Talk:Miaodao

I'm currently going through the print and online writings of Philip Tom, Scott Rodell, and others to get more hard info about the miaodao; in the meantime I've deleted the debate over Japanese influence (irrelevant to an early 20th century sword, and the general topic has been covered in other Chinese sword articles) and clarified that this is a historically recent sword (which I believe the previous edit was trying to state). Ergative rlt 02:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The name

When I was learning the sword, I was told the name meant "young rice shoot", or something like; the sword being curved like the shoot. I've no reference for this. — Johan the Ghost _seance 15:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

That sounds odd. "Miao" is a generic name for various minority groups in southern china, thus I suspect it really means "as used by those minority people". Note that this sword style is rather recent, and differs from older, more typical Chinese style weapons. Fittingly, swords of Tibetan style are called "Zang Dao (藏刀)", where "Zang" is Tibet. -- Ledrug 23:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Changdao?

The article on the Changdao says that Miao dao is a mistaken term for it. It doesn't say anything about such being a real weapon. I think one page is in need of, if not correcting, at least clarification.

Using miaodao to refer to changdao is a mistake, but the miaodao was/is a real weapon, albeit one that postdates the changdao. The changdao article only mentions the confusion between the two weapons, and says nothing about the miaodao itself being nonexistent. Ergative rlt 01:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Is it a mistake? According to this article, 'miaodao' was just a new name for 'changdao', whereas the changdao page says that the miaodao is a different sword. Did more than just the name change? Niten 21:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

From what I've heard, the Miao Dao is a modern variant of the Changdao, very similar but not necessarily completely identical. --Aldis90 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldis90 (talk • contribs) 00:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Name?

The article currently has two (well, three) explanations for the name "miaodao". First it says it comes from "sprout", and that 'miao' should not be confused with the Miao people. Later it says that it either comes from a grain leave, or from the Miao people. Does 'grain leave' mean 'grain leaf/sprout'? Anyway, the two sections should be merged. Niten 21:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Miaodao at Nanjing academies

Note that Dennis Rovere, who studied under one of the former instructors of the Central Military Academy of Nanjing, and who has published a translation and interpretation of Huang Bo Nien's texts (the ones that formed the basis of weapons training at both the Central Martial Arts Academy and the Central Military Academy), is quite firm in stating that the saber taught at those schools was not a miaodao. Also, Guo Changsheng could not have learned a Ming-era miaodao form when the weapon dates from the Republican era. Ergative rlt (talk) 02:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Conflicting information

We're having conflicting information dealing with the history of the Miaodao. The Chinese Page says that the Miaodao appeared towards the end of the Ming Dynasty. The english page however puts it as during the Republican Era, we're talking about a 300 year difference. Liu Tao (talk) 07:27, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

The MIng weapon was the changdao, or long saber; I've seen this weapon and its name in plates reproduced from Ming manuals. I've never seen any period sources for the claim that 'the miaodao predates the Republican era, or serious historical sources (as opposed to popular martial arts histories, which are generally horribly inaccurate) claiming the same. Ergative rlt (talk) 05:46, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

The Ming didn't have just 'one' sword, they had many swords. The Ming Empire had problem fighting the Wokou pirates due to 'inferior' weaponry. As of a result, Japanese swords were imported and equipted the Ming Army. The Ming made modifications and the Miao dao was developed through these mods. It was originally known as the Wodao(lit.Japanese sword) and wasn't until later that the Wodao was renamed as the Miaodao. Long story short, the Miaodao and wodao are the same weapons. The Miaodao was just a different name for the Wodao.

As for 'Changdao', it just means 'long dao'. It's a classification for Dao's with a long blade, somewhat like the Western use of 'longsword'. During the Ming Period, the Miaodao was called Changdao because that it required two hands to use.

As for Zhanmadao, it is strictly an anti-cavalry weapon. It's length makes it unfeasible for fighting infantry. Comparatively speaking it is much longer compared to the Miaodao. The Miaodao was used to fight infantry, the Zhanmadao was used for fighting cavalry. These are 2 entirely different weapons. Liu Tao (talk) 17:33, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Some period sources (such as the Wujing Zhongyao), or more properly reliable sources referencing period sources are needed. If the term miaodao appears in a Ming source, then yes it is a Ming weapon, but to state that the changdao was just an alternate Ming name for miaodao without such a reference is original research. Ergative rlt (talk) 19:03, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

No, it wasn't during the Ming. The sword during the Ming Period was known as the 'Wodao' or 'Changdao'. It wasn't until later, during the Qing that someone first called the sword 'Miaodao'. Same sword, different name. Chinese weapons didn't really have 'official' names, people just call a new weapon whatever name they can think of, and the more prominent and popular names stand. The Sword was called 'Wodao' because of it's Japanese Origins. The sword was called 'Changdao' because it's length required to hands to use, that's one of the reasons it was called as of. Another reason why it was called 'Changdao' was because the Jinyiwei was given 2 Dao. A long one and a short one. They called the short one 'Yaodao' or 'Waist Dao', and the long one 'Changdao'.

The Miaodao wasn't the only sword to be called 'Changdao' either, other kinds of swords were reffered to as 'Changdao' as well. The Huanshoudao of the Han Empire, Hengdao of the Tang Empire, and the Japanese Katanas were all called 'Changdao'. There is no actual 'Changdao', instead, Changdao can refer to many Dao, depending on the context you are speaking in.

If you want a source to prove your Republic Era info wrong, then I'll give you a source. The term 'Miaodao' was used was in the novel,' Ernü Yingxiong Zhuan', written during the Qing Era, BEFORE the Republic came to be. This is a novel written before the Republic, regardless of whether it's 'accurate' or not, the source ITSELF predates the Republic. Liu Tao (talk) 16:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Miaodao. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081103074622/http://www.freewebs.com/jingangbashi/miaodaointro.htm to http://www.freewebs.com/jingangbashi/miaodaointro.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:26, 27 January 2018 (UTC)