How much karate inside TKD?

[Rumy73]

TKD is a modern invention, which was an attempt to unify the various Korean styles following the long Japanese occupation of Korea. Yes, Karate has influenced TKD but so has Kung Fu, as well as traditional forms of Korean martial arts. That being said, TKD has taken a life of its own. Everything is influenced by something but a child creates his own identity that is apart from his parents.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

IMO TKD is a form of Karate and we should be proud of that! I am a minority in this opinion.

I'm with you 100% on this. TKD as I've stated can be a great SD art. It can be a great sport art. I should be enjoyed for what it is without the need to embellish it for what it is not i.e. 2000 years old, revised histories due to politics (and egos) etc.

Be less fussing around

 

[arnisador]

TKD is a modern invention, which was an attempt to unify the various Korean styles following the long Japanese occupation of Korea. Yes, Karate has influenced TKD but so has Kung Fu, as well as traditional forms of Korean martial arts.

The Japanese were brutally efficient at stamping out as much Korean culture as they could. The original TKD of the late 1940s was karate per se, but as it evolved they made it more Korean--including emphasizing the kicking aspect.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

TKD is a modern invention, which was an attempt to unify the various Korean styles following the long Japanese occupation of Korea. Yes, Karate has influenced TKD but so has Kung Fu, as well as traditional forms of Korean martial arts. That being said, TKD has taken a life of its own. Everything is influenced by something but a child creates his own identity that is apart from his parents.

If I had to toss in a % I'd say Karate was 90%, CMA 9% and any sort of indigineous Korean art 1%. And too be honest, I think 1% is being generous.

TKD should be very proud of its Karate roots and forego the politics. Karate is a strong tree on which to be a branch.

 

[Tswolfman]

I see your point but at this time tkd is its own tree. It may have been grafted from karate but it has evolved into something entirely different

 

[Rumy73]

If I had to toss in a % I'd say Karate was 90%, CMA 9% and any sort of indigineous Korean art 1%. And too be honest, I think 1% is being generous.

TKD should be very proud of its Karate roots and forego the politics. Karate is a strong tree on which to be a branch.

The Koreans produced martial arts guides hundreds of years before the Japanese invaded. Of course, these alone were not the germination of TKD. Many elements were in play when TKD was formulated. Dissecting its DNA with simplifications is quite unfair and borders on be rude.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

The Koreans produced martial arts guides hundreds of years before the Japanese invaded. Of course, these alone were not the germination of TKD. Many elements were in play when TKD was formulated. Dissecting its DNA with simplifications is quite unfair and borders on be rude.

Then you've taken it the wrong way.

It isn't simplification, it is factual history from the founding kwans themselves. Rewritten histories and attempts to transform it into a 2000 year old indiginous Korean art notwithstanding.

It is what it is and TKD practitioners should be satisfied with what it is and where it can go.

 

[Dirty Dog]

TKD is a modern invention, which was an attempt to unify the various Korean styles following the long Japanese occupation of Korea. Yes, Karate has influenced TKD but so has Kung Fu, as well as traditional forms of Korean martial arts. That being said, TKD has taken a life of its own. Everything is influenced by something but a child creates his own identity that is apart from his parents.

Close... TKD was created from the union of various Kwans founded by men who had trained in Japanese and (to a lesser extent) Chinese martial arts. There is no evidence that any of them had any training in any indiginous Korean art. Since that time TKD has branched and developed and grown and can now be considered an art in its own right, not 'just another type of Karate'.
The claim that any of the indiginous Korean arts survived the supression of Korean culture by the Japanese is nothing more than wishful thinking.

The Koreans produced martial arts guides hundreds of years before the Japanese invaded. Of course, these alone were not the germination of TKD. Many elements were in play when TKD was formulated. Dissecting its DNA with simplifications is quite unfair and borders on be rude.

They did? Then where are these guides? The only one I am aware of is the muje dobo tong ji upon which GM Hwang Kee based part of his Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan. And the muye dobo tong ji only contains ONE chapter on unarmed combat; certainly not enough for a full art. The MDTJ was published at the end of the 18th century, which hardly supports the claims of 2000 year old traditions surviving the occupation. And of course, GM Hwang didn't even start to incorporate what he learned from this manual into his Soo Bahk Do until the mid/late 1950s, by which time he was most definately NOT a part of the unification efforts that led to TKD.

In short, there is no reason (other than cultural pride) to claim that the origins of TKD include any indiginous Korean art at all.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

Close... TKD was created from the union of various Kwans founded by men who had trained in Japanese and (to a lesser extent) Chinese martial arts. There is no evidence that any of them had any training in any indiginous Korean art. Since that time TKD has branched and developed and grown and can now be considered an art in its own right, not 'just another type of Karate'.
The claim that any of the indiginous Korean arts survived the supression of Korean culture by the Japanese is nothing more than wishful thinking.



