Hudiedao

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by KuKulzA28

bumping this thread in case anyone can add more info about the Hu-die-dao and also Guang-dong and Hoklo weaponry/fighting

In USA, many of the "Tongs" (Chinese gangs) were known to use axes and "tommy-guns", would Hu-die-dao have been amongst their weapons?

Most certainly,

There have been some good articles found in Harpers Weekly in the early 1900s that document this and other weapons of choice.

You will find some of these dao above and others within my gallery collection.
I still have several pairs to add and I may get to it this weekend if time is available, it has been a rough couple of weeks without a home PC.

Dimensions that Fearn asked for are within the text.

http://www.swordsantiqueweapons.com/archive.html

Gav

[katana]

Interesting....I've only known these as 'butterfly knives' ....used in several forms of martial arts weapons training. I've seen them used in Wing Chun training sessions and would be devastating in confined areas.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke06luhv_nU


Regards David

[Nathaniel]

Originally Posted by katana

Interesting....I've only known these as 'butterfly knives' ....used in several forms of martial arts weapons training. I've seen them used in Wing Chun training sessions and would be devastating in confined areas.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke06luhv_nU


Regards David

David, FYI another name in Chinese for these is:

Baat Cham Dao / Bat Chum Dao / Baat Jam Dao / Bart Cham Dao / Baat Jaam Dou = Eight-cutting knife


( Dao = knife and Jian = sword)

....I didn't see this term mentioned so I thought I would add it to the list

[Jim McDougall]

Outstanding notes Kukulz, and thank you for the cited references, beautifully done. I like the observations on the scholars jian, which are well placed in perspective, and really help in understanding more of thier context. It is interesting when considered alongside the studies of fencing and advanced education of nobility and gentry in Europe etc. in more recent times.

Very good points and queries on the 'river pirates' and you are quite right about thier contact as far as the Philippines. I am not sure if the same perspective might be applied to the Chinese pirates as the more familiar European pirates of the 'Golden Age' of late 17th into early 18th century as far as motivation or skills in weaponry. I think there were of course varying degrees of application as previously noted, as piracy is a very broad topic which has been well known in most cultures from early times. Whether Vikings, Cossacks, Barbary Pirates, Privateers, Ladrones or various Asian 'river pirates', all had broadly interpreted lifestyles and probably a wide spectrum of participants.

I certainly dont believe that most pirates in the sense most familiar, were especially well trained in fighting or use of weapons. Most accounts of pirates I have known seem to suggest that pirates in most cases used all manner of ploys and intimidation in subduing thier prey, and would avoid targets that were excessively formidable. Naturally, there were groups or individuals who did become understandably seasoned and ruthless if they survived long enough to ply the 'trade' for a time.

With this being the case, I would imagine that such weapons as the hu die shuang dao were probably seen occasionally among river pirates, much as all manner of weaponry would have been. While piracy is often romanticized and associated with heroic or patriotic tales, in truth it is largely a social phenomenon which obviously entreated a wide assortment of miscreants and misfits from all walks of life. Certainly the criminal element prevailed, as well as those who had somehow come from failed positions even from upper classes.
With these wide degrees of pedigree, I would say equally wide degree of skills, education, character and ideals, or lack of, would have existed together, but the ultimate goal would have been largely the same...survival.

Nathaniel, thank you for adding the additional terms. While trying to learn more on these topics, it really helps to build a sort of glossary, as the terms often get confusing.

All very best regards,
Jim

[KuKulzA28]

I see. Perhaps the pirate-kings were no different from the bandit-kings on land (in essence), both drew the desperate, whether good fighters or not, and both needed open lawless territory to maneuver in. Thus the frontiers of the Empire and the Sea were great places. However, I would think that bandits rarely got away with amassing as large numbers as the Chinese pirates did...
It would probably be impossible to know, but did some pirate kings have a state-style rule over their crew and subjects? Or was it just everyone for themselves, and the king was just the most ruthless and influential of them all, feared enough to be obeyed? Or was it a system of patron/client, the pirates would obey the pirate-king's orders so long as the king provided for them well-enough and demonstrated peerless tactics/courage/benevolence/legitimacy/ruthlessness etc. - a buccaneer's version of the mandate of heaven I suppose...?

