Gichin Funokoshi and Hwang Kee

The only problem is there was no Tae Kyon. It is a term General Choi heard from his calligraphy (I believe), in reference to a historical art. Choi thought the name would inspire the koreans.

Tae kyon doe'snt appear again until the middle 80's - to bolster the claims of tkd history
 
Perhaps more than any other Asian nation, the martial arts of Korea present confusing and often contradictory accounts of their history and development. A Tae kwon do master says one thing, a hapkido master claims another, while a tang soo do master insists upon something completely different. And so very few can prove their lineage reaches more than 50 or 60 years back into the nation's history. The only fighting art mentioned in Korea's oldest records, was an ancient, comprehensive system with roots in northern China. Evidence supporting the contention that su bahk do originated outside Korea is provided by Chinese records that sho buo (Chinese pronunciation of Su Bahk) as an ancient martial art in the northern part of the country. Su Bahk spread into korea and found rapid acceptance first in military and then in the populace. The system became divided into striking skills called (tae Kyon) and grappling skills called (YU Sul), but yu sul died out on the korean peninsula. And tae kyon survives as the only fighting system descended from the ancient art of su bahk. So at this point we would need some tangible evidence for corroboration, or at very least, testimony from people who are not promoting their own martial arts. Master Chung Kyeong-hwa is the head of the korean traditional tae kyon federation, and if you look at the technicques you can see this is not japanese Karate.
 
Great post! For my part, if one were to split Su Bahk into two components, Taek Kyon would definitely have more concussive techniques than grappling. In this way then, I would count Ssireum as the more grappling modern art. True there are not the many elegant wrist throws, but there are certainly any number of throws, locks, pins and chokes (though not allowed in competition). Thank you for not advocating Yudo as a modern alternative. I also applaud your call for independent documented history rather than oral tradition. We truely need much more of this. Thanks.

Best Wishes,

Bruce
 
Dear Kai:

"......Tae kyon doe'snt appear again until the middle 80's - to bolster the claims of tkd history...."

I may be wrong but I think there is considerable documentation regarding Taek Kyon. I would check JOURNAL OF ASIAN MARTIAL ARTS. They ran a couple of articles over the years regarding the formation of TKD as well as the history of Taek Kyon (See: Vol 6, #1 & Vol 6, #4 respectively). Both articles have significant bibs to follow-up on. I think you may find the commentary on pg 84 of the second article especially interesting. It concerns the banning of su bahk by King Chung Mok during the 14th century in response to the damage done to communities by excessive betting practices. Of course, the degree to which one wishes to bind the history of one art with that of another is probably a personal choice. For my part I suspect that su bahk and "Su Bahk Light" (aka Taek Kyon) probably co-developed in much the same way as serious military arts such as "war games" are often reflected in lighter civil activities such as paintball competition. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce
 
Fortunately I'm a pack rate and I save most of my old martial art magazines, I have some Traditional Tae Kwon do Magazines from the summer 1975, and they have an article about the last surviving practitioner of this ancient art. At 82 years of age Song Duk Ki lived in soul and he tells the story about Taekyon, Mr. song was born in Sa Chick Don, Seoul, in 1893. While only 13 years old he began studying Taekyon this would be in 1906 way before Japanese karate showed up. He learned from Mr. Lim Hue at the time one of the most powerful men in Korea, and a well known TaeKyon instructor. In Taekyon, He said there are no hyungs (forms). And there are no dobok (uniforms); He goes on to say that there is round house kick, crescent kick, stomach punch and jumping front snap kick with both feet and the basic Taekyon has eighteen movements. When Mr. song was young, there were traditional martial-arts tournaments called Tan Oh Nol (youth festivals) beneath the four mountains: Wang San Nok San, Nam San and Sah San. This style was entirely prohibited in 1920 by the Japanese. however in 1958, the Korean President, Lee sung Man, attended a demonstration of Taekyon by Mr. Song and a friend, and Taekyon was reborn. This friend subsequently died, leaving Mr. song the only living practitioner of this ancient art form.
Mr. Song went on to teach young people. this was in 1975 so later on in April of 1994 Karate kung-fu Illustrated Magazine there is more on this Taekyon and chung Kyeong-hwa and the he is the head of the Traditional Tae Kyon National Federation in Chungiu. I think to say that these people have no traditional martial art is wrong when they have been doing it for thousands of years.
 