They did? Then where are these guides? The only one I am aware of is the muje dobo tong ji upon which GM Hwang Kee based part of his Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan. And the muye dobo tong ji only contains ONE chapter on unarmed combat; certainly not enough for a full art. The MDTJ was published at the end of the 18th century, which hardly supports the claims of 2000 year old traditions surviving the occupation. And of course, GM Hwang didn't even start to incorporate what he learned from this manual into his Soo Bahk Do until the mid/late 1950s, by which time he was most definately NOT a part of the unification efforts that led to TKD.

In short, there is no reason (other than cultural pride) to claim that the origins of TKD include any indiginous Korean art at all.

A large portion of the Moo Ye Dobo Tong Ji, is also a translation of an earlier Chinese military text. the Ji Xiao Xin Shu. There were addendums and improvements made, but it is rooted in Chinese military field maneuvers, as I understand it.

 

[Dirty Dog]

A large portion of the Moo Ye Dobo Tong Ji, is also a translation of an earlier Chinese military text. the Ji Xiao Xin Shu. There were addendums and improvements made, but it is rooted in Chinese military field maneuvers, as I understand it.

That is also my understanding. And since it is, as you mention, a military manual, it focuses on horsemanship, weapons, and weapons from horseback, with only one chapter devoted to unarmed combat. Sort of like miltary training today. Imagine that.

TKD is what it is, and the claims of 2000 year old Korean roots for it have long since been disproven.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Close... TKD was created from the union of various Kwans founded by men who had trained in Japanese and (to a lesser extent) Chinese martial arts. There is no evidence that any of them had any training in any indiginous Korean art.

Well, both Gen. Choi and, I believe, GM Hwang Kee both stated they learned Taekkyon to various degrees (Gen. Choi said his knowledge was pretty rudimentary; I don't know if Hwang Kee claimed to "master" Taekkyon or not). The important thing to recall about Taekkyon was that it was more of a folk game than a martial art in any sense that we would think. People make a big deal about there not being any "record" of people such as Gen. Choi and GM Hwang studying Taekkyon but that's a bit like saying there's no record of me playing kick ball when I was a kid. As far as I can tell the importance of rank, certification, etc. in Korean martial arts really is a result of the Japanese influence on Korean culture not only through the occupation but also from the Kwan founders' time spent studying in Japan.

That all being said, I have no problem saying that there is some influence of Taekkyon on Taekwon-Do. In the ITF there are a few foot techniques that resemble those found in Taekkyon more than in karate, for instance. I would also say that the way the body is moved has much more in common with Taekkyon than karate with the rythmic raising and sinking of the body. When I trained at a KKW school this was absent and, in fact, a greater emphasis was placed on keeping the head level a la karate (how common this is now I don't know).

Does anyone know of any other Kwan founders (or early Kwan Jang) that claimed to have studied Taekkyon? I believe GM Kim Soo did, but he isn't really a Kwan founder or Kwan Jang (though he did instruct at the Chang Moo Kwan for a time before moving to the Kwang Duk Won).

Pax,

Chris

 

[Dirty Dog]

Well, both Gen. Choi and, I believe, GM Hwang Kee both stated they learned Taekkyon to various degrees (Gen. Choi said his knowledge was pretty rudimentary; I don't know if Hwang Kee claimed to "master" Taekkyon or not). The important thing to recall about Taekkyon was that it was more of a folk game than a martial art in any sense that we would think. People make a big deal about there not being any "record" of people such as Gen. Choi and GM Hwang studying Taekkyon but that's a bit like saying there's no record of me playing kick ball when I was a kid. As far as I can tell the importance of rank, certification, etc. in Korean martial arts really is a result of the Japanese influence on Korean culture not only through the occupation but also from the Kwan founders' time spent studying in Japan.

That all being said, I have no problem saying that there is some influence of Taekkyon on Taekwon-Do. In the ITF there are a few foot techniques that resemble those found in Taekkyon more than in karate, for instance. I would also say that the way the body is moved has much more in common with Taekkyon than karate with the rythmic raising and sinking of the body. When I trained at a KKW school this was absent and, in fact, a greater emphasis was placed on keeping the head level a la karate (how common this is now I don't know).

Does anyone know of any other Kwan founders (or early Kwan Jang) that claimed to have studied Taekkyon? I believe GM Kim Soo did, but he isn't really a Kwan founder or Kwan Jang (though he did instruct at the Chang Moo Kwan for a time before moving to the Kwang Duk Won).

