Tang Hao’s Analysis Of Wang Zongyue

[Bao]

Nope. There's only one Daoist Zhang Sanfeng 張三丰, the one born in the late Yuan dynasty. The later people imply the same Zhang Sanfeng, but they have put him in the wrong dynasty. There are no historical records of those mentioned in the article, just fairy tales. Just like the book mentioned, nothing there is written by anyone called Zhang Sanfeng.

[GrahamB]

To withstand its tumultuous history, the Chinese culture and psyche has had to be pretty good at retaining knowledge through traditions, at least until the 20th century. That’s why it's even conceivable to some that a tradition could be faithfully passed down for hundreds or even a thousand years. When you add effectiveness as a criteria, in martial arts, it either works or it doesn’t, so it is even more difficult to deviate too far from the norm. So, we can’t discount tradition too much as a factor.

Just to pick that part out of your post...

Martial arts either works or it doesn't. If only it were that simple!

I think a lot of Chinese martial arts simply don't work in a fighting environment. More than many would like to admit. The objective evidence is pretty damning... Talented people who train hard can make them work, of course, but inside almost all of them (good or bad) there are parts that are clearly nothing to do with fighting at all. You could pick Bagua or Chen Tai JI or Yang Tai Ji... or any of them. I think Chen Tai Ji is one of the most theatrical-looking martial arts in existence! It cannot look that way for reasons of pure efficiency in combat. It's just not possible. Same with many Choy Li Fut forms - I'm thinking of one where you pretend to ride a horse like General Guan Yu. And yet these marital arts still exist and people still practice them, and love them, and gain enormous benefit from them, culturally, physically, mentally, etc, and probably will do for another thousand years...

So I think we'd need to define what "works" means in that context. They always fulfill some sort of social/societal function.

[twocircles13]

This article might help the intellectually challenged amongst us.

https://www.okanaganvalleywudang.com/on ... ng-sanfeng

I was surprised that I enjoyed your interview with him. I consider any historical Wudang traditions to be shattered and modern Wudang to have been a few cobbled together remnants with a lot of filler from other martial traditions. This being amassed since the end of the Cultural Revolution, but most probably put together in the 1980s.

I overall enjoyed the article. I would debate some of his finer points. For example, he may be technically correct about the use of taiji fist first appearing in print in 1912. Writing attributed to Yang Banhou between 1872 and 1878 but not published until the 1980s and 90s use the term Taiji Method referring to martial art instruction. And Li Yiyu’s collection of Classics was dated 1881 though not published until the 1990s. It is clearly written Taiji Quan Treatise.

I agree with him that many martial arts that moved slowly started jumping under the Taiji umbrella.

[twocircles13]

To withstand its tumultuous history, the Chinese culture and psyche has had to be pretty good at retaining knowledge through traditions, at least until the 20th century. That’s why it's even conceivable to some that a tradition could be faithfully passed down for hundreds or even a thousand years. When you add effectiveness as a criteria, in martial arts, it either works or it doesn’t, so it is even more difficult to deviate too far from the norm. So, we can’t discount tradition too much as a factor.

Just to pick that part out of your post...

Martial arts either works or it doesn't. If only it were that simple!

I think a lot of Chinese martial arts simply don't work in a fighting environment. More than many would like to admit. The objective evidence is pretty damning... Talented people who train hard can make them work, of course, but inside almost all of them (good or bad) there are parts that are clearly nothing to do with fighting at all. You could pick Bagua or Chen Tai JI or Yang Tai Ji... or any of them. I think Chen Tai Ji is one of the most theatrical-looking martial arts in existence! It cannot look that way for reasons of pure efficiency in combat. It's just not possible. Same with many Choy Li Fut forms - I'm thinking of one where you pretend to ride a horse like General Guan Yu. And yet these marital arts still exist and people still practice them, and love them, and gain enormous benefit from them, culturally, physically, mentally, etc, and probably will do for another thousand years...

So I think we'd need to define what "works" means in that context. They always fulfill some sort of social/societal function.

I like picking apart my posts, but in this case it is a little disappointing. Just the miscommunication of talking about different things during different time periods, so let’s define that a little better.

I’m talking about martial traditions up to about 1900 and a few that survived since then. Where adepts were in a position to kill or injure, or be killed, or one might be called up to serve in the militia using the art in which you had trained to defend your county or region. These are definitely fighting environments.

You seem to be talking about martial arts today, which is mostly sport fighting, if any fighting, and self-cultivation including physical fitness, stress relief, etc. as a hobby. I whole-heartedly agree that most of these do not prepare one for a fighting environment. A few could.

Further, CIMA training is much more than just the form. That's just learning to move, which is like learning to read. There’s a lot more to education after that.

[GrahamB]

I would still attest that before 1900, "martial arts", would be mainly a social pastime - what you did in your spare time, perhaps performed at festivals to appease the hungry ghosts, or for other reasons, for social cohesion of the group, entertainment, etc.

I would see that as related to, but not the same as, serious weapons training/fighting done by militia, or done by soldiers. Killing and being killed.

The history of military arts, is not the history of martial arts.

After 1900 (the failure of the Boxer Rebellion) all those "rotten old traditions" began to be stripped from marital arts, until we have what we have today. A load of guys hilariously miscommunicating on the Internet with each other and trying to figure out what all these weird moves are for

[twocircles13]

I would still attest that before 1900, "martial arts", would be mainly a social past time - what you did in your spare time, perhaps performed at festivals to appease the hungry ghosts, or for other reasons, for social cohesion of the group, entertainment, etc.

I would see that as related to, but not the same as, serious weapons training/fighting done by militia, or done by soldiers. Killing and being killed.

The history of military arts, is not the history of martial arts.

