Transitions into Unarmed Combat

Discussion of Chinese historical swordsmanship from all styles.

Moderator:Scott M. Rodell

Post Reply
Cat
Posts:11
Joined:Fri Dec 03, 2004 3:16 pm
Location:Darkest America
Contact:
Transitions into Unarmed Combat

Post by Cat » Sun Apr 03, 2005 11:52 am

I'm given to understand that Western swordsmanship includes, as a matter of course, transitions from sword combat into unarmed combat, with a particular emphasis on grappling, locks, and throws. That being the case, it's a safe bet that Chinese swordsmanship would include similar transitions... However, I've never seen them or heard much discussion of the topic.



So, two questions:

1. Does GRTC teach armed->unarmed transitions? (For those studying other styles, does your style do so?) Likewise, are you taught how/where to include unarmed techniques (trips, grabs, throws, disarms) in sword combat? Or are armed and unarmed techniques kept essentially separate from each other?



2. How do you go about teaching such a thing? Are there particular drills? Safety considerations? Special equipment?



~Cat

Scott M. Rodell
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts:1364
Joined:Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:50 pm
Location:Virginia
Contact:

Hands to Swordplay

Post by Scott M. Rodell » Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:50 am

This is a really good question, it gets us thinking about how to use our art in stituations outside of jian facing jian.



Studying Chinese historical swordsmanship is a bit like archeology. This was almost a dead art, & its still an endangered one. Chinese swordsmanship hasn't come down to us as a complete system that was being widely practiced. And there are only a very, very few period manuals to provide us with examples of what training encompassed. Also, there are schools developing new methods of swordplay, with the emphasis on play, that have little if anything to do with historical realities. Those who practice this type of play, typically with light, foam sword-like objects, understandably have a skewed understanding of swordsmanship. We, like archeologists, have the job of look at the evidence available & drawing logical conclusions as to what historical swordsmanship included & how it was practiced. One of our main tools for this is looking at the forms themselves. The forms are essentially manuals of swordsmanship in three dimensional form.



All schools of Chinese swordsmanship arise out of a martial system, such as taijiquan or shaolinquan. Unlike the empty hand techniques of the various schools of Chinese martial arts, the mechanics of swordplay, functional techniques, etc. vary little from school to school. Therefore we know one important thing about close quarter contact during swordplay. That is that the swordsman had at his disposal a wide range of striking, kicking, & grappling techniques to employ from which ever system he studied. Knowing this, we can observe the sword forms & study their martial applications, to determine how each school of swordsmanship dealt with different situation, including the close-in.



My study of both the Michuan & public Yangshi Taiji Jian forms led me to the conclusion that rather than switch to grappling in close quarter sitiuations, the intent is to drive back the duifang back out to sword use distance. In other words, instead of switching hands vs. hands, the swordsman first uses kicks to keep his duifang at bay, not allowing him to approach & get inside his sword length. If the duifang does succeed at getting inside, then the swordsman can use techniques such as pushing with the blade, (see first section of the Michuan form, pages 80-81 in Chinese Swordsmanship) or the talisman, to the duifang's throat (see section 7th of the Michuan form pages 155-156) to force the duifang back out. Alternatively, if one senses that one will not be able to force the duifang back, or hasn't enough time to, the free hand talisman can be employed to poke the duifang in the throat, pausing him for a moment, giving time for the sword to be brought into action (see the Major Star of the Dipper movement of the public form, page 192). In each example provided above, we should note that the jian is typically kept out of reach of the duifang. My impression from studying the form applications with the close quarters situation in mind is that why fight with your hands when you are holding a deadly weapon in one of them? (This kind of reminds me of the American idiom, "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight.")



Having writen all this, I would not say that this means one couldn't or should never drop one's sword or use the hilt to strike or grapple. There will certainly be times when one has to no other choice. But when there is a choice, stick with your sword & make your duifang come to you on your terms, make him play your game.