Pax,

Chris

Here's the problem. There's no actual evidence that ANYBODY knew any actual traditional taekkyon by the libneration, or that what is practiced today as taekkyon has anything other than a passing resemblance to the taekkyon that was practiced prior to the Japanese occupation of Korea, and the almost total supression of their culture.

Certainly the Koreans have a cultural preference for kicking, and that has had a huge impact on the development of taekwondo, but there's no real evidence to support any direct connection to specific training or technigues from taekkyon, soo bahk, kwon bop or hwarang.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Here's the problem. There's no actual evidence that ANYBODY knew any actual traditional taekkyon by the libneration, or that what is practiced today as taekkyon has anything other than a passing resemblance to the taekkyon that was practiced prior to the Japanese occupation of Korea, and the almost total supression of their culture.

You don't think that Song Duk Gi knew Taekkyon?

Like I said, the focus on having a paper trail is an influence of Japanese culture, IMHO. From what I have seen of Taekkyon there's a bit of an influence on Taekwon-Do with next to none on Taekwondo. Could it be empirically verified? Probably not enough for a lot of people.

Certainly the Koreans have a cultural preference for kicking, and that has had a huge impact on the development of taekwondo, but there's no real evidence to support any direct connection to specific training or technigues from taekkyon, soo bahk, kwon bop or hwarang.

Oh, sure. But I didn't mean just the propensity for kicking. I mentioned the similarity in kicking techniques because they are easiest to see but are, in balance, the least important influence. IMO, the similarity in how the body moves is a more subtle but, ultimately more telling, characteristic. YMMV, of course.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Dirty Dog]

You don't think that Song Duk Gi knew Taekkyon?

I don't know. Given that he was a child when Japan occupied Korea, how much could he have known? Certainly he said he did. And certainly the South Korean government has accepted that statement. Culturally, they have a vested interest in his claims being true. That doesn't make it true, and certainly there's no real historical evidence to support his claims. That doesn't mean they're not true. It also doesn't mean they ARE true. Nor does it mean that he didn't learn some taekkyon. Nor does it mean that his memories of what he learned have not been altered over time.
I don't care for baby black belts because I do not think children have the maturity to understand the complexities of our arts. I think a baby Kwanjang is even less likely.
Personally, I find it unlikely that any one person could, alone, in secret, from such a young age, maintain unchanged a complicated martial art.

Like I said, the focus on having a paper trail is an influence of Japanese culture, IMHO. From what I have seen of Taekkyon there's a bit of an influence on Taekwon-Do with next to none on Taekwondo. Could it be empirically verified? Probably not enough for a lot of people.

That's one reason why I'm not upset by the idea that the history of TKD doesn't go back 20,000,000 years. It's already muddled enough already.

Oh, sure. But I didn't mean just the propensity for kicking. I mentioned the similarity in kicking techniques because they are easiest to see but are, in balance, the least important influence. IMO, the similarity in how the body moves is a more subtle but, ultimately more telling, characteristic. YMMV, of course.

Cause and effect are very debatable. The General, while an incredibly talented and gifted visionary, also had a vested interest in connecting his new art with historical Korean arts. And while his movements may well have been influenced by "taekkyon", there is no evidence to show that this is the same as historical taekkyon.

 

[RobBnTX]

It is my understanding that Taekkyon was a popular folk game among the street gangs of Seoul, the so-called Kkangpae, before the Japanese occupation. Given that Gen. Choi was raised in what is now in North Korea, just how much Taekkyon he knew is debatable but he claimed to have learned it from his calligraphy master so I guess the question could be where did his calligraphy master learn it?

It is also my understanding that the ban by the Japanese was an extension of a ban already in place since the late 1800s as Taekkyon was associated with these street gangs but survived as authorities at that time often looked the other way at the activities of the Kkangpae.

So anyway someone please correct me if my information is incorrect.

 

[RobBnTX]

I have often wondered if the emphasis on kicking in TKD could possibly be traced to the influence of Northern Kung Fu by Hwang Kee when he was briefly associated with the Chung Do Kwan and then later when he established his Moo Duk Kwan rather than whatever influence Taekkyon may have had. Hwang Kee had trained with a Kung Fu master by the name of Yang Kuk Jin when was working for the railroad in Manchuria and most styles of Northern Kung Fu features many high kicking techniques. I once watched a practitioner of My Jhong Law Horn Kung Fu and was amazed at his intricate footwork and high kicks.