[Jim McDougall]

It seems most of what we know of these pirate entities comes from romanticized and sensationalized literature or narratives, and I honestly cannot claim to having read much of this. However, what I have presumed is based on notes, research and discussions over the years, and simply considering the kinds of embellishments that typically become emplaced in tales of these figures.
I think it would take focused and in depth research on specific regions and pirate groups to really understand what sort of hierarchy or organization they might have used, there always had to be a command figure, and that person would need to maintain respect most of all. Whether accomplished through fear, benevolence or any means, leadership was essential. I have always been surprised at the very sensibly represented codes of the European pirates, which were remarkably considered actual democracies of a form.
It seems quite a paradox to have such standards applied to basically an outlaw enterprise, but gives an example of how many of these groups probably organized.

Getting back to the orginal topic, the 'butterfly knives', much as the diverse strata of members of the pirate groups, were likely present in incidental cases.

All best regards,
Jim

[fearn]

Originally Posted by freebooter

Most certainly,

There have been some good articles found in Harpers Weekly in the early 1900s that document this and other weapons of choice.

You will find some of these dao above and others within my gallery collection.
I still have several pairs to add and I may get to it this weekend if time is available, it has been a rough couple of weeks without a home PC.

Dimensions that Fearn asked for are within the text.

http://www.swordsantiqueweapons.com/archive.html

Gav

Appreciate the numbers, Gav. They're neat blades.

Best,

F

[Jim McDougall]

The 'butterfly knives' seem to have always been one of the more esoteric and intriguing Chinese weapons, probably from increased presence in China from the Taipai period, increased immigration of Chinese mid 19th century, and the Boxer Rebellion, and acquisition of these as souveniers.

It does not seem that authentic examples are often available, though the popularity of reproduction forms through interest in martial arts are often seen.

I believe these were primarily civilian weapons, used by martial artists and most definitely effective in the crowded city streets and dark alleys of southern China. Thier association with the 'river pirates' seems well placed as the focus of these well organized clans were profoundly present on the coastal areas of the south preying on junks as well as into the Yangtze River. It seems that they were quite present on Taiwan as well, as noted.
The hooked guard on these seems to derives from the sai, or trident like weapon, also a key martial arts weapon.
There are suggestions of military association due to the use of knuckleguard, and westernization of military in latter 19th century, but the guard is thought to have been intended more as a 'knuckleduster' and blades are often only sharpenened halfway.

I am not sure there was any significant presence of these as weapons used by the 'Tongs' in America. While these began as protective societies to protect against oppression of immigrant Chinese in rather unstable environments of American cities in those times, they later took on thier own enterprises, not always especially legal. These groups that had been known as Tongs (= hall, as in organized group) became a type of gangs, that by the early 20th century, many were known by the type of guns they carried.
The term 'hatchet man' came from the hit men who eliminated troublesome enemy figures. Weapons were of course not legally obtainable for these Chinese, and common utilitarian items such as axes were more likely used along with crudely fashioned traditional forms of knife or short swords.

It seems that in many forms of martial arts, the use of dual weapons is quite preferred, as it enables exaggerated and confounding movements that throw off the opponent. Knowing how fast these guys move, its hard enought to watch the moves of one arms let alone two! In India, the use of patas and katars by the Mahrattas uses windmill like slashing of two weapons is used.
The Boxers were well known for thier terrifying demonstrations used to demoralize the westerners there, using huge daos and certainly these paired knives.

Aboard the decks of a cramped ship, these manueverable weapons would be a deadly deterrent in a melee.

Absolutely fascinating pieces of Chinese history!!!