Scott M. Rodell
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts:1364
Joined:Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:50 pm
Location:Virginia
Contact:

Re: Transitions into Unarmed Combat

Post by Scott M. Rodell » Mon Apr 04, 2005 12:14 pm

Cat wrote:...two questions:

1. Does GRTC teach armed->unarmed transitions? (For those studying other styles, does your style do so?) Likewise, are you taught how/where to include unarmed techniques (trips, grabs, throws, disarms) in sword combat? Or are armed and unarmed techniques kept essentially separate from each other?


I haven't taught it as such, though your question is giving me some ideas from training. Essentially I work to keep the students' minds open to what can happen. So when there is an opportunity to quickly move in, jam them up & strike, I do. A jab in the stomach is usually enough to get the point across. If I do my job of teaching swordsmanship well enough, there should be few, if any opportunites for a duifang to move in.



We also engage in empty hand vs. sword training. This involves the unarmed student facing one armed with a padded stick. The student with the stick can wield it in any manner they like & should keep the student without a weapon at the thresh hold of their ablity. Once you're pretty good at facing a stick unarmed, it's much easier to face a weapon with your jian in hand.


2. How do you go about teaching such a thing? Are there particular drills? Safety considerations? Special equipment?


Our swordplay can be dangerous. Instead of relying on protective gear, we reply upon each other's skill & experience. I also expect students to be self-aware & reliant so that if training is getting beyond what one's skill level can handle, one steps back & asks for a break or a slow & less powerful play. Likewise I expect classmates not to beat up on each other. So when you know you have someone, you don't beat them to the ground, just because you can.

Mimic
Rank: Frequent Contributor
Posts:24
Joined:Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:32 pm
Location:Tallinn, Estonia

Re: Transitions into Unarmed Combat

Post by Mimic » Wed Apr 13, 2005 9:26 am

Cat wrote:I'm given to understand that Western swordsmanship includes, as a matter of course, transitions from sword combat into unarmed combat, with a particular emphasis on grappling, locks, and throws. That being the case, it's a safe bet that Chinese swordsmanship would include similar transitions... However, I've never seen them or heard much discussion of the topic.


European swordsmanship does not include transitions as such, but combative arts do include unarmed techniques to be used in armed combat situations (completely unarmed techniques are a matter altogether different). Grappling grows in importance in european swordarts with the advance in armour, basically you did not have any hope of damaging your opponent once distance closed up with your sword, thus you had to do something else useful, like binding your opponent's weapon to bring your own to unopposed thrust position or to throw your opponent to the ground to use your dagger on his armour's vulnerable spots while you were holding him down. As armour went out of favour in warfare, thus was also importance of grappling arts in swordsplay lessened.

As the swordsplay we are learning in GRTC is from the era of no or marginal armour and VERY sharp swords (no need to cut through armour and still stay sharp), an era comparable to european rapier period, then some similarities in the fight logic are there, in my opinion, of keeping your distance and letting your weapon do the work. Which wouldn't mean a practiced player wouldn't find a spot here or there for a well-placed kick to the knees or binding of careless duifang's weapon hand with your off hand.



As always, my personal opinion, a somewhat educated guess ;)



Best regards,

Mimic
Dancing on the edge of a blade.

Cat
Posts:11
Joined:Fri Dec 03, 2004 3:16 pm
Location:Darkest America
Contact:

Post by Cat » Wed Apr 13, 2005 6:33 pm

Thanks!



Mimic has filled out some points that I was going to ask about (except, you answered before I managed to organize my thoughts, and stated some of the contextual considerations much more clearly than I would have). I can easily see a correlation between the prevalence of armor and the emphasis on different kinds of techniques.



My knowledge of the various schools of Western swordsmanship is entirely secondhand - a little research, but no real training. These questions came out of a conversation with someone who actually studies one of the Western styles.



My experience with Chinese swordsmanship is also somewhat limited; I've covered two jian forms and am about to start learning a dao form. In my current school the techniques are kept fairly separate, though (a) that may have more to do with the way the curriculum is taught than with the system itself, and (b) there is a certain overlap in principles. There are some movements in both of the jian forms where the talisman hand is extended, though I was given to understand that these were more in the nature of a salute or challenge than an actual attack. That may be a misunderstanding on my part, or on my teacher's.



