
BV |
Thanks, Bruno, for posting the pics. The text is an 11th cent. military encyclopedia,
Wujing Zongyao It has a plethora of polearms, which scholars like David Nicolle have commented that such a wide variety was unusual in any military context, and the fact that there were later editions of the work in which drawings of mechanical catapults were inexplicably altered to include cannon barrels in the same designs, lead one to believe whether this work reflects "real" vs "ideal" conditions.
We don't see the huge variety of very specialized pole weapons in later works like the 18th cent.
Huangchao Liqi Tushi compiled at the direction of the Qing court, which is a catalog of regulation patterns of all the material accouterments of imperial, civil, and military activity as of 1759. I don't recall seeing spades among the lineup of spears and shaft weapons.
The 16th cent. books on military tactics and training by the Ming general Qi Jiguang have detailed discussion of arms and their deployment, and demilunes were not included. Now it is true that Qi incorporated forces recruited from monasteries in the campaigns against coastal pirates, but their combat skills and weapons were separate from what he prescribed for the regular military units he was in the process of reforming.
Discussion of the weapon is also absent in the late 18th cent. Korean compilation of combat arts, the
Muye Dobo Tongji which is heavily indebted to Ming and Qing precedents.
In China and Korea, the spear was considered "king of weapons" on the battlefield. The demilune was certainly useful in specialized contexts, but in the big picture of military operations, versatility and general utility were far more important.