Dao versus Jian

[MaartenSFS]

I don't understand the obsession with the Jian. They were barely used in the last thousand years and, from what I've been told, were then wielded in duelling and more akin to the European Smallsword, to maim but not kill. Prior to that it was much heavier and used in conjunction with a shield, the usage akin to the Roman Gladius. Why is this later, less practical method of Jianfa so popular today when it was Dao that were actually used on the battlefield (and elsewhere)? Was Jianfa some kind of game for the elite? All of the Wuxia bullshit just further elevates an inferior blade (plus other flowery, BS Gongfu). What are your thoughts?

[yeniseri]

An interesting "polemic" on the beginnings of taijiquan in North America
http://nr.ucpress.edu/content/17/3/64.abstract

Summary: The “Spirituality of taiji quan” as presented by Western books has less to do with Chinese religious tradition than contemporary spirituality cloaked in old Daoist imagery, hence the image of the jian having more 'status' as opposed to the use of the dao in its simplicity, being the weapon of necessity with the Big Swords Rebellion since modern weapons were unable to be had, used or able, or to be financed.

[Trick]

theres been some writings about Liam neeson lately, so that got me thinking about the movie Rob Roy which i watched two nights ago...Yes its movie fencing done by actors(and maybe fencing skilled doubles). Tim Roth makes a great performance there with the rapier

[Steve James]

Training with different weapons develops the body in different ways. That's why many systems have several weapons. However, someone in an ancient Chinese army might not have all the weapons or train with them.

In general, I think that swords were saved for last ditch occasions after long range weapons and tactics had failed. Even if the extremely well-armed soldier would have had a crossbow, spear, sword, and knife, the sword would have been a dao, They're easier to make, and you're right that they're more efficient to use. The weight being at the front of the weapon means that they have a greater percussive potential than any jian.

However, I doubt that daos are able to be used in formations. They need space to swing, unlike the way Roman formations could the gladius. A jian (like the relatively flexible tcc jian) would be even less useful, especially against armored opponents. The spear was the king of the battlefield, it's been said.

But, people study the jian now because some think the form is more interesting. But, nobody's stabbing each other with them. Dao-like weapons, such as machetes, pangas, etc., are still being used to chop things up today, including people.

[MaartenSFS]

Those are good points. Rather than in formations, though, Dao could be used also on horseback and in smaller skirmishes. I am considering to learn my Master's short staff if I ever get the chance. It is thirteen fists long, a very practical (to carry) length and a very versatile weapon. It is, however, very dangerous to spar with, so there is still the posibility that I'll need to learn double Dao instead (which is quite different from the Daofa I have already learned and closer to unarmed combat). These are much shorter Dao.

[Steve James]

Sure, it's argued that the curved sword (dao or sabre) developed for use from horseback. I'd still guess that a spear would be the predominant weapon --just because it's just a knife on a stick.

[Bhassler]

A heavy, swinging sword is much more effective in the hands of a strong, terrified, and only slightly trained peasant fighting armored opponents. Once you take away the armor and start looking at duels between individuals who can afford the time to train, then lighter, thrusting weapons are the efficient killer's choice. If you're on horseback, a big, curved blade lets you use the advantages of height and power. If you're on a pirate sailboat, you need a short blade to fit the confines and having a chopper works for things like rigging as well as people. Spears don't work as well on boats. Or in cities. If you live in a city and you need a blade, a pocket knife is more useful than any sword or spear. A pu dao is a poor (yet awesome) choice to open a bag of potato chips. It all comes down to the context you expect to be using your art in.

[origami_itto]

Why either or?
The dao is a simpler weapon, you learn it and then you've got all the other stuff you can do with a jian to learn.

I mean, is practicality really why we do this?

[Steve James]

Yes, context is everything. And, the most likely context in civilian life is empty-hand. Weapons training, if it does not improve empty hand use, is not much use. Some FMA teachers start beginners with blades and work toward empty hand application. Blade work, especially with sharp weapons, demands more precision and coordination. A stick is not a knife is not a jian is not a spear, but a hand/arm can be applied like any of those weapons.

Afa a jian against an armored opponent, I think it'd be a nightmare. The weight is behind the hand so "chopping" isn't as strong and has to be done close to the hilt to be effective. Well, I've been taught that jian use depends on accuracy, and the assumption is that one can't simply cut through just anything. I.e., targeting was the crucial skill (as in slicing exposed arteries, tendons, ligaments, nerve centers). It might seem impractical, but is fairly clear from most forms. I mean impractical from the pov of necessity. I.e., people who used jians didn't look like they were doing forms. (Imho, of course).

I think if jians were primarily a stabbing weapon, they'd be stiffer. The oldest ones probably are. Modern (post firearm) jians are lighter and more ceremonial. Though, if you're a minor official without bodyguards, it was a great weapon for personal defense --even if one didn't know a single form.

[everything]

what is your opinion about weapons-at-hand transferability? that is the only modern, practical reason I'd care now (nevermind history for its own interest). I mean like in the movies where jackie chan or someone picks up a chair, pot/pan, coffeepot, etc.

on paper, i'd say FMA. practically speaking (because all i can do is watch 5 elements videos here), I'd say just me self-taught in xingyi 5 elements, but that is with zero training and zero historical knowledge...

[everything]

this woman didn't use any other weapon-at-hand besides her unarmed skills (learned 3 weeks before), but interestingly she used a carabiner to lock her assailant in the bathroom (incredible quick/smart thinking after surviving and fending off assault): https://abcnews.go.com/US/female-jogger ... d=46034147

[johnwang]

The advantage of Dao vs. Jian is you can use your hand (or your body) to push on the back of Dao to add more power on the cut. You can't do that with the sword.

[origami_itto]

Realistically the cudgel is the most practical weapon. It's simple and easiest to find an improvised substitute in a pinch.

[edededed]

There may be some cultural bias - kind of like the Japanese fascination with the katana vs. other weapons (are spears, naginata, etc. so useless?).

In Romance of the Three Kingdoms, most of the strongest fighters used polearms, though (mao, chunqiudao, fangtianji). Definitely you would have to be reaaaaally good to defeat a master of one of those weapons (how to get close enough to stab with your flimsy jian in the first place?). Of course, in those days they did wear armor, too.

[Bhassler]

what is your opinion about weapons-at-hand transferability? that is the only modern, practical reason I'd care now (nevermind history for its own interest). I mean like in the movies where jackie chan or someone picks up a chair, pot/pan, coffeepot, etc.

I think it's mostly fantasy. Youtube sucker punch muggings and try to find time to locate and pick up a weapon. If you know something is going to go down, just get a real weapon. The folks I know who live lifestyles where the sudden need for a weapon is a real thing spend time training with the actual weapons they are going to use, including retaining and/or drawing those weapons under fire.