At the risk of starting a war here I need to ask a question. In advance, may I ask that if this is going to start some sort of political discussion, please ignore this request. Politics is really NOT where I want to go, but I am not a TSD person and am having a hard time.

In the course of a number of strings people discuss the relationship between Dang Soo Do and Shotokan. I am becoming confused as to whether DSD practitioners see their art as an extension or modification of Shotokan, or as a separate art though heavily influenced BY Shotokan. For those of you who train in this art this may be a no-brainer, but to someone who does not it seems as though folks continually slide back and forth between these two poles. Help? Anyone?

Best Wishes,

Bruce
 
Hello,

Tang Soo Do is an art all its own, though it is heavily influenced by Shotokan.

If you take a Someone who is Shotokan and someone who is Tang Soo Do and have them in class together, you would see a very interesting class...

You could compare just Bassai, and that would take 20 min. One could tell they were the same form, but different aspects are emphisised and done much differently...

Hope this helps...

M.Tabone
 
Actually I looked back over some old issues of the Journal Asian Martial Arts. The article stated that by the 20th century all Korean traditions had died out. The book MU YEI TOBO TONG JI was mostly a reprinted Chinese text, and the only surviving records from pre "modern" times to survive have to do with taxes and such.

May 99 isssue of Black belt had a article "the twisted history of tang soo do' in which the author trieed to track down the history of TSD forms. It concludes with admission from the 1995 book" the Making of Tang Soo Do" that the form were learned from a book.
There is also a couple of articles from Classicsl Fighting Arts magazine that are interesting.
As for the previiuos post about the 85 yr old last practioner of Tae Kyon? If he was the last how long did it take him to train a successor? At 85yrs old?
If this rubs you the wrong way please ignore
Thanks
Todd
 
Thanks, Todd.

"....Actually I looked back over some old issues of the Journal Asian Martial Arts. The article stated that by the 20th century all Korean traditions had died out. The book MU YEI TOBO TONG JI was mostly a reprinted Chinese text, and the only surviving records from pre "modern" times to survive have to do with taxes and such......."

I've talked with Mr. DiMarco a few times and he is a bit of a stickler for accuracy. Its hard for me to think he would let a generalization slip by his pen. Then, again, context is everything, so maybe there are a few assumptions that were made. Let me toss a couple of these thoughts out.

1.) I can't think of anyone who is well read who would agree that "all Korean traditions had died out." Korean archery, wrestling, sword and MThand all continued through the 17 and 1800-s all the way up through the Occupation, WW II, the Korean War and afterwards. I think the point that people keep sticking on is that they are looking for some kind of lineage of "style" like the Japanese had/have. The message that I get is that if there is no such lineage then the art didn't exist.

2.) The Japanese took over security for Korea in 1907 and began the Occupation in 1910. Effectively what this meant was that they controlled key points in the country such as Seoul and Pusan, from which they worked influence over the rest of the country. Had you asked the Japanese governor-general if there were any Korean MA, he probably would have done a quick look around Seoul, and finding nothing would have decided, "nope, Korean MA have died out."

3.) Rural Korea until after WW II tended to be a pretty untamed place. Up until WW II there were still reports of tigers wandering into the Seoul and having to be dispatched. Away from the cities, unless there was a specific issue going on (the Kwangju Student Uprising, 1930, comes to mind) the Japanese seemed content to rule by dictum. Personally (Warning!! Personal Opinion Follows) I suspect this is why the Koreans have some shame about the Occupation. It was not bad enough that their own government sold the country out, but I think the people actually appreciated getting away from the abuse of the Yangban and generations of slave and peasant culture. But what that may have meant was that away from the cities the populace could follow what they liked. For instance, In Sun Seo and In Hyuk Suh both report that their grandfather came back from duty in the palace to teach his material in the local village. I would bet a lot of this sort of thing went on.

4.) And yes, just about any text of significance would be written in Chinese as the medium of educated communication. In time, I am sure many texts that have come down to us are now out in Han ja or even Hangul. Remember in the West there was a time when well-read individuals needed knowledge of Latin and Greek to study. FWIW.

BTW: Just for grins it may not be such a bad thing to take a look at those tax and census records including the slave records from the Buddhist Monasteries. At least one could track the demographics of the people as they moved around prior to 1950, yes?

Best Wishes,

Bruce
 
I guess if the book is a copy of a earlier chinese text it could be a little hard to use it to verify a indigenous art??
 
"......I guess if the book is a copy of a earlier chinese text it could be a little hard to use it to verify a indigenous art??....."

