Tai Chi Sword Tassel

[GLW]

Now that is funny...given the almost total ORAL history tradition in most Chinese Styles and the complete BS that most people will argue about in regards to history.

The first part of historical depiction:

If the tassels were ornamental or purely for show and not used in battle (possibly true if tasseles and flags were used at all ) Then the depiction in a museum would be inaccurate only if they were shown in combat situations. If they were shown in display...no big thing.

If the sword being show was one that belonged to a noble...was it a ceremonial weapon (never seen use) or a real combat one....

Again, there is a lot of room for interpretation there.

Historical inaccuracies abound. I can quote chapter and verson the origins of styles...as in how many styles tie back to Yueh Fei. Orgins of styles, use, hero tales, etc... .

The issue of weapon weight...an issue in competition for ages. I know plenty of Traditional folks that use heavy but badly made weapons. I also know of plenty that claim traditional and then spend ages going though weapons to pick out the lightest one...not the best balanced or most comfortable as a traditional person would be thought to do..

[Nexus]

Speaking from a non-historical basis:
Some practical uses of sword-tassels are as a means of leading the sword and distracting the enemy. The sword, following the tassel in a strike can confuse the opponent.
Besides that, it can be a means of balance when using the sword and can help you depending on the style you are practicing. For the internal styles, when you do horizontal strikes, meaning the sword is parallel to the ground, generating the strikes from your mid-section can encourage the tassel to swing circularly below the sword itself.

Also, as far as swords go, some of the Practical Tai Chi Swords with various length options and also a polished walnut option can be found here, done by Hanwei.
http://www.by-the-sword.com/acatalog...ds_Page_2.html

[Sam Wiley]

Wow, this thread has blossomed. A lot of good ideas in here.

Love the comment about the sash being red until it's been used. I've cut myself enough times to be able to paint an entire wall blood red, and two of the most serious were practicing with swords.

Anyway, I have, frankly, quit caring about how the arts are depicted when it comes to historical accuracy. At least mostly. I mean, some of the claims are absolutely laughable, and when I laugh at something, probably more people are laughing, too. I laugh when people talk about using the "sword fingers" for instance to poke someone in a sword fight. You're swinging a sword and you're going to poke your opponent? On the other hand when someone says you hide a dagger in that hand and stab, slash, poke and block with it, I pay attention. I pay attention, because it's very similar to other schools of fencing and makes sense. But how can tassels circling below distract the opponent? Personally, I'd be paying more attention to the shwrp end of the sword.

I tried tying the sash around my wrist and found it to be a bit restraining agility-wise. But at least I can understand a reason for it. It would seem sound to me, except for the agility thing. Why put it on the sword when you could just tie the whole thing on your wrist?

By the way, I found that Nadi book about 2 years ago in a store and went back to get it but they'd sold it. Now I can't find it (and I hate having to order something once I've held it in my hands in store). Is there some place specific that would have it?

[Doug]

Originally posted by Sam Wiley
Anyway, I have, frankly, quit caring about how the arts are depicted when it comes to historical accuracy. At least mostly. I mean, some of the claims are absolutely laughable, and when I laugh at something, probably more people are laughing, too.

If you practice with practicality in mind, I can see where you would not care how practice is related to historical accuracy or not. However, if you train in a particular style and your interest is in accurately portraying that style, you will definitely want to be as accurate to technique as possible. In this sense, the whole of Chinese martial weapon arts is within a select style (although it is comprised of many influences). As such, we who practice the Chinese arts with tradition in mind will likely consider ourselves temporary bearers of tradition who want to see the accurate continuation of such traditions.

I laugh when people talk about using the "sword fingers" for instance to poke someone in a sword fight. You're swinging a sword and you're going to poke your opponent?

Actually, you can do that. It is not merely a poke but, as I understand it, a penetrating strike. People who punch through apples, watermelons, or sandbags with their fingers alone do so for a reason. There is more to the sword hand than laughter.

But how can tassels circling below distract the opponent? Personally, I'd be paying more attention to the shwrp end of the sword.

Exactly. While a tassel can do the very thing you describe, to learn how to use the tassel and the blade well is another story. A danger can be that a practitioner can overuse the tassel when he wants to use the blade. At swordforum.com, this issue has been discussed quite a bit. There was mention of using metal in the tassel to add to the harrassment of the opponent. I would check out the threads over there for more information.

I tried tying the sash around my wrist and found it to be a bit restraining agility-wise. But at least I can understand a reason for it. It would seem sound to me, except for the agility thing. Why put it on the sword when you could just tie the whole thing on your wrist?

Right. I found the same when tying the sash on a dao around my wrist. I do not believe anyone would want to tie a sash around the wrist when using a dao.

Doug M

[GeneChing]

Are you comliling some theoretical material together for a book or article? I would like to see that in print.

Always... it's what I do for a living.

Coincidentally, I recently received a sidebar about sword tassels that both confirmed and denied my personal stance on this. It confirmed tassel use as a lanyard, more specifically with mounted swrodsman tying the sword to their saddle (this is very parallel to sword knots in the West). It also described tassles as a weapon, noting that some tassels actually had hidden barbs inside them. I'd love to see an example of one of these. It was implied that these were really long tassels...

[Doug]

What is this sidebar you mention? Is it a source you can post here?

Thanks,

Doug M

[GeneChing]

It'll be in an upcoming issue. Soon, in fact. A good time to subscribe!

[Sam Wiley]

Well, I am trying to not care too much. I take an interest, of course, but I'm not going to stress over it. Right now, some are trying to get back to the fighting roots of the arts. In the future, people will go back to the health and exercise benefits. Further down the road, people will go back to exploring the fighting aspects...it's the fire and ice cycle. The pendulum swings because people of extreme opinion push and pull. Me, I just decided to have fun riding the swing. Makes me feel like a kid again.

