Ming Shield Manual: Ambush Stance 紀效八勢:埋伏勢

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 6 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ •

  • @ElvenDeputyGeneral
    @ElvenDeputyGeneral 2 роки тому +4

    借力顶开means "to deflect (the spear thrust) using the attack's own momentum." 借力 is a huge concept in Chinese martial arts which usually means to apply a technique using the force of your opponent's attack.

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому +2

      yes that makes sense. Thanks for pointing that out! Feel free to look through some of the other videos and see if you can find any better interpretations of those as well!

  • @kevinlobos5519
    @kevinlobos5519 2 роки тому +8

    I wholeheartedly agree with this interpretation. In my experience sparring with weapons, low stances or steps like these can be super usefull but you need the cardio, flexibility and leg strength to pull them off properly.
    I also think the main reason super low stances like this are so present in TCMA is because of their use in armed combat.

  • @二刀流的刀鞘
    @二刀流的刀鞘 2 роки тому +2

    Very Nice interpretation, especially the knee walking !

  • @saberserpent1134
    @saberserpent1134 2 роки тому +2

    EXACTLY like shooting for a takedown. I whole heartedly agree with that assessment, as well as the rest of the points made. Great vid, Brother!

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому

      Thanks for watching! I look forward to seeing you put those feibiao into action!

  • @jgbizarro2726
    @jgbizarro2726 2 роки тому +3

    I like it when instead of "posture" it is used as a step, as it should be

    • @user-pn7wq9cl1g
      @user-pn7wq9cl1g 2 роки тому +1

      A lot of people confuse kung fu's intricate dashes and steps with its offensive & defensive postures. I wish mediocre kung fu wasn't so prevalent; this channel is a breath of fresh air, isn't it.
      That's one of the things that makes Chinese fighting arts so unique; they tend to have a focus on creating a hard-to-disrupt baseline of highly-adaptable motions that gives practitioners a distinct sort of plucky swagger.

  • @shitaolin9439
    @shitaolin9439 3 місяці тому

    nnd相见恨晚啊,这么宝藏的频道今天才推给我😢

  • @dlatrexswords
    @dlatrexswords 2 роки тому +1

    Love the whole series! Now to practice the walk and build the quads…

  • @leogazebo5290
    @leogazebo5290 2 роки тому +2

    It's always a nice day to learn something new. Hope you get more successful so you can make videos of other weapon manuals.

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому +2

      Thanks for your support! I will certainly keep looking into other manuals and weapons!

  • @RichardBejtlich
    @RichardBejtlich 2 роки тому +1

    Glad to see your videos again! By the way it would be cool to hear how you learned Chinese.

  • @戰國春秋
    @戰國春秋 2 роки тому +2

    Yes, the penetration/rockover step (i.e. wrestling) is also what I imagine the illustrations are trying to depict.
    Similar to this shorts ua-cam.com/users/shortsA4lfow1Scc0
    In Qi Jiguang's Mandarin Duck Formation, there will be bushy Langxians dangling above the heads of rattan shieldmen, which provide cover for them, but they most likely needed a way to move around in a low stance.

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому +2

      Yeah I should try it continuously as depicted in your video as well! And you are of course right about the Langxian. Eventually it would be nice to get a whole unit of people together and do some sparring with the mandarin duck formation, but I don’t have enough friends in this hobby near me to do that.

  • @Macartogrul
    @Macartogrul 2 роки тому +3

    I hope your channel will grow out. It is good to have channels for Chinese weaponry as well. HEMA is cool but more diversity is better 😉

  • @zhengyunli800
    @zhengyunli800 2 роки тому +3

    It is quite practical.

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому

      Yeah, I think that if you look at these shield techniques in the proper context against a spear they are quite practical.

  • @ambulocetusnatans
    @ambulocetusnatans 2 роки тому +1

    It seems like the only styles that still have routines with the shield are in southern styles, but I was always under the impression that the northern styles were more directly descended from the military. So my question is, which category is closer to the old military way of battle, the northern or the southern?

    • @ambulocetusnatans
      @ambulocetusnatans 2 роки тому +1

      Actually now that I'm thinking about it, many southern styles hold the spear with the right hand in front like it is perhaps a remnant of having a shield, and the northern styles generally hold the spear with the left in front as you would after dismounting from horseback. So do you think that maybe it's because more infantry came from the south and cavalry came from the north?

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому +1

      The rattan shield originates in fujian according to the sources. So it is definitely a southern weapon. The north had wicker shields and I suspect that the tiger shields which are sometimes used in shaolin forms may have been wicker shields in the past.