I think I am getting a little confused here. I don't know about anyone else but there are a few words that get thrown around that convey more energy than information and I think one of these might be "indigenous". If I remember correctly that word bespeaks being produced "naturally" within a country. I'm not sure anyone is saying that the Korean "invented" the use of weapons. Rather, I think what is being presented is the idea that the Koreans have had and do have a standing culture of martial science and tradition. People of the Pacific Rim have been passing traditions back and forth for centuries. Of course, Nationalism rears its ugly head and suddenly one culture or another want people to believe they were the well-spring from which everyone else drew their water. I've heard both the Japanese and Koreans take this position. At best, its annoying, and at worst historically inaccurate. However, the Koreans did and do have a tradition of martial prowess and I think it helps when that acknowledged. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce
 
I guess the thing is tho' for waht it's worth the physical roots can be traced in KMA, and they are'nt Korean. The traditions that are mentioned might have inflluenced the philosophical, and natioalistic aspects.

Even Herb Perez maintains that Tae Kyon did not influence TKD!
 
Thanks, David, but your gifts raise the very point that I am working to make.

If people want to discount TSD or even TKD as proceeding from Japanese traditions, thats one thing. If people want to step farther and discount TSD and TKD as not being an accurate representation of Korean traditions I will even go with that. Where I draw the line is when people start taking Korean martial science, and Korean martial traditions and discounting them in toto.We don't have to go back to the Three Kingdoms Period. One can start with the "house armies" of the Koryo Dyn, the Warrior Monks of the Mongol invasion and later of the Imjin Wars, the various standing armies and cadre of successive administrations in the Yi dynasty as affirmed by early Dutch experiences. In fact the Incident involving the USS Sheridan in response to the burning of an earlier American ship, records the military response to their actions including the use of firearms and swords. So do the persecutions of both Catholic and Protestant communities during the 1800-s. The revolt by the Korean army in 1894 likewise speaks to their weaponry and tactics. There are two things that are being discussed here and over on E-Budo. One is martial art and its successor, martial sport. The other thing is the nature of Korean martial tradition and martial science. The two subjects ARE related, but I think we are playing WAY to fast and loose blurring the lines between the two as we jump back and forth. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce
 
Like any other culture I am sure there instances of martial uporisings, does that mean there would be a systemized practice of the martial arts going on??


If I were to found my own little system and 90% percent came from my teacher, and 10% came out of noggin-Whom do I give credit to?
Todd
 
Dear Todd:

I think we are two different wave-lengthes here. If I am reading your posts correctly you seem to be concerned with some sort of attributions. Usually when I run into this kind of thinking it comes framed among concerns like "who invented...." or "who was the first....." or "whose idea was it....". As I write this I am thinking of your use of the word "system" in your last post. You may not be aware that Korean martial science doesn't follow this patri-linear succession. If you are trying to figure out who "invented" Korean sword, or "what sword styles" comprise Korean sword work you are asking the wrong questions. Think about using a rifle in the military. What "system" is that? Who "invented" it? Questions like this usually come out a culture that it concerned with proprietary ownership of some skill or method. The Japanese produced such a line of thought because they needed to oblige the Samurai class as it deteriorated in influence in the Tokugawa period and later in the Meiji Resoration. In our own culture we worry about such things because we want to make sure we get credit and royalties for our intellectual properties.

Now, to clarify where this is going for me, if you want to ask, for instance "Did Koreans have swords?" (yes--- five different achitectures) and did "they have methods for using them?" (yes --- for each of those architectures). We are asking something different. If you want to ask if the "Koreans practiced Korean sword up until 1907?" (yes, and well after that). But if you want to ask if the Koreans practiced Yon Mu Kwan TKD in the 1800-s you are asking a non-sequiter. Not necessarily because there was no TKD but mostly because the manner in which you are asking suggests that a kwan in a immutable agency, and we would have to go into your understand of what a "kwan" is.

I guess where I am going with this is that if you want to take a particular view of Korean martial science it would help to know what it is that you are positing. If you have some premise that you are defending or a position to advance I would like to hear it. So far your premises have been consistently inaccurate--- at least the way you are presenting them, and I can't really help because I am not sure what it is that you are trying to say. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce
 
Bruce ,

Was this conversation originally not about the relation of Hwang & Funakoshi , and how their 2 art's are similar ? I believe that was addressed in both the links I provided .

