"Ratio" of weapons of "civilian" S.Chinese... ?

Rick · 12th January 2011, 01:50 AM

Fortunately we have no 'Experts' here; only Students .

KuKulzA28 · 12th January 2011, 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick

Fortunately we have no 'Experts' here; only Students .

Well, the much more learned students then, cause I'm definitely not one of them

fearn · 12th January 2011, 05:03 AM

Wasn't the White Lotus Rebellion around 1800? That could give you one reference point, I think.

As for ratios, outside of armory records, I'm not sure where you'd get any of that information. After all, something that's a staff one day would be a stick, flail, or spear the next, and what does it get counted under?

I suspect an approximate rule is that the shorter the (metal) blade, the more there were of them, just because metal was relatively uncommon, and over-sized swords and such were the province of the great generals and Imperial Palace.

The other two categories are the improvised weapons, such as hoes and rakes, the "weapons of the gods" (aka whatever villagers could make out of their bamboo stands when they got sufficiently annoyed), and the exotic weapons used by the martial artists, particularly when they were doing things like guarding caravans or collecting taxes. The exotic weapons were a bit of a trademark, and if they got famous, they let people know not to mess with the bearer. But that only worked if they were rare too.

Additionally, the Korean Muyedobotongji (available from in a book) shows the weapons that the Chinese taught the Koreans to repel the Japanese invasion. It's handy, because you can get some idea of the proportions of their basic 12-man squad.

Hope this helps.

F

KuKulzA28 · 12th January 2011, 08:34 PM

Thanks fearn, I'll look into those... and if anyone else has input, I'm all eyes/ears

I remember the Mandarin Duck formation from General Qi Jiguang... Supposed to be inspired by southern ethnicities and their method of warfare. It seems to have consisted of 12 people, 11 in combat, and 10 main combatants.

1 squad leader w/ flag
2 sabers and rattan shields
2 multiple tip spears
4 long spears
2 tridents
1 cook/porter

Looks like 1 saber to 4 spears (of varying types).
But that sheds no light on the use of baat jaam do / butterfly swords, bows, and firearms amongst the southern Chinese. the sword to spear ratio of 1:4 is probably about right, maybe the ratio was even greater like 1:10 or something.

fearn · 13th January 2011, 06:17 AM

Yes, I'm talking about the mandarin duck formation. It's certainly a place to start. I'd also add that the multiple tip spear (nangseon) isn't exactly a spear, and they worked in concert with the swordsmen in a rather cool way.

I think there's a book out there about Chinese archery (Amazon Link) that might be useful as well.

Best,

F

aiontay · 14th January 2011, 12:56 AM

Given that historically the Chinese relied on local militias well in to the 1800s, I'm not so sure that there was a particularly clear divide between civilian and military weapons, particularly in Taiwan, especially in the 1600-1700 time frame.

One possible approach would be to do an analysis of the weapons taught in the various southern traditional martial arts. I realize there are some problems with that approach, but maybe the percentages of say, staff and hoe forms in Choy Lay Fut versus the number of broadsword forms might give you some insight.

I'd also be inclined to think that Taiwan might be a bit of an outlier from the rest of South China, and while it might be a more "backward" area it might therefore been better armed. I don't know if you've read "Rebels and Revolutionaries in Northern China". I think that is the title. I bought it years ago while I was living in Taiwan and subsequently loaned it to a guy and never got it back. Anyway it was a study of the dynamics of banditry, rebellion and revolution in 3 northern Chinese provinces in the 19th and 20th Centuries. These provinces, I forget the exact three, had a long tradition of unrest and banditry. I remember a couple of points in the book that might be relevant. One, although he did not elaborate on this point, the author did note that the "rebellious" reputation of these provinces was similar to Taiwan's and the second was although they were extremely poor provinces the inhabitants were very well armed. In fact, the peasants were criticized by government officials for their propensity to buy guns and swords rather than invest in agricultural improvements. Of course, the author explained what this was not completely irrational behavior on the peasants' part, but the main idea here is just because the civilians may not have been wealthy, it doesn't mean didn't buy good weapons if they could.

KuKulzA28 · 14th January 2011, 05:38 AM

Good points!

Was one of those provinces Shandong? That place was historically full of banditry and violence, and the region has birthed many effective fighting styles - such as Mantis Boxing. The current day combat-effectiveness of many of those practitioners is debatable, but that's due to many factors and an entirely different discussion. But your point is pretty intriguing. Do you have an ISBN or a specific vendor you know that I can get the book from? If not I'll search.

Taiwan was definitely a pretty violent "frontier" for centuries... I know that many Taiwanese were better-armed compared to counterparts in more "peaceful" (relatively) parts of China... but that was probably more out of necessity than cultural preference. Weapons over agricultural improvements, eh? No doubt you need to to survive before you can thrive.

