Chinese spear

[MenteReligieuse]

Most shaolin spears I have seen in vids and in online-shops are 7' long (6'staff with 1'head). I know for a fact that in sojutsu koryus (just think japanese spear arts) you have spears that can be 11 feet long and up.

 

(Kan ryu spear : 3.6 meters (11ft 10inch)!)

 

Were historical warfare chinese spears really just 7'long or was this regulated later for wushu?

[Zhong Gau]

7 feet seems to be the functional length limit for chinese styles. try using an 11 foot weapon with speed up close. it probably could be done, but why use a cumbersome thing that's good moderate at a distance when up close and personal is where you need it?

 

most pole weapons are also this length. (Pu Dao, Kwong Dao, long staff, Dragon Head Spear, double moon blade spear, ect.)

 

there are also several periods in Chinese history in which weapon length was curtailed, thus the ringed swords. Pole arms probably faced some sort of restriction, too.

 

find a Hung Fot practicioner. There's one in San Jose, CA and another in Bethesda, MD and another in Chile. they're a mostly weapons style that left the Shaolin temple in the 16 or 1700's.

[MenteReligieuse]

This particular art used a "kuda". Sort of a sliding handle that they used to slide the spear through, isntead of using your hands. Gave more spead and a possibility of more reach on attacks.

 

Here is a section of the article that discusses combat with such a spear :

 

quote:

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

While moving forward to attack, the Owari Kan Ryu spearman must be able to thrust and quickly pull back, rapidly shortening the forward portion of the spear in order to compensate for a closing maai. And then be able to thrust effectively again. The thrust can be made from as close as a few inches away while gripping directly behind the spearhead.

 

As well as moving forward to attack, the spearman must be able to thrust effectively while literally running backwards. If an opponent running forward with a sword manages to enter within the spearman's maai, the spearman must be able to back pedal quickly enough to allow time to shorten the spear and counter-thrust. Of course, side-stepping and other footwork are also practiced.

 

Very few, if any, classical martial traditions in Japan utilized only one weapon. The trained warrior had to be able to contend against a wide variety of arms on the battlefield, and so was trained to be familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of all the main weapons. The man wielding the yari had to be able to adjust to the length and reach of any weapon he might encounter. Interestingly enough, when facing the tachi or kodachi (sword or short sword), the kodachi is considered the more effective weapon against the spear. This is because the shorter blade and single-hand use of the weapon allow greater mobility and agility in closing the maai against the spear. Nevertheless, a well-trained Kan Ryu spearman would not have much trouble in dealing with either weapon.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Also I recheked the standard lenght of the Kan ryu spear : 3.6 meters (11ft 10inch)!.

 

For more info check this article out : http://www.koryubooks.com/library/harmstrong1.html

[Zhong Gau]

i remember one of my older brothers asking a sifu about this sort of thing back in the mid 90's. they tried to develop the kinds of techniques described using a staff and a metal pipe of similar length and could not manage the kinds of control needed for forms practice with a weapon that could lengthen due to centrifugal force. when the spear was whipped they could not stop it from leaving the tube. so the concept of lengthening and shortening must be a battlefield concept and not a temple practice. Several weeks later the older brother brought another article explaining the nonviability of the weapon concieved in that article, the author using it to test people's willingness to try something new based on someone else's 'said-so-experience' or merely to experiment.

 

in another explanation the author said it was mainly to test magazine reader's gullibility.

 

Same Article?