Chinese sword guard design

[YouKnowWho]

If we compare the following 2 different design of the sword guard, we can see a big difference there. The 1st one has guard that is curved backward. When your opponent's sword touches your guard, it will slide off. Your opponent cannot take advantage on that "contact point". The 2nd sword has guard that is curved upward. When your opponent's sword touch your guard, your opponent can use your upward curve guard as the leverage and then stab the tip of his sword into your body. Why people design sword guard like the 2nd sword that will give your opponent such advantage? What's your opinion on this?

http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/7036/correctsword.jpg

http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/7440/wrongsword.jpg

[Taixuquan99]

Interesting. Sort of along the lines of a difference between the bell guard on a foil versus the crosspiece on a long sword.

Really interested to see the responses.

[Lucas]

i remember a disucussion about this i read once, a student of adam hsu mentioned that the guard angled back is generally for training purposes, i happen to own that training jian designed by adam hsu and it does indeed inform you of incorrect technique. now i dont know because this is all 'heresay' i dont know the man, but it seemed a reasonable explination. i cant remember where i read that discussion, it was not here.

im positive that is the adam hsu training sword, it is identical to mine

i would never be partial to letting a blade slide off my guard toward my wrist/arm tho, not if i were to actually sword fight. i would prefer a catch guard or a cross guard.

[Taixuquan99]

i would never be partial to letting a blade slide off my guard toward my wrist/arm tho, not if i were to actually sword fight. i would prefer a catch guard or a cross guard.

My first inclination is the same, but I'd be curious to read other opinions. A bell guard allows the blade past. Obviously it has other defensive attributes, I'm just curious if others have views on this.

That said, I'm not as concerned about the opponent having blade contact at the crosspiece. Their leverage is not better in such a position, imo.

[Lucas]

it wouldnt even ben an issue if you were wearing gauntlets that provided enough protection.

[GeneChing]

Read A Straight Talk about Straight Sword By Adam Hsu (2005 January/February: The Sword Collector's Special (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=567)). He explains his theory behind his sword design.

[Lucas]

trust in gene go get all gansta on us and learn us up somethin good

[jdhowland]

i remember a disucussion about this i read once, a student of adam hsu mentioned that the guard angled back is generally for training purposes...

i would never be partial to letting a blade slide off my guard toward my wrist/arm tho, not if i were to actually sword fight. i would prefer a catch guard or a cross guard.

I've also heard the opposite: military style was angled back toward the hand and the "guard" was reversed for times of peace. I don't have any historical references for this but if you look at analogous western weapons you find that prongs on a dagger sometimes point forward because it is a shielding/ controlling weapon. On a sword the quillons are rarely made to this design.

The purpose of the "guard" is not to protect the hand so much as to bring the mass of the sword closer to the hand for better control. Considering the small guards on a jian/gim the only way to protect the hand is with technique.

[YouKnowWho]

i would prefer a catch guard or a cross guard.

If the guard of your opponent's single edge Dao touches your sword guard, he can then use his other hand to press the back of his blade (with his body weight behind) and press his blade into your body. That's one of the most important skills used in Dao.

It's like "raise up curtain and enter". Since the curtain cannot move, your raise up arm should not move and only move your body. If you apply this principle into sword fighting, the moment that your Dao guard touches your opponent's sword guard, you move your body in and then push the blade of your Dao into your opponent's chest.

If your opponent's sword slides off your guard, your sword will have as much threaten as his sword does. You are not in and disadvantage position.

[Taixuquan99]

Considering the small guards on a jian/gim the only way to protect the hand is with technique.

This is an interesting point.

[Lucas]

If the guard of your opponent's single edge Dao touches your sword guard, he can then use his other hand to press the back of his blade (with his body weight behind) and press his blade into your body. That's one of the most important skills used in Dao.

It's like "raise up curtain and enter". Since the curtain cannot move, your raise up arm should not move and only move your body. If you apply this principle into sword fighting, the moment that your Dao guard touches your opponent's sword guard, you move your body in and then push the blade of your Dao into your opponent's chest.

If your opponent's sword slides off your guard, your sword will have as much threaten as his sword does. You are not in and disadvantage position.

good point

[bawang]

this might be shocking for you guys, but most chinese straightsword is all made up. straightsword went extinct over 400 years ago.