All best regards,
Jim

[KuKulzA28]

Great input Jim! I would agree that their popularity is great, but I feel as if that's more to do with Wung Chun's popularity after Bruce Lee came on the scene, rather than they being popular in general. (Also, the quality of a lot of the unbalanced and stainless steel dao is questionable, as is the training of many Kung Fu schools, so I wouldn't be concerned about being jumped by a hu-die-dao wielding Wing Chun master). Dual weaponry has always been harder to manage than single, and as such would be the minority. No doubt other Chinese pirates, highwaymen, and fighters would use long-knives/shortswords but I doubt very many used the paired Hu-die-dao, as it is also a tradition that only the most trusted amongst the Southern Chinese martial arts were taught it. Then again, being skilled in fighting was a lot more prevalent then than now, and every village's leading Shifu/Sifu was likely to have quite a following, even if many of them are just local farmers looking to improve themselves and the village militia when they weren't out planting or harvesting. Still though, martial arts were generally not highly regarded, being the tool of the trade for bodyguards (protectors of the rich), thugs (harassers of the poor), and soldiers (rape & pillage & destruction).

I think the same can be said about other less "popular" weapons. The da-dao may have existed in many local variants as a sort of machete, But the Da-dao we know today as the weapon wasn't very common in official imperial armies. Similar weapons we used bu these were often the two-handed sabers of the Palace Guard or the Miao Dao of the Iron troops and northern arquebusiers.... not exactly the da-dao we know of, though certainly a DA dao (BIG blade). Others like the hook swords and wind and fire wheels would have been rarer still. On top of all this, consider that the Emperor rarely wanted his subjects armed... often very few Chinese had a weapon - the closest thing they had was their rice-knife or a walking stick. The fact that mercenary/bodyguard companies were very prosperous in the Ching dynasty reveals that crime was rampant and the countryside dangerous. Not only did the bodyguards have to be good hand-to-hand combatants, they had to be skilled in geography, language, and be able to smoothly deal with bandits when the bandit-groups were too large. They also had "secret" weapons on them aside from their spear or sword, often a small cudgel, dagger, revolver, or 1911 hey martial artists aren't stupid, and they get every edge they can get... except those who use chi-blasts and can catch bullets...

I sense I am beginning to go off-topic...

I wonder what exactly gave South China Sea pirates such a terrible reputation. Was it their relatively modernized navies of war junks? Their terrorizing of trade? Their superior knowledge of the waters? Or was it their actual fighting prowess? Was it how many guns and cannons they had bristling on their ships, or the prowess of their crews - who might be armed with anything from dao to butterfly swords to spears to arquebus...
Would these pirates be well-trained or just a motley crew of everything from an armed person, to a great fighter? Koxinga's forces were well-trained, but he was also more than just a local pirate-king...

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Kukulz, and for the wonderful response. Its great to have the insight you provide on this, as my information is based only on overview and various notes, so your perspective is outstanding.

I very much agree that the Emperor would not particularly like civilians having arms, as from what I understand the secret societies that sought to return to Ming or Han Chinese rule from the much despised Manchu power would be very much a threat. I have seen the pairs of these hu die shuang dao of abount 1850's to 60's stated of a 'security company' or to that effect.

I have often wondered about the so called 'scholars jian' and whether these individuals were permitted to have protection weapons in some sort of scholastic exception in cities.It would seem that in rural areas, there would be more latitude for local smiths to create weaponry such as the common village jians and other types of dao etc.

I have always had great admiration for martial arts in virtually all of the many disciplines, mostly for the brilliant control of the amazingly powerful skills that are tenaciously learned, and which also far exceed the more obvious physical applications.

I would classify the reputation of the 'River Pirates' as formidable rather than 'terrible'. From what I understand they often operated much as privateers in the sense of protecting from foreign intrusion, although it would be difficult to accurately classify the incredibly large spectrum of these organized clans in one category or another. As always, the term becomes essentially generically applied.

Its great to discuss more on these Chinese weapons as they are incredibly interesting, and not often covered in threads here. I have had various opportunities to collect notes and a few references, but it is good to be able to add to them with more accurate observations.

Thank you again!!!

All the best,
Jim

[KuKulzA28]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you Kukulz, and for the wonderful response. Its great to have the insight you provide on this, as my information is based only on overview and various notes, so your perspective is outstanding.

No. Thank you! I learn a lot from all this. My words come from what I have read here, in books, and heard from Chinese martial arts historians and teachers.

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I have often wondered about the so called 'scholars jian' and whether these individuals were permitted to have protection weapons in some sort of scholastic exception in cities.It would seem that in rural areas, there would be more latitude for local smiths to create weaponry such as the common village jians and other types of dao etc.

