Thanks, hoshin1600 for taking the time to detail the ambiguities of Uechi-ryu lineage. Most Okinawan styles have some measure of uncertainties in their lineage but are minor compared to what you presented!
I think it's clear that no single pure Chinese style was brought to Okinawa by any particular teacher; rather a mixture of them (which probably was the case of what Uechi's pangai no'on represents) and were then modified into something uniquely Okinawan. And we must factor in Kanbun's son, Kanai, who modified and added to what was now called Uechi-ryu during the late1920's-WWll (the time period of Okinawan karate evolving into actual styles) making it even more difficult to trace kata back to China. Additionally, some Chinese schools that contributed to karate formation died out, so there's nothing to trace back to.
Okinawan karate did not have "styles" at the start of the 20th century. For the next decade or two they still were not concrete entities, existing only informally with the various masters sharing and cross training their skills amongst each other, each of them generally having learned from a combination of teachers themselves. They are different streams swirling and mixing together, then separating into their own divergent channels.
The 3 bo kata I know show many similarities in structure yet have different lineages: Kedahama>Kyan. Itosu and Aragake>Mabuni>Taira. Kamiya>Taira. Tatsuo Shimabuku learned these kata from Kyan and Taira. They in turn have similarities to bo kata, Soeishi and Urasoe, done by other styles.
Who knows? All part of TMA mystique.