[Lucas]

im have been shocked and awed!

[bawang]

finger slicing in sword fighting is very unrealistic, like people who constantly talk about eye poking.

[jdhowland]

this might be shocking for you guys, but most chinese straightsword is all made up. straightsword went extinct over 400 years ago.

No shock. Thought it was common knowledge. It's a symbolic weapon largely but still good for expressing some kinds of skills.

[jdhowland]

...the moment that your Dao guard touches your opponent's sword guard, you move your body in and then push the blade of your Dao into your opponent's chest...

Right. Hence the forward facing flange on the dao guard. I inwardly roll my eyes when I hear people referring to this as a "blood cup."

[Lucas]

I hear people referring to this as a "blood cup."

wtf are you serious?

[SPJ]

yes. standard infantry and calvary weapons

were long spear and long spear. Ge or Ji.

jian was only short distance defense. or just gesture wearing or ceremony wearing.

Da Dao is still good.

Da Dao was used in the northwest army (Xi Bei Jun) or 29 th army and fought Japan in WWII.

I saw Da Dao from Ji Xin Wen. He first used Da Dao and defending Xi Feng Kou near great walls of China.

My high school was across the street from Military Museum in Taiwan.

---

:cool:

[jdhowland]

wtf are you serious?

Rarely. You mean about people referring to this type of guard as a "blood cup." Sure. Heard it more than once from armchair experts who say the design was meant to catch blood before it gets to the hilt.

[GeneChing]

I hear that so often - it pains me the same way hearing Eye of the Tiger pains me.

Clearly, the jian guard doesn't serve as significant hand protection. It can serve as a grip purchase, not at all unlike early arming swords. In fact, if you look at the evolution of western swords, crossing the guard with the finger produces the finger ring, which evolves into more complex permutations, like the swept-hilt guard. The finger ring becomes pas d'ane (the rings in the ricasso) and eventually, the swept-hilt closes into a solid cup-hilt guard. It's a pretty straight forward evolutionary course. Chinese guards haven't evolved significantly over the centuries. The modern guard retains the same basic shape as the ancient ones, more or less. I have seen some old Chinese diagrams that allude to finger rings, but I haven't seen actual historic examples.

[jdhowland]

GeneChing;1132342]I hear that so often - it pains me the same way hearing Eye of the Tiger pains me.

This made me smile. I don't do that often.


Clearly, the jian guard doesn't serve as significant hand protection. It can serve as a grip purchase, not at all unlike early arming swords. In fact, if you look at the evolution of western swords, crossing the guard with the finger produces the finger ring, which evolves into more complex permutations, like the swept-hilt guard. The finger ring becomes pas d'ane (the rings in the ricasso) and eventually, the swept-hilt closes into a solid cup-hilt guard. It's a pretty straight forward evolutionary course.

Yes. I was hoping swordsman Gene would drop in for an observation such as this. This clarifies the practicality of the swept back shape. Many seem designed to fit the index finger this way. I have learned three jian sets. All use the finger on the "guard" this way and two use the index finger against the blade as support.


Chinese guards haven't evolved significantly over the centuries. The modern guard retains the same basic shape as the ancient ones, more or less...

When a weapon does not evolve with changing styles of warfare it is usually an indication that the weapon has a strong cultural value beyond utility. Think of the bushi class in Japan. The odachi was a badge of rank for the samurai even though it was outclassed by spears, arrows and naginata. The "classic" european sword is straight even though curved blades were the final military design. It's a symbol of honor and chivalry.

[kristcaldwell]

the purpose of the forward facing guard (for lack of a better term), pertains to one's grip. simply put, it allows for greater control by allowing the user the ability to (slightly) manipulate finger positions for the desired strike. additionally, with the thumb and forefinger overlapping part of the guard (but never wrapping around it like many wushu practitioners perform), the sword is in a position more conducive for stabbing.

[YMC]

A quick historical survey of surviving jian from the Qing dynasty will show that both the forward swept and back swept guard designs in almost equal distribution if one combines village militia pieces, higher end pieces, and tourist pieces. I have attached 2 examples of each.

I find that village militia pieces tend to have forward swept guards.