My former school taught Northern Praying Mantis, and while I didn't advance far enough to learn the jian, I *did* learn something of the staff. Mantis has several transitions into what I would consider "grappling" in its staff work - techniques which can be used to bind up the opponent's weapon or limb. I doubt that a skilled Mantis practitioner (i.e. not me) would be at all hesitant about using an 'unarmed' technique in a sword fight, if he thought he could get away with it... though, again, that may be something emphasized more in staff work than it is with a bladed weapon.



~Cat

Alberto
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Posts:40
Joined:Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:16 pm
Location:moscow

Post by Alberto » Sun Apr 17, 2005 12:24 pm

we are learning in GRTC is from the era of no or marginal armour and VERY sharp swords (no need to cut through armour and still stay sharp), an era comparable to european rapier period
2 Mimic

then, this era exist only in your fantasy, inspired by HK movies. please check any catalog or book on rapiera, and you find that this weapon is 1-1.3 m long and weights in average 1.5 kg. You can check with Lao Shr dimensions for average jian and thus find no similarities whatsoever. Rapier is thurst weapon with cutting ability, and extremly elaborated guard. how you compare it to jian with lightweight (less than 1kg), small (80 cm blade or so) and no guard at all (compare to european weapons)?
Regards,

Alberto

Mimic
Rank: Frequent Contributor
Posts:24
Joined:Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:32 pm
Location:Tallinn, Estonia

Post by Mimic » Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:24 am

Alberto wrote:
then, this era exist only in your fantasy, inspired by HK movies. please check any catalog or book on rapiera, and you find that this weapon is 1-1.3 m long and weights in average 1.5 kg. You can check with Lao Shr dimensions for average jian and thus find no similarities whatsoever. Rapier is thurst weapon with cutting ability, and extremly elaborated guard. how you compare it to jian with lightweight (less than 1kg), small (80 cm blade or so) and no guard at all (compare to european weapons)?


Ah, but here you have misunderstood me :) I may have not explained too well what I meant. I had in mind not the physical similarities of weapons, but the overall battlefield picture, during the times in which those weapons were used, the situations people armed with those weapons were faced with.



Regards,

Mimic



PS: A cuphilt rapier, for one, is not all too elaborate ;)

PPS: And thank you, I do know what a jian looks like and what are it's dimensions and I still hold to my opinion as to that the combat logic is similar with those weapons, only methods differ.
Dancing on the edge of a blade.

User avatar
ben hanawalt
Rank: Frequent Contributor
Posts:17
Joined:Tue Sep 27, 2005 10:01 am
Location:Los Montanos
Contact:

Post by ben hanawalt » Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:13 pm

i agree with you mimic. which is why I switched from rapier to a jian. nice and simple, and much better cutting ability in my opinion.



I would like to add a bit more to the main theme of this thread.. I spar and fence w/ my brother quite a bit.. he has no martial training.. but is really, really good. and he is constantly throwing things at me I don't expect, from my more 'learned' sparring partners...



and one thing he does. and kicks my ass with.. is transitioning into hand to hand combat while we fence. ( I can't very well tell him that's not how you're supposed to do it.. when it works.. and well..) theoretically he should never be able to get that close. but when you're practice field isn't perfect. (ie.. on a gravel road with a drop off... inside a mobal home.. on the porch.. etc)... I am constantly amazed when I go for a rather routine lunge, uncommited so that I might circle his blade and attack from another angle... when instead of doing what I expect.. a parry.. he might sidestep at angle.. and well I don't remember what happened after that. just picking myself off the ground..



so perhaps. Im need to practice more. or a hundred other things. but against a swordsman using standard techniques.. I do all right..



but it leads me to believe we shouldn't under estimate what is possible , when you don't know that you cant.



ben
From the earth.. into the fire.. fanned with air.. quenched in water नमस्ते

Post Reply