12th January 2011, 08:34 PM	#4
KuKulzA28 Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: between work and sleep Posts: 731	Thanks fearn, I'll look into those... and if anyone else has input, I'm all eyes/ears I remember the Mandarin Duck formation from General Qi Jiguang... Supposed to be inspired by southern ethnicities and their method of warfare. It seems to have consisted of 12 people, 11 in combat, and 10 main combatants. 1 squad leader w/ flag 2 sabers and rattan shields 2 multiple tip spears 4 long spears 2 tridents 1 cook/porter Looks like 1 saber to 4 spears (of varying types). But that sheds no light on the use of baat jaam do / butterfly swords, bows, and firearms amongst the southern Chinese. the sword to spear ratio of 1:4 is probably about right, maybe the ratio was even greater like 1:10 or something.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

12th January 2011, 01:50 AM	#1
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,339	Fortunately we have no 'Experts' here; only Students .

12th January 2011, 05:03 AM	#3
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Wasn't the White Lotus Rebellion around 1800? That could give you one reference point, I think. As for ratios, outside of armory records, I'm not sure where you'd get any of that information. After all, something that's a staff one day would be a stick, flail, or spear the next, and what does it get counted under? I suspect an approximate rule is that the shorter the (metal) blade, the more there were of them, just because metal was relatively uncommon, and over-sized swords and such were the province of the great generals and Imperial Palace. The other two categories are the improvised weapons, such as hoes and rakes, the "weapons of the gods" (aka whatever villagers could make out of their bamboo stands when they got sufficiently annoyed), and the exotic weapons used by the martial artists, particularly when they were doing things like guarding caravans or collecting taxes. The exotic weapons were a bit of a trademark, and if they got famous, they let people know not to mess with the bearer. But that only worked if they were rare too. Additionally, the Korean Muyedobotongji (available from in a book) shows the weapons that the Chinese taught the Koreans to repel the Japanese invasion. It's handy, because you can get some idea of the proportions of their basic 12-man squad. Hope this helps. F

13th January 2011, 06:17 AM	#5
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Yes, I'm talking about the mandarin duck formation. It's certainly a place to start. I'd also add that the multiple tip spear (nangseon) isn't exactly a spear, and they worked in concert with the swordsmen in a rather cool way. I think there's a book out there about Chinese archery (Amazon Link) that might be useful as well. Best, F

14th January 2011, 12:56 AM	#6
aiontay Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 88	Given that historically the Chinese relied on local militias well in to the 1800s, I'm not so sure that there was a particularly clear divide between civilian and military weapons, particularly in Taiwan, especially in the 1600-1700 time frame. One possible approach would be to do an analysis of the weapons taught in the various southern traditional martial arts. I realize there are some problems with that approach, but maybe the percentages of say, staff and hoe forms in Choy Lay Fut versus the number of broadsword forms might give you some insight. I'd also be inclined to think that Taiwan might be a bit of an outlier from the rest of South China, and while it might be a more "backward" area it might therefore been better armed. I don't know if you've read "Rebels and Revolutionaries in Northern China". I think that is the title. I bought it years ago while I was living in Taiwan and subsequently loaned it to a guy and never got it back. Anyway it was a study of the dynamics of banditry, rebellion and revolution in 3 northern Chinese provinces in the 19th and 20th Centuries. These provinces, I forget the exact three, had a long tradition of unrest and banditry. I remember a couple of points in the book that might be relevant. One, although he did not elaborate on this point, the author did note that the "rebellious" reputation of these provinces was similar to Taiwan's and the second was although they were extremely poor provinces the inhabitants were very well armed. In fact, the peasants were criticized by government officials for their propensity to buy guns and swords rather than invest in agricultural improvements. Of course, the author explained what this was not completely irrational behavior on the peasants' part, but the main idea here is just because the civilians may not have been wealthy, it doesn't mean didn't buy good weapons if they could.

14th January 2011, 05:38 AM	#7
KuKulzA28 Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: between work and sleep Posts: 731	Good points! Was one of those provinces Shandong? That place was historically full of banditry and violence, and the region has birthed many effective fighting styles - such as Mantis Boxing. The current day combat-effectiveness of many of those practitioners is debatable, but that's due to many factors and an entirely different discussion. But your point is pretty intriguing. Do you have an ISBN or a specific vendor you know that I can get the book from? If not I'll search. Taiwan was definitely a pretty violent "frontier" for centuries... I know that many Taiwanese were better-armed compared to counterparts in more "peaceful" (relatively) parts of China... but that was probably more out of necessity than cultural preference. Weapons over agricultural improvements, eh? No doubt you need to to survive before you can thrive.