The more refined pieces will usually have the swept back guards, what some have called the "ace of spades" shape. As someone already pointed out, there is likely a symbolic reason for this, probably tracing back to the ruyi shape. I post an example of the ruyi pattern; a rough translation of ruyi means "as you wish," and is typically a symbol for longevity, auspiciousness.

[YMC]

That the jian basically died out as a formal battlefield weapon at the end of the Ming is not in dispute. The Qing are a Turkic-Mongolian people and the dao was their preferred blade. However, the pure number of surviving Qing era village quality jian belies the argument that the jian was no longer used extensively. It may not have been used by the military proper, but just one can't say that militia or civilian martial artists weren't hacking themselves up with them. These were rustically made, no frills weapons. Not ceremonial pieces or part of formal dress.

So if the forward swept guard was so disadvantageous and so easy for your opponent to control, why did the design continue to be produced in such high numbers? One could argue that the Chinese don't like to change and stuck with the design, or that indeed, no one really used jian anymore so why change the design of a show piece? However, let me ask a basic physics question. The tip on the blade is how far from the center of gravity of the blade versus the guard? Who actually has the better ability to control the duifan's weapon if the tip of the blade is caught at the guard?

[ginosifu]

If the guard of your opponent's single edge Dao touches your sword guard, he can then use his other hand to press the back of his blade (with his body weight behind) and press his blade into your body. That's one of the most important skills used in Dao.

Would not the forward or upward guard be used to trap that Dao? Then with a slight twist to lock it in place and then redirect the Dao?

ginosifu

[bawang]

That the jian basically died out as a formal battlefield weapon at the end of the Ming is not in dispute. The Qing are a Turkic-Mongolian people and the dao was their preferred blade.

no. the jian died out a long time earlier. an official survey was done by the ming dynasty military and could not find a single person who taught jian for combat, and it was declared officially extinct. (author mao yuanyi, book wu beizhi)

the jian became increasingly useless as early as the han dynasty over 2000 years ago, completely uselsess by tang dynasty 1500 years ago.

[YMC]

no. the jian died out during the ming dynasty. an official survey was done by the military and could not find a single person who taught jian for combat.

the jian became increasingly useless as early as the han dynasty over 2000 years ago, completely uselsess by tang dynasty 1500 years ago.

Again, I don't think that there is any dispute that the jian lost its usefulness in the MILITARY by the Ming dynasty. My understanding is that this was towards the end of the Ming and the Qing certainly weren't going to revive the tradition. Do you mind providing the source of the survey you cite? If the military use of the jian ended much earlier than the tail-end of the Ming then I will have to update my understanding.

However, the jian's use in civilian circles or in militias certainly didn't end given the extent of the surviving antique jian dating from the Qing. So unless one equates military use of weapon as the only measure of its survival as an art or combat weapon, then a lot of wasted time was spent in making weapons of fairly complicated manufacture.

[bawang]

Do you mind providing the source of the survey you cite?
http://archive.wul.waseda.ac.jp/kosho/ke05/ke05_00061/ke05_00061_0031/ke05_00061_0031_p0072.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wubei_Zhi


However, the jian's use in civilian circles or in militias certainly didn't end given the extent of the surviving antique jian dating from the Qing.

the jian's use in civilian circles involved dancing for money.


So unless one equates military use of weapon as the only measure of its survival as an art or combat weapon, then a lot of wasted time was spent in making weapons of fairly complicated manufacture.

military use of jian is the only measure of its survival because the jian is a military weapon used by the military

[TenTigers]

I also see the forward facing guard as a trapping device.
Even on some butterfly knife designs, the guard is not so elongated, but still able to trap the opponent's weapon.
Now, back to the blood cup. I have also heard it described as such, particularly from Paul Chen/Hanwei swords.

[YMC]

Ah, thanks for providing the source. My understanding is that this reference was written in the latter part of the Ming dynasty right?

I can also see that we are at an impasse because we are defining usefulness and survival of an combat art differently. The attributes of a trained army versus militia or single fighter are different things.

I also can't argue against your dancing for money statement since I agree with it. However, given that most of the antique early to mid Qing jian I have handled and studied were balanced with its center of gravity ~4-6in from the guard, differentially hardened with cutting edges over 50-55 on Rockwell scale, these weren't made only for performance. Contrasting these examples with some I have seen dated towards the end of Qing and beginning of the Republican era, which were not differentially hardened with soft "cutting" edges, lighter, with center of gravity much nearer to the guard, it is clear these pieces were made for performance or as decorations. So why bother with the complicated manufacture of "functional" weapons if no one knew how to use them?

