Doc Stier wrote:As with other historical figures, some stories related to the martial artists of earlier generations, like the early Yang family masters, are undoubtedly either exaggerated or even totally fictional, but most likely based upon some degree of actual truth.
Accounts of other events, however, are described in the testimonials of multiple, independent eye witnesses who had nothing to gain in recording what they saw. Additionally, dishonesty would have been outed by other individuals who were also present, thereby refuting any overt exaggerations or inaccuracies.
Nonetheless, people will either believe or disbelieve such accounts according to their own personal biases and agenda priorities. At this point in time, it doesn't really matter to me, since historical events don't influence or impact my personal training regimen in any way. Only my own efforts can do that.
How many of today's top fighters, either Western boxers or MMA fighters, will be remembered by name for their respective skills 90-100+ years past their death? I'm guessing probably very few, if any, so you do the math. Is it really rational and logical to think that the enduring reputations of various Old Masters are totally unmerited unless validated with photos and film footage? I don't think so, but whatever.
We've seen plenty of situations in recent history where objective consideration of an event is shouted down by sensational narratives that get pushed to the public and eagerly embraced by those looking for... whatever it is they're looking for that can be supported by said narrative. Public agreement is not and likely never has been a reliable metric of truth. That said, I agree that one's personal training is all that matters, and care very little for history outside of my own lineage (and even that is more of a cursory interest). You were just so adamant about requesting specific sources for someone else's claims, I was wondering if you could provide the same for your own.