Well, just because big emperor says no doesn't always mean no! There's always exceptions. Military families obviously are trained in and use weaponry. As I said before, thugs, bodyguards, and soldiers all had to have weapons. Village militia may have been supplied by the local armory or blacksmith, but some families had a family sword/spear, treasured and passed down.
The scholar sword can be compared to the fencing and dueling of European aristocrats... While many scholars and nobles of China were not fighters, some were accomplished warriors (have the wealth and time to devote) and obviously the sword was a sign of status as well as a weapon. The jian was considered the scholar's sword because it took more finesse and learning to become proficient. The saying is something like "10 days for fists, 100 days for dao, a lifetime for jian" - I probably got it wrong, but you get the idea. Empty hand techniques were much less emphasized compared to weaponry (though the body can be used in many ways, the versatility of which cannot be paralleled by weapons as we know it).

Some rich folks even devoted their lives to the martial arts. Fan Xu Dong, born in 1841, was pretty wealthy throughout his life and taught openly in Yantai, Shandong. Apparently, legend says he defeated a Russian Boxer at one point. Some say he defeated a roaming Samurai who was challenging and killing local martial artists. I guess he was quite the hero for martial artists of the time. Shandong was known for it's development of martial artists. The people were stereotypically tall and rude.

I know some rich Chinese today who teach martial arts. A guy in my local Chinatown teaches Hung Gar for very low cost. Granted he owns 10 restaurants or so, so he can afford to spend free time teaching. Whether or not the fighting application is present is debatable, I cannot attest to that since I have never been to his school.

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I would classify the reputation of the 'River Pirates' as formidable rather than 'terrible'. From what I understand they often operated much as privateers in the sense of protecting from foreign intrusion, although it would be difficult to accurately classify the incredibly large spectrum of these organized clans in one category or another. As always, the term becomes essentially generically applied.

I think I might need to do more reading on River Pirates. Would that be confined solely to mainland China? What of the Japanese/Chinese Wokou? What about Chinese pirates in the South China sea, terrorizing land from northern China down to Taiwan and the Philippines? The Philippines you say? Damn straight, and I got CITATION!
“[pirate king Lin Tao/Limahong ] attacked Manila with sixty-two armed junks and some four-thousand warriors on November 29, 1574”

Wiley, Mark V. Filipino Martial Culture. Singapore: Charles E. Tuttle Publishing, 1996.

The Spanish were also concerned with Koxinga who was said to be contemplating the invasion of the Philippines after one of the Spanish sino-massacres. Perhaps if he did with his large fleet and armies, history would've turned out differently. The Philippines are a lot further from the Qing than Taiwan is. But that would make him further from Xiamen, his old base, and geographically, strategically, and logistically further from his goal of re-instating the Ming, which at one point became a lost cause.
The Chinese pirate-kings were a lot more progressive in their thinking. Trade. Guns. Colonies. Evolving warfare. Navy. Very fascinating how the southern Chinese folks conducted themselves, a very different flavor from the northerners.

But that gets to the heart of my question... what were this pirates like? What made them so fierce? They didn't have the same fanatical attitude and cultural incentives that the Moros had that made them so feared. They didn't simply raid and return home (or settle) like the Vikings did. Yet they were very powerful and some of them attempted to carve out kingdoms of their own. What made them like that? What were their main sources of man-power? What was their usual level of martial skill? Their weaponry? How common were Hu-die-dao? I would say it'd be a great weapon about sampans and junks, but were they common? Somehow I don't think so, but maybe they were...

[fearn]