[bawang]

So why bother with the complicated manufacture of "functional" weapons if no one knew how to use them?

the reason is very obvious, the jian is symmetrical and looks pretty. and it was also a symbol of nobility and power.




I can also see that we are at an impasse because we are defining usefulness and survival of an combat art differently. The attributes of a trained army versus militia or single fighter are different things.



if you take a look at any other classical weapon form, between the flower movements there are actual fighting techniques. this is not the case with sword forms. sometimes up to 90% of the entire form is flower.

there is also no such thing as "military/civilian/militia". they all practice the exact same techniques. the only difference is the amount of flower movements between the forms.

[YMC]

I also see the forward facing guard as a trapping device.
Even on some butterfly knife designs, the guard is not so elongated, but still able to trap the opponent's weapon.
Now, back to the blood cup. I have also heard it described as such, particularly from Paul Chen/Hanwei swords.

As far as I know, the technical term for the guard (hushou) has no reference to being a blood cup. However, fullers are referred to as xuecao, which translates to blood groove/ditch even though that's not their purpose; fullers acting with an I-beam effect, cutting down on weight but retaining as much strength as possible.

[YMC]

the reason is very obvious, the jian is symmetrical and looks pretty. and it was also a symbol of nobility and power.




if you take a look at any other classical weapon form, between the flower movements there are actual fighting techniques. this is not the case with sword forms. sometimes up to 90% of the entire form is flower.

Again, not disagreeing with any of your points. Just different interpretations I guess.

As I stated, performance and show pieces were made. Yet, at the same time, rustic village forge quality pieces of functional features were also made. The rich nor literati were not going to buy these pieces. In the photos I showed an example of what collectors call a village quality jian with upswept guard. These jian are usually wonderfully balanced, but no frills and frankly of poor decorative value. These jian usually don't have scabbards, or if they did, pigskin scabbards that haven't survived the century very well. No village literati was going to wear this piece as a show of his station; there were prettier things out there. So the common interpretation among the ethnographic weapons collector is that such pieces were functional weapons intended for use.

As for the emptiness of jian forms, again, no argument from me, at least of the forms I'm familiar with. In addition, I will leave arguments over what useful techniques in forms actually exist to people who like them or train them. My point remains this, performance oriented and decorative swords were made, functional swords were made as well as swords that were both. Many functional pieces I have handled demonstrate edge knicks as well as signs of resharpening and regrinding, so they were being used for something other than dancing. Perhaps not well, perhaps not prettily, but used.

[bawang]

i was not arguing that jian was not used, i am glad we can agree.
i agree the jian was used, it is very easy to use with a shield (teng pai) since the hardest part of using the jian is trying to block and parry with it. and countless people probably tried to recreate real usable techniques. i got no problem with that.

i wanted to remind people jian is not an ancient magical weapon like in crouching dragon hidden penus, it is actually one of the most unusable weapons in kung fu.

my problem is with the kung fu sword fetish, the rediculous amount of unrealisitc wrist cutting techniques, and arguments over pointless things like the guard. the guard doesnt affect the jian in any way at all. every time i read somethign like this i go into a burning rage and i smash my keyboard, then i drink beer, so i am not happy. i am not hapy at all.

[David Jamieson]

The limb (or whatever) closest to you is the target of attack. Hence the ubiquity of wrist cutting techniques.

This sword plays more like fencing. The wrist holding the sword is often the legit target

[SimonM]

My first inclination is the same, but I'd be curious to read other opinions. A bell guard allows the blade past. Obviously it has other defensive attributes, I'm just curious if others have views on this.

That said, I'm not as concerned about the opponent having blade contact at the crosspiece. Their leverage is not better in such a position, imo.

I agree.

Most control happens when your sword is contacting the lead 1/3 of the blade. If you are up on the forte you have little control over your opponent.