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому +1

      @@ambulocetusnatans I wouldn’t generalize it quite that much. Though ibfantry and naval combat dominated the south while cavalry did in the north. In reality troops could come from all over the empire. Aside from this the rattan shield also played a role in naval warfare and local militia defense. Additionally, general Qi Jiguang wrote this manual based on his experience training fujianese peasants to fight against pirates and after the ming fell, they fled to taiwan so you can actually find elements of mandarin duck formation training in very small local styles in taiwan. For instance the wolf brush is sometimes used for forms and the like. Unfortunately though many of those styles are dying out because young people see it as old fashioned and somewhat backwards.

    • @ambulocetusnatans
      @ambulocetusnatans 2 роки тому +1

      @@thescholar-general5975There are a couple of Okinawan styles that have routines with a sheild, and Okinawan martial arts were heavily influenced by Fujian, but what intrigues me is how various styles from areas as far apart as Okinawa and Korea appear to be influenced by the Wu Bei Zi, and yet they all look so different. It would be interesting to reconstruct the ancestral style, the way that linguists have reconstructed Proto Indo-European language. The pieces of the puzzle are scattered far and wide.

  • @lalli8152
    @lalli8152 2 роки тому +2

    These chinese stances look so interesting, and the sword techniques too

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому +1

      Thanks for watching! Once I get another shield on my hands I will plan to do some sparring and see how I do against some higher level spear users

  • @blakebailey22
    @blakebailey22 11 місяців тому +1

    Would a wicker/twig shield like that really offer any kind of substantial protection? I suppose there must be some use for it if it was a standard piece of equipment in the military, but I can see through it, I imagine a thrust from a spear or even a sword would go right through it

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  11 місяців тому +1

      One day I plan to make some better replica shields and do some destructive testing, but there are a few reasons why I believe the shield is not as weak as many assume. For one, the shield I have here is not necessarily representative of the shields they had during the ming period. Many of the oldest examples we have show a much greater weave density and they frequently feature a central steel washer with a tassel to cover the central hole in the shield. We also have accounts of shields being treated with hide glue, rice glue, and tung oil.
      Also, rattan is much more substantial than wicker. There is a reason that they use rattan sticks in events like the sca where they are used for full contact fighting in steel armor. The tensile strength of rattan is also several times higher than wood. Even though tensile strength is not the only factor when it comes to defending against weapons, a tight weave with a high tensile strength will make it difficult for any object to open up gaps in the shield. Aside from this, rattan also retains a much higher degree of flexibility than wood which greatly reduces the chance of it shattering or splintering, this is why they can use them in the sca without breaking. It is almost impossible to break a rattan stick by striking something which is very different from most woods.
      The other reason that I think that the shields were fairly strong is because the sources themselves state as such. Im the ming period, they had access to leather faced wooden shields like those in Europe. They even had tower shields for crossbowmen to use as cover. So they knew how to make the alternative. Yet the sources, clearly state that the rattan shield is very strong. It could stop arrows, spears, and swords, but not bullets (that is literally how they word it). Given all of this, I am inclined to believe that the shields were viable until I can do some testing to either verify or negate their claims.

    • @blakebailey22
      @blakebailey22 10 місяців тому

      @@thescholar-general5975 I appreciate the response! Yours was much more informative than the one given on the Wikipedia page. With that being said, I still cannot help but feel skeptical. That page mentions how rattan shields "greatly [outperform] comparable wooden shields. As rattan has no wood grain, it does not split." With that section not having a citation. While I feel rattan shields were probably serviceable against slashes much like the Irish scaith shield, unless I see otherwise I feel like any shield that's "porous" so to speak would not fair well against piercing attacks. I also feel like they would have too much give when struck by bludgeoning weapons, whereas a solid wooden shield would not only be better comparatively against piercing and bludgeoning strikes, but also seems like way less time and effort would go into simply making a more traditional shield. One more thing that makes me skeptical about rattan shields is that while the source you listed says that rattan could not block bullets, a source given by a channel called HistoryNTruth who made a two hour long video called "The Fall of the Qing Dynasty" from someone who fought in the Siege of Albazin named Yang Hai Chu who states that the Taiwanese marines were asked to take off their clothes and attack the Russian Cossacks on boats and their rattan shields were able to deflect bullets at around the 54:40 mark of that video. I think there may be some embellishments about their shield as a result of pride, but then again I could be wrong. I look forward to your testing!

