![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
Comments like that are always appreciated. In time I will post the data you are interested in, it is just that at the moment I am short on time for as many posting as I would like too within this forum. Please feel free to contact me via email for interim correspondence about these pieces, I check email daily. Gav |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: between work and sleep
Posts: 731
|
![]()
bumping this thread in case anyone can add more info about the Hu-die-dao and also Guang-dong and Hoklo weaponry/fighting
![]() In USA, many of the "Tongs" (Chinese gangs) were known to use axes and "tommy-guns", would Hu-die-dao have been amongst their weapons? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,141
|
![]()
Thanks for bumping this thread, as I missed it the first time around. I have always been keenly interested in the so-called "river pirate swords". I am assuming that the curved guard could be used like a bien, to parry or even break an opponent's sword? The back alleys and tight tea-houses of China would seem to be the obvious reasoning for these smaller bladed swords that often fit into one scabbard. They would have made ideal "pirate" swords in that they could also be used in the tight confines of a ship without stabbing a fellow shipmate in battle or becoming intangled in the rigging. This was the exact same reason smaller cutlass and hangers went to sea in the Western navies and merchantmen.
Now I am NOT saying that I necessarily accept this as fact, but in more than one book on piracy circulating around, one can see one of these hu-die-daos (didn't know the name of it. Thanks, Gav) that was supposedly carried by one of Captain Kidd's crew. Of course, there was plenty of trading going on to support this. Likewise, pirates came from all walks of life (think of the whaling crews made up of Maori, Africans, Haitians, Polynesians, etc). Very interesting swords, none the less... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
Most certainly, There have been some good articles found in Harpers Weekly in the early 1900s that document this and other weapons of choice. You will find some of these dao above and others within my gallery collection. I still have several pairs to add and I may get to it this weekend if time is available, it has been a rough couple of weeks without a home PC. Dimensions that Fearn asked for are within the text. http://www.swordsantiqueweapons.com/archive.html Gav Last edited by freebooter; 22nd July 2009 at 10:11 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 2,658
|
![]()
Interesting....I've only known these as 'butterfly knives' ....used in several forms of martial arts weapons training. I've seen them used in Wing Chun training sessions and would be devastating in confined areas.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke06luhv_nU Regards David |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 865
|
![]() Quote:
David, FYI another name in Chinese for these is: Baat Cham Dao / Bat Chum Dao / Baat Jam Dao / Bart Cham Dao / Baat Jaam Dou = Eight-cutting knife ( Dao = knife and Jian = sword) ....I didn't see this term mentioned so I thought I would add it to the list ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,192
|
![]()
Outstanding notes Kukulz, and thank you for the cited references, beautifully done. I like the observations on the scholars jian, which are well placed in perspective, and really help in understanding more of thier context. It is interesting when considered alongside the studies of fencing and advanced education of nobility and gentry in Europe etc. in more recent times.
Very good points and queries on the 'river pirates' and you are quite right about thier contact as far as the Philippines. I am not sure if the same perspective might be applied to the Chinese pirates as the more familiar European pirates of the 'Golden Age' of late 17th into early 18th century as far as motivation or skills in weaponry. I think there were of course varying degrees of application as previously noted, as piracy is a very broad topic which has been well known in most cultures from early times. Whether Vikings, Cossacks, Barbary Pirates, Privateers, Ladrones or various Asian 'river pirates', all had broadly interpreted lifestyles and probably a wide spectrum of participants. I certainly dont believe that most pirates in the sense most familiar, were especially well trained in fighting or use of weapons. Most accounts of pirates I have known seem to suggest that pirates in most cases used all manner of ploys and intimidation in subduing thier prey, and would avoid targets that were excessively formidable. Naturally, there were groups or individuals who did become understandably seasoned and ruthless if they survived long enough to ply the 'trade' for a time. With this being the case, I would imagine that such weapons as the hu die shuang dao were probably seen occasionally among river pirates, much as all manner of weaponry would have been. While piracy is often romanticized and associated with heroic or patriotic tales, in truth it is largely a social phenomenon which obviously entreated a wide assortment of miscreants and misfits from all walks of life. Certainly the criminal element prevailed, as well as those who had somehow come from failed positions even from upper classes. With these wide degrees of pedigree, I would say equally wide degree of skills, education, character and ideals, or lack of, would have existed together, but the ultimate goal would have been largely the same...survival. Nathaniel, thank you for adding the additional terms. While trying to learn more on these topics, it really helps to build a sort of glossary, as the terms often get confusing. All very best regards, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: between work and sleep
Posts: 731
|
![]()
I see. Perhaps the pirate-kings were no different from the bandit-kings on land (in essence), both drew the desperate, whether good fighters or not, and both needed open lawless territory to maneuver in. Thus the frontiers of the Empire and the Sea were great places. However, I would think that bandits rarely got away with amassing as large numbers as the Chinese pirates did...