[TenTigers]

wrist cutting is a viable technique. Even in staff techniques, the goal is to strike the wrist, whether in a direct strike, or to slide down the opponent's weapon and strike the wrist, then the next strike is to the head or torso. "When using the staff, don't expect two sounds," is an old adage. There should never be "clack" "Clack" "Clack" back and forth in true fighting. That is for two-man sets, which are for demo purposes and are basically useless for teaching real skill, other than "clack" "clack". You strike the hand/wrist, the weapon drops.
The other thing is that gim techniques are at a higher level than the dao, which in turn raises your skill level.
But I am in agreement with the uselessness of the flower techniques.
My Sifu taught me a Southern "Village," gim set that is devoid of flower technique. There is no walking around, spinning, prancing techniques. Only parrying and cutting. It's no crowd pleaser, but it gets the job done.

[SimonM]

No shock. Thought it was common knowledge. It's a symbolic weapon largely but still good for expressing some kinds of skills.

I just like swords. I don't care if they're obsolete.

[SimonM]

But I am in agreement with the uselessness of the flower techniques.
My Sifu taught me a Southern "Village," gim set that is devoid of flower technique. There is no walking around, spinning, prancing techniques. Only parrying and cutting. It's no crowd pleaser, but it gets the job done.

Good for him!

I'll be honest, my sifu did teach the flower techniques, but to those of us interested in learning how to use the sword to actually fight, he pointed out the techniques that were just for show, and encouraged us to use realistic techniques in sparring.

[GeneChing]

I just like swords. I don't care if they're obsolete.

As long as it's sharp, it's functional in my hand. ;)

[GeneChing]

The Contact-Guard Grip - Strong Support for the Tai Chi Sword (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=1052) by Robert Dreeben, with photos by Amada Alcantara.

[SimonM]

Interesting article, but Dreeban's understanding of European sword technique is flawed.

[mickey]

Greetings,

Even into the 20th century there were sword duels in China (before Mao) and in Taiwan.

The sword with the upward open guard used by Mr Dreeben is woefully inadequate for sword locking purposes.

mickey

[pazman]

Even into the 20th century there were sword duels in China (before Mao) and in Taiwan.




Link or citation?

[bruno3997]

Nice forum

[Lucas]

Nice forum

Welcome :)

[Lucas]

so then was the jian primarily a dueling/showmanship blade historically? i can imagine, on a battlefield where soldiers have protection on their wrists and bodies, a broadsword or a heavier blade would be for more useful. at that point it seems like the finess required for such a blade would become more obsolete, and the favor given to something with more...chop or better thrusting support...like a broadsword or a warsword.

[mickey]

Greetings,

For sword duels in Taiwan: Chinese Boxing: Masters and Methods. Found in the chapter on Grandmaster Hung, "The Not So Little Elephant". Master Hung officiated some.

For dueling in Mainland China: No citation to offer. I knew of someone who had one. No more to share about that.

EDIT: One person who won a sword fighting competition in Mainland China was Grandmaster Ken Tak Hoi of the Monkey style.


mickey

[bawang]

so then was the jian primarily a dueling/showmanship blade historically? i can imagine, on a battlefield where soldiers have protection on their wrists and bodies, a broadsword or a heavier blade would be for more useful. at that point it seems like the finess required for such a blade would become more obsolete, and the favor given to something with more...chop or better thrusting support...like a broadsword or a warsword.

at the taiping museum i saw the famous sword of the heavenly king, the demon subduing sword. it was really thick looking like a european broadsword.

[RenDaHai]

at the taiping museum i saw the famous sword of the heavenly king, the demon subduing sword. it was really thick looking like a european broadsword.

You don't see it very often, but there is a battlefield variation of the Jian. It is shorter but very wide. Wider at base then tapered. It has a thick metal rod along the center of the blade and is heavier than a sabre. I have seen this type of Jian used in some traditional styles near Song Mountain. The technique is like Jian but it has additional slashing power.




On the original post question, you do NOT want the opponents sword to slip off the guard, you want to use the guard to hook it momentarily, like a hook hand. If it slides off it could slide into your arm. So the guard should be wide end up.

[SimonM]

at the taiping museum i saw the famous sword of the heavenly king, the demon subduing sword. it was really thick looking like a european broadsword.

There is also a gorgeously preserved bronze jian in the national museum in Beijing which basically has the form factor of late Celt and early Norse battlefield blades.