My point about the fingers things is that you have a sword. That's it, right there. Use the sword. If you have a knife in the off hand, use it. But why finger-poke if you can stab or cut? All stories of people being able to jab through armor aside, other things are more believable and their are methods requiring less skill...such as using a knife in the off hand. In any case, most of the armor back then was silk or other cloth, or wood. I don't think Asia saw a lot of chain or other mail, or even plate. By the time they met westerners, the westerners came with guns, which practically eliminated the development of armor for a long time.

Anyway, while others are considering themselves temporary bearers of tradition and wondering why my stances aren't lower, I'm wondering why, if my stances aren't low enough, my tassels drag in the mud.

I guess we could debate this thing until we're all blue in the face, but we'll still never know for sure. After all, none of use has gone into battle to test a theory and everyone who has is dead.

Whoever decided to tie a scourge to a sword handle had to be one weird dude.

[Doug]

Originally posted by Sam Wiley
In any case, most of the armor back then was silk or other cloth, or wood. I don't think Asia saw a lot of chain or other mail, or even plate. By the time they met westerners, the westerners came with guns, which practically eliminated the development of armor for a long time.


I guess we could debate this thing until we're all blue in the face, but we'll still never know for sure. After all, none of use has gone into battle to test a theory and everyone who has is dead.

China does have a history with armor. Check out threads at www.swordforum.com for some good information on armor. In fact, check out art of specific time periods to get a good idea about what kind of armor was worn as well.

Well, we can be pretty certain. We just need to get through all the nonsense. That will take time (hopefully not as long as it will take the Chinese government to open the first emperor's tomb/pyramid.

Doug M

[NorthernShaolin]

Doug,

Yeah, I wish they hurry it up and open the first emperor's tomb or for that matter any of the many emperor's tombs. I sure many of our questions about type and shape of weapons and maybe some written materials on exactly what fighting styles really existed in their times. So many questions but so little answers.

[Doug]

I have a documentuary on the first emperor that is pretty good. In it, there is an English scholar of Taoism who claims that there are people in the Chinese government who are afraid of opening the tomb/pyramid. I think that the emperor is supposed to be angry at anyone who "disturbs his tomb" and would cause such terror and what not...something like that. Eh, I guess it makes sense for someone who ate jade and gold to say. Poor guy--maybe he would not have been such a ******* to the people had he avoided such a high-risk diet. But would Atkins have been better for him? I don't see anyone trying to excavate the burial grounds of the late and EVIL Dr. Atkins...

Doug M

[GeneChing]

I totally agree about the fingers. If I had a sword, the last thing I would be thinking is I should poke him in the eye.

My presenet hypothesis is that the jianzi is actually a throwback to mudras. It's mysticism. Interestingly enough, I just read a paper that discussed the use of qi in the martial arts. Apparently there is no hard evidence of any historical documentation of qi being connected to empty-hand combat until the 16th/17th century. However, there IS mention of it connected with jian practice, and that goes back much earlier. I can't remember when exactly, but I could look it up if you're interested. Of course, jian has deep roots in Taoism, as does qigong, so there could be a significant connection. I haven't been able to map it on to a mudra that makes any sense yet though. The closest is one finger - tarjani in Tibetan Buddhism - which is a warning or threat, pointed at an opponent. That makes sense in a way. I've been trying to find the earliest example of jianzi but haven't been having too much luck so far.

[Doug]

Gene,

Can you post some (or all if you do not mind) of the sources you use for your theory on tassels/sashes? I am particularly interested in the "sidebar" you mentioned above.

Which issue did you talk about this in? I hope I did not miss it recently.

Thanks,

Doug

[littlelaugh]

My sifu was talking about this last week while we were doing a sword form. He also said that tassels can be used as a distraction and a weapon. Our practice swords have little wood balls embedded in the tassels. He said to imagine a heavier metal ball, and to think about how that might be used to both hit someone with and how it could be used for sword balance.

I think the heavier ball could be used to add power if you were trying swoosh somone in the eyes with the tassel ends maybe? Although I don't know if that's really feasible.

Also I was wondering, with the sword finger issue, aren't you really supposed to be holding a scabard?

Cheers,

Laugh

[Doug]

Originally posted by littlelaugh
My sifu was talking about this last week while we were doing a sword form. He also said that tassels can be used as a distraction and a weapon. Our practice swords have little wood balls embedded in the tassels. He said to imagine a heavier metal ball, and to think about how that might be used to both hit someone with and how it could be used for sword balance.

Interesting. Could you say more about these--how heavy are they? How heavy would the metal balls be? To what degree have you found that you need to control them, and, using your estimation, how much would you need to compensate for metal ones?

I think the heavier ball could be used to add power if you were trying swoosh somone in the eyes with the tassel ends maybe? Although I don't know if that's really feasible.

This was my concern upon reading this. I have thought of this as well (I thought I was the only person fantasizing about this stuff), but I know that the extra weight at the end would have to be controlled in order to keep the strain from the sword (which might mean that a longer tassel would be needed to wrap around the other hand for control--I don't know).

Also I was wondering, with the sword finger issue, aren't you really supposed to be holding a scabard?

Well, you could be, but do not have to. The fingers could be striking implements on their own--not the focus of attack but an accessory for the person skilled in "finger skills." Certainly, a scabbard is a nice alternative. It would explain why most antique dao and jian are without scabbards. I will try to post some art that depicts Koreans using sword and scabbard when fighting the Japanese from the invasion of Korea.

Thanks,

Doug