After 1900 (the failure of the Boxer Rebellion) all those "rotten old traditions" began to be stripped from marital arts, until we have what we have today. A load of guys hilariously miscommunicating on the Internet with each other and trying to figure out what all these weird moves are for

I think that about sums it up in a general way.

For some, martial arts had become a pastime before 1900s, but not for all. The boxers preparing to rebel certainly did not treat it as a pastime, though I think they did pervert the "battle magic” of their arts quite a bit. There are others whose traditions survived, more in rural areas, some to the present.

[Steve James]

So I think we'd need to define what "works" means in that context. They always fulfill some sort of social/societal function.

Ok, but what "works" depends on the context, doesn't it? I'd argue that, for ex., modern mma exists because of the introduction of new successful techniques. China's sheer size meant that techniques and styles were varied, based on the conditions and most importantly on the way people actually fought. One can argue that the flowery techniques seen in some mas aren't functional nowadays in competition. But, how did the people who invented them fight?

Btw, I think it perfectly reasonable to argue that, like today, the flowery forms weren't the way people actually fought each other, or at least it didn't look that way. I totally agree that in terms of a competition, what works is what's most useful and efficient. Both competitors will be trying to do that. A muay thai thigh kick will work, as will a rear naked, or a slam, or a punch in the face.

Personally, I'd say that anyone who wants to compete needs to study those areasl --because that's what they're going to face, not because one is superior to the other. And, imho, the results are going to look very similar. If a tcc/xy/bg guy goes to the UFC, I bet we won't say he looks like he's doing tcc. Oh, it might be possible to say "look he used a yun shou."

Afa in China's history, what martial art were soldiers trained in?

[GrahamB]

I wonder if people have odd ideas about the "boxers". I don't see them as a group of highly trained martial artists. Rather, I see them as disaffected local youth ("bare sticks" who had no prospect of marriage or a much of a future) rounded up from the local villages, whipped up on anti-foreigner propaganda, told they were on a mission to save the Empress, convinced that some sort of spirit trance could repel bullets and then sent out to murder innocent civilians then massacred by highly trained European troops. Everybody had guns and weapons. Nobody was kung fu fighting. Or boxing.

[GrahamB]

Afa in China's history, what martial art were soldiers trained in?

Which soldiers and when?

[Steve James]

Um, I guess what did the Imperial military train in the early 19th c., around the time of YLC etc. Or, perhaps, what were they training when the idea of the "weak man of Asia" was around? I know that people in the military often practiced martial arts, though not necessarily as part of their training.

[windwalker]

Yin Style Baguazhang - IRFS Imperial Guardsman

In general, how people look in a fight reflects how and what they trained for, more so for those engaged in activities used in
combative environments or in life dependent activities....




Baguazhang - IRFS Fairbairn OSS

[GrahamB]

Um, I guess what did the Imperial military train in the early 19th c., around the time of YLC etc. Or, perhaps, what were they training when the idea of the "weak man of Asia" was around? I know that people in the military often practiced martial arts, though not necessarily as part of their training.

I'm not sure I'd care much about the Chinese military when they were at their weakest and most decimated, just after fighting the massive Taiping Rebellion civil war and then having their arses kicked by Europeans who wanted to push opium on the population. But those guys were Manchu originally, so probably everybody wrestled. General Qi didn't think much of martial arts in the proceeding Ming - too acrobatic and no use for warfare, apparently, but that would indicate that people were practicing them and they were pretty flashy.

[Steve James]

Oh, the organized military training I think we'd associate with martial arts looked something like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ljd8eNVbsBY

Apparently, this was going on at the same time Tang Hao was traveling to see the Chens. It seems clear that this was as much a matter of providing physical exercise as learning to master a dao. It's also likely that the Chinese military would have cqc drills, my guess it would have involved wrestling too.

Um, if you need to train someone to go and kill or die, you can't speed up ima training enough -especially when they'll have to learn how to use firearms.

[Graculus]

General Qi didn't think much of martial arts in the proceeding Ming -

It’s also worth bearing in mind that Qi Jiguang didn’t think too much of the militia – poorly trained and demotivated before he arrived to knock them into shape and make a few tactical innovations.

In truth, we don’t really know too much about how these arts were transmitted through the generations. In a country as big as China, and over such a long period of time there were sure to have been variations. Much of it came through the military, but what little we know suggests that was in the hands of individual commanders. Where did they learn? General Qi mentions some of the well known martial methods of his time, and he is recorded as learning from some of them (spear, I think), which suggests there were some kind of independent teachers, too.

The situation is clearer with regard to Japan over the same period (which had a hereditary military class at the top of the heap), but even there, there were different ways of transmitting military skills, and the values of the bushi (samurai) were not always shared by the bugeisha (martial artists) even though they were of the same class.

Graculus
Https://ichijoji.blogspot.com

[everything]

if xingyiquan has military spear techniques or vice versa, it seems pretty obviously:

1. relatively fast to transmit/learn for a large group (at least the basics of "5 elements", which is probably all you have time for in a "bootcamp").
2. handheld weapons-oriented first (for pre-firearms battles)
3. crosses over to empty hand (worst case scenarios)
4. crosses over to bayonet or out-of-rifle-ammo bad-case scenarios
5. no flowery bullshit
6. can be "external" but can be "internal"

I think this is all "obvious" if you just pick up a broom and run through 5 elements. doesn't take any "deep research", just common sense.

if you accept that, then probably xingyiquan and/or similar or precursor arts with those kinds of characteristics would've been more widely adopted. personally, I think there is no utility to try to look further back ("what came before xingyiquan") and take it as an assumption there were similar techniques long long long long before surviving written history, but i'm sure "history or anthropology nerds" can explain more.