David
 
Dear David:

Yep, and for my part they were right on the money. Where I think the drift comes in is in the way some of the contributors were using some of the arguements in some of the posts and drawing some conclusions. The invoking the Hwa Rang warriors and that whole digression (on E-Budo) was a classic case of where a lot of these sorts of discussions go. I , for one, did sincerely appreciate your contribution, though.

Best Wishes,

Bruce
 
By kwon I assume you mean school, which would in rather limited definition be a way of doing things in a similiar method.
If you are talking non linear, why are there schools today or do Korean schools trace thier lineage?
 
A kwan, by definition is a constellation of people brought together by a shared goal and who likewise share an agreement on the venue or method for attaining that goal. It is not a "style" or a "gym" or a "ryu". A kwan need not reflect a martial background, and, in fact, for many years reflected either a political or intellectual approach. Some of the earliest kwans were little more than poetry sessions over tea. They came to the forefront during the Japanese Occupation as political movements to resist Japanese domination. Following the Second WW the term has come to be used quite a bit with the promotion of Korean martial arts.

".....If you are talking non linear, why are there schools today or do Korean schools trace thier lineage?..."

Fact is that people do a lot of dumb things, and nobody knows exactly why. Why do people use the term "supreme grandmaster" and "grandmaster" when there are no such positions in Korean culture? Why do people continue to use terms like "do-ju" and "do-ju-nim" when it is painfully apparent that these terms are derived from Japanese tradition rather than Korean? Why do Koreans espouse a hatred of Japanese culture and injury during the 20th century while continuing to use structures such as the dan/kyu (aka dan/guep) ranking system and the practice of Aikido, Judo and Kumdo in preference to Korean arts such as Hapkido, Ssireum, Taek Kyon, Archery, and Ship Pal Gi? Why is it that the Koreans have a culture that goes back 3-4 thousand years, and yet their own people do little to maintain or promote their culture, choosing instead to promote the same shallow Western pursuits as here in the States. Its not because there is no history. There is plenty written down and there for the investigation. Its not because it can't be found. If a simple 4th dan from the Midwest can pursue such research whats holding the Korean nationals back?

The simple fact is that by establishing a lineage after the fashion of the Japanese Ryu an entrepeneur increases the chances that monies for seminars, certification and enrollment will funnel to ones' own door rather than anothers'. There is no historical provenence for the sort of lineages that one sees' touted in the media, magazines or books; not in Korea anyhow. In my own case I can trace my lineage--- if you want to call it that--- back to Yong Sul Choi. What does it mean? Little more than if I wish to, I can validate my students through my teacher by getting paper with his signature on it and in this way one of my students can claim a historical relationship with Choi. Whatever winds yer clock. As a Buddhist I have as much having taken my Precepts and now stand as yet the next generation of Buddhists after the founder of the monastery to which I belong. Meaning?

Now since I have gone this far, let me also say what this stuff is NOT.

Being a martial artist does not, in our modern day, mean that a person practices a martial science. It does not mean that one adheres to or espouses a martial code as a premise for ones' conduct. It does not mean that one practices the material used historically by Korean warriors, nor conducts their lives according to a code after the fashion in which they did. Martial arts in the context of todays experience means to use a buzzword or group of buzzwords, antics, dress or structure that suggests an image to ones' community. It is a commercial experience in which designated authorities sell various roles for people to put on. It is what I call "martial theatre". Nothing wrong with that, actually, until one decides to fall back on such theatre as though it were something more authentic. Then, it simply will not hold up. Nobody says people can't put on uniforms, do Okinawan kata, wave around Chinese staffs, use Japanese structure and what-not. All I am asking is that folks not confuse somebodys' imaginings about Korean martial culture with the historical reality. Hope this is of some help, FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Tang Soo Do United's Website Update

Previous Thread

100% Cotton Mid Night Blue Top

Next Thread

Similar threads

S
Hwang Kee
Replies
9
Views
2K
sjrwheeler
S
JWLuiza
Master Penfil and the Vision Hwang Kee
Replies
6
Views
2K
Master Jay S. Penfil
Master Jay S. Penfil
M
Tang Soo Do Competitions
Replies
7
Views
3K
Dirty Dog
Dirty Dog
Makalakumu
1960 - Intro to Tang Soo Do by Hwang Kee
Replies
4
Views
2K
Makalakumu
Makalakumu
Makalakumu
Tang Soo Do and Karate (not Shotokan)
2
Replies
35
Views
14K
Makalakumu
Makalakumu

Latest Discussions

Back
Top