  • @BorninPurple
    @BorninPurple Рік тому

    Interesting video, I think using your strength with the dao to get an opening on the spear could mean cutting it away? Could be a possible answer.

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  Рік тому

      It is a possibility, but i found it difficult to generate an adequate amount of chopping force while moving the blade parallel to the front face of the shield. With a more point forward cut I am sure you could damage the spear, but that would require opening the shield some and exposing the right shoulder. Not saying it wasn’t done, but these reasons lead me to consider other interpretations more seriously.

  • @2008davidkang
    @2008davidkang 2 роки тому +2

    The depiction of the stances look similar to me as the Low Even Stance. Since both are focused on capitalising on an opening and charging in, could they be complementing each other in a way? For instance throwing the javelin and charging in with the low advancing steps of the Ambush Stance in case the pikeman recovered faster than expected or you started charging slightly later than expected? I'd imagine this will reduce the likelihood of getting skewered when something goes wrong, and leaving your squad vulnerable?

  • @thunderflower7998
    @thunderflower7998 6 місяців тому

    Where can one rder one of this round straw body and arm shield ?what is it called in pin yin?

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  6 місяців тому

      It is called a tengpai in pinyin. If you search “rattan shield” online you should be able to find one to order.

  • @417hemaspringfieldmo
    @417hemaspringfieldmo 9 місяців тому

    I love that shield

  • @ElvenDeputyGeneral
    @ElvenDeputyGeneral 2 роки тому +1

    Also, 埋伏 here means "to duck, to stay low", shouldn't be translated directly into "ambush". Quite often you'll find the same word has different meanings in classical Chinese and contemporary Chinese.

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому +1

      Very interesting! Do you know of an example in literary chinese which uses 埋伏 to say be low to the ground in a non-ambush context?

    • @ElvenDeputyGeneral
      @ElvenDeputyGeneral 2 роки тому +1

      @@thescholar-general5975 the word 埋伏 itself comprises of 埋(to bury, to conceal) and 伏(to lower one's body posture) and you'll quite often see this expression 埋下伏兵 in Chinese classics, which means to set up an ambush by "concealingly deploying soldiers who lower their postures", but in this particular instance the "concealed attack" element of the direct translation"ambush" doesn't quit apply(well unless you take into account the rattan shield that stops your enemy from seeing your sabre hand once you duck down). My take is 埋伏 here means 埋身伏低 which can be translated to "closing distance whilst ducking low".
      I did have a search in the earliest recorded usage of 埋伏 with the meaning of "ambush" but the results are not very clear. I guess it's not a big problem translating it into "ambush" here, the only thing is that "ambush " is more of a military strategy term than a martial arts term. Anyway love your work! 祝武艺精进

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому

      @@ElvenDeputyGeneral Great explanation of the term!

  • @SivaCoHan
    @SivaCoHan 2 роки тому +1

    你是怎么做到流畅阅读古文的……太厉害了吧。

  • @Tsurukiri
    @Tsurukiri 2 роки тому +2

    Thanks for this!
    The low stance is probably just the low bow stance. The baggy pants in the pictures cover the front leg. See here: ua-cam.com/video/fT_5Gl5lr0o/v-deo.html At least the same stance is used by Sudanese warriors with shields. They can move in it very quickly while staying low. Hip mobility and strong knees required. We hobbyist warriors struggle with this posture, and when we get older it gets a lot harder to do it.

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому

      Yes the reverse bow stance does look somewhat similar to the manual though to get in it usually requires you to face the opposite direction (towards the extended leg). Do you have a link to the video with the Sudanese warriors, I remember you sharing a video of shield fighting in Borneo which had shieldsmen you were able to squat and quickly hop along the ground. Were the Sudanese warriors doing something similar?

    • @Tsurukiri
      @Tsurukiri 2 роки тому +1

      @@thescholar-general5975 Check this for example: ua-cam.com/video/YXqSyBF9UBI/v-deo.html in the beginning they show one way to move in a low position. The guy one the left briefly passes through the 'ambush stance' while retreating. The Sudanese also have a few other ways to move in the low position.

  • @camrendavis6650
    @camrendavis6650 2 роки тому +2

    A bit unconventional, but would definitely be a surprise in a duel

    • @thescholar-general5975
      @thescholar-general5975  2 роки тому +2

      Yeah, I took a long time trying to interpret why all the images were like that and this is what I came up with that made the most sense. I may be missing something though, so I look forward to what others come up with.