It would probably be impossible to know, but did some pirate kings have a state-style rule over their crew and subjects? Or was it just everyone for themselves, and the king was just the most ruthless and influential of them all, feared enough to be obeyed? Or was it a system of patron/client, the pirates would obey the pirate-king's orders so long as the king provided for them well-enough and demonstrated peerless tactics/courage/benevolence/legitimacy/ruthlessness etc. - a buccaneer's version of the mandate of heaven I suppose...? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,247
|
![]() Quote:
Best, F |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,192
|
![]()
The 'butterfly knives' seem to have always been one of the more esoteric and intriguing Chinese weapons, probably from increased presence in China from the Taipai period, increased immigration of Chinese mid 19th century, and the Boxer Rebellion, and acquisition of these as souveniers.
It does not seem that authentic examples are often available, though the popularity of reproduction forms through interest in martial arts are often seen. I believe these were primarily civilian weapons, used by martial artists and most definitely effective in the crowded city streets and dark alleys of southern China. Thier association with the 'river pirates' seems well placed as the focus of these well organized clans were profoundly present on the coastal areas of the south preying on junks as well as into the Yangtze River. It seems that they were quite present on Taiwan as well, as noted. The hooked guard on these seems to derives from the sai, or trident like weapon, also a key martial arts weapon. There are suggestions of military association due to the use of knuckleguard, and westernization of military in latter 19th century, but the guard is thought to have been intended more as a 'knuckleduster' and blades are often only sharpenened halfway. I am not sure there was any significant presence of these as weapons used by the 'Tongs' in America. While these began as protective societies to protect against oppression of immigrant Chinese in rather unstable environments of American cities in those times, they later took on thier own enterprises, not always especially legal. These groups that had been known as Tongs (= hall, as in organized group) became a type of gangs, that by the early 20th century, many were known by the type of guns they carried. The term 'hatchet man' came from the hit men who eliminated troublesome enemy figures. Weapons were of course not legally obtainable for these Chinese, and common utilitarian items such as axes were more likely used along with crudely fashioned traditional forms of knife or short swords. It seems that in many forms of martial arts, the use of dual weapons is quite preferred, as it enables exaggerated and confounding movements that throw off the opponent. Knowing how fast these guys move, its hard enought to watch the moves of one arms let alone two! In India, the use of patas and katars by the Mahrattas uses windmill like slashing of two weapons is used. The Boxers were well known for thier terrifying demonstrations used to demoralize the westerners there, using huge daos and certainly these paired knives. Aboard the decks of a cramped ship, these manueverable weapons would be a deadly deterrent in a melee. Absolutely fascinating pieces of Chinese history!!! All best regards, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: between work and sleep
Posts: 731
|
![]()
Great input Jim! I would agree that their popularity is great, but I feel as if that's more to do with Wung Chun's popularity after Bruce Lee came on the scene, rather than they being popular in general. (Also, the quality of a lot of the unbalanced and stainless steel dao is questionable, as is the training of many Kung Fu schools, so I wouldn't be concerned about being jumped by a hu-die-dao wielding Wing Chun master). Dual weaponry has always been harder to manage than single, and as such would be the minority. No doubt other Chinese pirates, highwaymen, and fighters would use long-knives/shortswords but I doubt very many used the paired Hu-die-dao, as it is also a tradition that only the most trusted amongst the Southern Chinese martial arts were taught it. Then again, being skilled in fighting was a lot more prevalent then than now, and every village's leading Shifu/Sifu was likely to have quite a following, even if many of them are just local farmers looking to improve themselves and the village militia when they weren't out planting or harvesting. Still though, martial arts were generally not highly regarded, being the tool of the trade for bodyguards (protectors of the rich), thugs (harassers of the poor), and soldiers (rape & pillage & destruction).