 

[chrispillertkd]

I don't know. Given that he was a child when Japan occupied Korea, how much could he have known? Certainly he said he did. And certainly the South Korean government has accepted that statement. Culturally, they have a vested interest in his claims being true. That doesn't make it true, and certainly there's no real historical evidence to support his claims. That doesn't mean they're not true. It also doesn't mean they ARE true. Nor does it mean that he didn't learn some taekkyon. Nor does it mean that his memories of what he learned have not been altered over time.
I don't care for baby black belts because I do not think children have the maturity to understand the complexities of our arts. I think a baby Kwanjang is even less likely.
Personally, I find it unlikely that any one person could, alone, in secret, from such a young age, maintain unchanged a complicated martial art.

If you're referring to Song Duk Gi here as a "Kwan Jang" I think you're still imagining Taekkyon as a martial art. It was a game, really. Taekkyon has certainly moved towards being a martial art recently but like I said in an above post not having a record of someone training in it is like not having a record of someone in the U.S. playing kick ball when they were a kid. It just really wasn't the kind of thing that had a Kwan Jang from what I understand.

As for cause and effect when it comes to Taekkyon's influence on Taekwon-Do, I think it's likely that Gen. Choi was influenced by Taekkyon's raising and lowering of the body when he came up with sine wave. It's conjecture, sure. But I think now that many people accept the influence of karate on Taekwon-Do (which is something Gen. Choi always stated) now they want to deny any other influence. You can see that with people who ignore the fact that a few of the Kwan founders studied Chinese styles.

If someone is looking for a paper trail, like the type that can be seen in the different licenses of the the Japanese Koryu or the dan certificates of modern day Japanese and Korean martial arts, it's just not going to happen. But you can see the type of body motions used in different martial arts and if there isn't a proof of causation there certainly is more than a bit of correlation. It's like finding a finger print at a crime scene. It might not mean that person was the killer, but they were there at some point. Was Taekkyon directly responsible for Taekwon-Do's checking kicks, twisting kicks, foot tackling, sine wave, etc.? Maybe not directly but there's more than a bit of similarity, and it's a similarity that doesn't come from Japanese karate. I'm not saying Gen. Choi (or Hwang Kee, for that matter) directly lifted these things from Taekkyon. But the influence is apparent.

Pax,

Chris

 

[arnisador]

I have often wondered if the emphasis on kicking in TKD could possibly be traced to the influence of Northern Kung Fu

My understanding is that a kick to the head was a mark of fighting prowess in Korea for a long time, somewhat like beating someone with one hand tied behind your back would be here. It was an ideal, and that was mostly a cultural thing.

I believe Taekkyon was mostly a shin-kicking sort of game but to some extent it reflected a kicking-centric philosophy. As TKD evolved from Karate, the cultural notions exerted an influence on it.

 

[chrispillertkd]

My understanding is that a kick to the head was a mark of fighting prowess in Korea for a long time, somewhat like beating someone with one hand tied behind your back would be here. It was an ideal, and that was mostly a cultural thing.

I believe Taekkyon was mostly a shin-kicking sort of game but to some extent it reflected a kicking-centric philosophy. As TKD evolved from Karate, the cultural notions exerted an influence on it.

In Taekkyon you could win by either throwing or sweeping someone, pushing them out of the ring, or kicking them in the head. Which is probably where the idea that being able to kick someone in the head is an example of being very skilled comes from. There is an interesting write up on Taekkyon in Stewart Culin's Korean Games, which was published in 1895 and mentions the use of both sweeps and high kicks.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Rumy73]

The real question is how reductive do we wish to get? Karate most definitely stems from China. It only reached the Japanese mainland in the 1920s. Korea was occupied by Japan from 1910-1945. However, it always had trade and intellectual exchange with China. China absorbed trade and commerce from across Asia and the steppes. Ideas arrived indirectly from Europe and in limited cases directly -- Alexander the Great, Marco Polo, Jesuits, et cetera. Reasonable minds can deduce that martial arts in the broadest sense were part of these exchanges. Certainly in the Ryukyu kingdom is a famed instance of such an exchange. Scholars and elites who were trained in China brought back the foundation of what became karate. Over time karate developed unique traits. Nationalism led to the removal of Tang from the name to the simpler "open hand."

The paradigm of outside influence and the subsequent repurposing is exemplified in karate. Arguably, TKD fits this bill. Although the Koreans were occupied, their culture was not eclipsed. Any incorporation or adaptation of karate was filtered through their own lens. It has gone on to be a unique art in its own right. How much past forms of Korean fighting styles informed TKD at the inception or in a later stage of progression is probably impossible to dissect with English language sources.

In closing, ideas that are exchanged between cultures are rarely adopted wholesale. The anger between Chinese, Korean and Japanese cultures has led to overstatements of individualism and overplayed the denials of outside influence.

One more point, simultaneous, independent development of ideas has occurred throughout the world over space and time. Learning to use one's body as a weapon, maximizing on physics, has happened across the globe.