Originally Posted by KuKulzA28

Then again, being skilled in fighting was a lot more prevalent then than now, and every village's leading Shifu/Sifu was likely to have quite a following, even if many of them are just local farmers looking to improve themselves and the village militia when they weren't out planting or harvesting. Still though, martial arts were generally not highly regarded, being the tool of the trade for bodyguards (protectors of the rich), thugs (harassers of the poor), and soldiers (rape & pillage & destruction).
(SNIP)
I think the same can be said about other less "popular" weapons. The da-dao may have existed in many local variants as a sort of machete, But the Da-dao we know today as the weapon wasn't very common in official imperial armies. Similar weapons we used bu these were often the two-handed sabers of the Palace Guard or the Miao Dao of the Iron troops and northern arquebusiers.... not exactly the da-dao we know of, though certainly a DA dao (BIG blade). Others like the hook swords and wind and fire wheels would have been rarer still. On top of all this, consider that the Emperor rarely wanted his subjects armed... often very few Chinese had a weapon - the closest thing they had was their rice-knife or a walking stick. The fact that mercenary/bodyguard companies were very prosperous in the Ching dynasty reveals that crime was rampant and the countryside dangerous. Not only did the bodyguards have to be good hand-to-hand combatants, they had to be skilled in geography, language, and be able to smoothly deal with bandits when the bandit-groups were too large.

Actually, the farmer's martial arts were (and probably are) quite diverse in China, and most of them aren't practiced outside the country. As someone who practiced one pointed out, there's not a lot of difference between living in a temple and learning a martial art, and living in an isolated farming village and learning a martial art. Both are spartan conditions with lots of manual labor, and the relative lack of distractions (as would be found in a big city) means that the sifu can take up large blocks of time for training his better students, there being little else to do. He could also control their diet and other aspects of their lives to favor martial development.

Don't forget that Chen-style tai chi was a village martial art. The Chen village made its money growing and shipping medicinal herbs, and even before they developed tai chi, they had their own martial art for protecting their shipments from bandits.

As for weapons, we've all seen those village swords that Josh has. Beyond that, the village arts often use farm equipment (hoes, rakes, etc), along with staffs of varying lengths, and more conventional spears, jian, and dao.

Anyway, this is getting off topic, but it's worth remembering that in the last ~500 years before the Cultural Revolution, the state didn't do a lot for rural security. The peasants weren't all defenseless during that time, although the best martial artists were generally found in the big cities, where they could make more money.

Best,

F

[Rick]

Well, just for a little sensationalism .

[Jim McDougall]

Outstanding, that is...sensational!! illustrations Rick Thank you!

Great information Fearn, and you are spot on concerning martial artists and security. I found some great information that might give us more insight into the use of these butterfly knives.

In "Chinese Martial Arts Training" , Brian Kennedy and Elizabeth Guo, 2005, pp.137-141, there is interesting discussion on these private security companies from about 1800-1900, who employed martial artists.

Apparantly c.1800, one of the early and most prominant firms was named 'Hau You Biao Ju' (meeting friends guard service) and gained notoriety as it was owned by Li Lian Ying who was interestingly head eunuch of Empress Dowager.
As this service developed, it seems every province had one or more private security companies for personal, residence or convoy protection. It is noted that the 'hu yuan' was a bodyguard for residential service, while the 'zou biao' guarded convoys or goods.
Apparantly in the case of convoys etc. the triangular guidon or pennant of the security company was displayed to warn predators off, or at least ostensibly so.
It seems that much as often was the case of with Masonry, the bonds of brotherhood transcend business or political allegiances, and martial artists of like groups in many cases knew each other and trained together. In many instances the guards would contact potential adversaries in advance to establish guanxi, or diplomatic relations. It would seem these arrangements may have taken interesting turns at times, and perhaps there were instances of intrigue?

In any case, one of the martial arts weapons often used by these martial artists were these types of butterfly knives. In cases where ‘open’ weapons were used (spears, halberds, sabers) the triangular banners were displayed. On more covert matters, ‘secret’ weapons such as batons, chain whips and these types of knives were used, with no banner shown.

According to Thom Richardson in “China and Central Asia” ( paper in “Swords and Hilt Weapons”, ed. M.Coe, 1989, p.182), these type of paired weapons either swords or knives, seem to have come into use at the end of the 17th century. It is noted that most of the collected examples of these were made around the first half on the 19th century.
As noted in earlier post, I have seen examples of these with security firm markings from about 1860’s. These butterfly or paired weapons, along with swords with short, heavy blades were favored in the southern regions in crowded city streets.

It is known that interaction between martial artists and river pirates were relatively commonplace, and pirates were inclined to ‘confiscate’ weapons, along with anything they thought worthwhile, so this would account for instances of their use among them.

Best regards,
Jim