![]() I think the same can be said about other less "popular" weapons. The da-dao may have existed in many local variants as a sort of machete, But the Da-dao we know today as the weapon wasn't very common in official imperial armies. Similar weapons we used bu these were often the two-handed sabers of the Palace Guard or the Miao Dao of the Iron troops and northern arquebusiers.... not exactly the da-dao we know of, though certainly a DA dao (BIG blade). Others like the hook swords and wind and fire wheels would have been rarer still. On top of all this, consider that the Emperor rarely wanted his subjects armed... often very few Chinese had a weapon - the closest thing they had was their rice-knife or a walking stick. The fact that mercenary/bodyguard companies were very prosperous in the Ching dynasty reveals that crime was rampant and the countryside dangerous. Not only did the bodyguards have to be good hand-to-hand combatants, they had to be skilled in geography, language, and be able to smoothly deal with bandits when the bandit-groups were too large. They also had "secret" weapons on them aside from their spear or sword, often a small cudgel, dagger, revolver, or 1911 ![]() ![]() I sense I am beginning to go off-topic... I wonder what exactly gave South China Sea pirates such a terrible reputation. Was it their relatively modernized navies of war junks? Their terrorizing of trade? Their superior knowledge of the waters? Or was it their actual fighting prowess? Was it how many guns and cannons they had bristling on their ships, or the prowess of their crews - who might be armed with anything from dao to butterfly swords to spears to arquebus... Would these pirates be well-trained or just a motley crew of everything from an armed person, to a great fighter? Koxinga's forces were well-trained, but he was also more than just a local pirate-king... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,192
|
![]()
Thank you Kukulz, and for the wonderful response. Its great to have the insight you provide on this, as my information is based only on overview and various notes, so your perspective is outstanding.
I very much agree that the Emperor would not particularly like civilians having arms, as from what I understand the secret societies that sought to return to Ming or Han Chinese rule from the much despised Manchu power would be very much a threat. I have seen the pairs of these hu die shuang dao of abount 1850's to 60's stated of a 'security company' or to that effect. I have often wondered about the so called 'scholars jian' and whether these individuals were permitted to have protection weapons in some sort of scholastic exception in cities.It would seem that in rural areas, there would be more latitude for local smiths to create weaponry such as the common village jians and other types of dao etc. I have always had great admiration for martial arts in virtually all of the many disciplines, mostly for the brilliant control of the amazingly powerful skills that are tenaciously learned, and which also far exceed the more obvious physical applications. I would classify the reputation of the 'River Pirates' as formidable rather than 'terrible'. From what I understand they often operated much as privateers in the sense of protecting from foreign intrusion, although it would be difficult to accurately classify the incredibly large spectrum of these organized clans in one category or another. As always, the term becomes essentially generically applied. Its great to discuss more on these Chinese weapons as they are incredibly interesting, and not often covered in threads here. I have had various opportunities to collect notes and a few references, but it is good to be able to add to them with more accurate observations. Thank you again!!! All the best, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,247
|
![]() Quote:
Don't forget that Chen-style tai chi was a village martial art. The Chen village made its money growing and shipping medicinal herbs, and even before they developed tai chi, they had their own martial art for protecting their shipments from bandits. As for weapons, we've all seen those village swords that Josh has. Beyond that, the village arts often use farm equipment (hoes, rakes, etc), along with staffs of varying lengths, and more conventional spears, jian, and dao. Anyway, this is getting off topic, but it's worth remembering that in the last ~500 years before the Cultural Revolution, the state didn't do a lot for rural security. The peasants weren't all defenseless during that time, although the best martial artists were generally found in the big cities, where they could make more money. Best, F |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|