The Korean roots of TKD
- Thread starter Rumy73
- Start date
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
TKD could not have been 100% Japanese Karate in the 1940's since it didn't exist. There was no such thing.
Research did not come up with a name for "the new art" until 1954.
Then again it depends on how you define TKD.
You are very misinformed, sir.
Perhaps you can support this with a better source than an excerpt from Human Weapon? That show, while pretty cool over all, didn't always do as much research as might be desirable... or cross check the statements made by featured sources?
Pretty much everything I've seen supports that, yes, there was an indigenous Korean foot game/dance -- but that the functional fighting applications were pretty much lost, if they were ever solidly there. TKD has pretty strongly been shown to have largely originated from Shotokan karate, adapted to serve Korean nationalist needs. That's not to say it hasn't developed in its own directions since then.
Pretty much everything I've seen supports that, yes, there was an indigenous Korean foot game/dance -- but that the functional fighting applications were pretty much lost, if they were ever solidly there. TKD has pretty strongly been shown to have largely originated from Shotokan karate, adapted to serve Korean nationalist needs. That's not to say it hasn't developed in its own directions since then.
Funny post.
Makes an absolute (but completely vague) statement and drops a video that doesn't even present factual evidence to support the statement.
Btw, what is the conceptual accuaracy of "Korean DNA"?
I believe he was talking about the schools that gave birth to what would be later called taekwondo. I wouldn't say 100%, sure, but it was a very large part. Notice how it makes more sense now you know that:
I would add just one thing:
Off course what was teached in the various pre-"taekwondo" kwans would hardly be "pure karate" -- instead it would have the personal variations of the kwans' founders, notably in the cases where those founders actually studied other styles (Chang Moo Kwan founder Byung-In Yoon, for example). Even so, after the (complicated) merge of kwans under the same name, most of what could be seen was largely shotokan karate. I honestly would call "artificial changings" to what has been changed in the latest decades on KKW taekwondo, and we can clearly see how much a great part of those changes are just to make taekwondo less looking like karate (see changes in uniforms, forms, small changes in techniques and basic motions, etc.). The funniest part is that what today most resembles taekkyon is the WTF olympic sparring (surely not a coincidence), that is a lot different even from Kukkiwon Taekwondo itself, if we compare the fight principles of both. By the way, most of those fight principles in the non-sport venue of taekwondo remain the same of karate, what is even more evident in ITF Taekwon-Do.
Funny enough : if you consider how man years japanese people spent in Korea, there could not be such thing as purely japanese karate 
Saying there is no karate in taekwondo is as wrong as saying that there is no taekwondo (of taekyon, or any korean art) in karate.
All the countries of the area had martial arts, and they all mixed a little bit in each other, Korea was a very busy road to go to/from japan, china, mongolia etc.
Please don't be so final in your statements about martial arts origins : a long time passed, a lot of people were involved and everything evolved, and I truly don't believe all those countries lived in a autarky.
I do believe there's (at least) karate in taekwondo I learnt, and I live happy with that.
People pretending that taekwondo is a purely korean art can be called misinformed if you like, I don't care and just would like them to explain how anything can be 'pure' in a country that just left 50 years of violent and repressive occupation.
People pretending that taekwondo is a purely japanese art can be called misinformed too if you still like it, I don't care and just would like them to explain me why, in this case, I'm able to say "wow, that's a korean art" when I watch Taekwondo, Taekkyon, Hapkido, Tang soo do and so on. There's definitively something common between them, and different from other arts. If you call it Korean DNA, it seems ok for me.
Who cares about 'purity' ? Mixed and rich sounds very fine for me. I'm sometimes lurking in karate lessons to learn some stuffs ... and aïkido, and jujitsu and so on, and all of those knowledge are part of my taekwondo anyways.
Saying there is no karate in taekwondo is as wrong as saying that there is no taekwondo (of taekyon, or any korean art) in karate.
All the countries of the area had martial arts, and they all mixed a little bit in each other, Korea was a very busy road to go to/from japan, china, mongolia etc.
Please don't be so final in your statements about martial arts origins : a long time passed, a lot of people were involved and everything evolved, and I truly don't believe all those countries lived in a autarky.
I do believe there's (at least) karate in taekwondo I learnt, and I live happy with that.
People pretending that taekwondo is a purely korean art can be called misinformed if you like, I don't care and just would like them to explain how anything can be 'pure' in a country that just left 50 years of violent and repressive occupation.
People pretending that taekwondo is a purely japanese art can be called misinformed too if you still like it, I don't care and just would like them to explain me why, in this case, I'm able to say "wow, that's a korean art" when I watch Taekwondo, Taekkyon, Hapkido, Tang soo do and so on. There's definitively something common between them, and different from other arts. If you call it Korean DNA, it seems ok for me.
Who cares about 'purity' ? Mixed and rich sounds very fine for me. I'm sometimes lurking in karate lessons to learn some stuffs ... and aïkido, and jujitsu and so on, and all of those knowledge are part of my taekwondo anyways.
Funny enough : if you consider how man years japanese people spent in Korea, there could not be such thing as purely japanese karate
Saying there is no karate in taekwondo is as wrong as saying that there is no taekwondo (of taekyon, or any korean art) in karate.
Really? What evidence can you present that Gichin Funakoshi (or any of the other Masters of that time period) studied any Korean art? You do know that you actually have to study this, right? It doesn't become a part of your art by osmosis.
The founders of the kwans that joined together to create taekwondo taught what they learned in Japan (primarily), with some influence from Chinese arts. This is a matter of record.
Um, because you're seeing them NOW, after they've gone through 50 years or so of modification from their Japanese origins. Modifications that were specifically intended to make the arts "more Korean" and distance them from their Japanese origins.
Taekwondo is primarily derived from Shotokan.
Tangsoodo is even more closely related to Shotokan than is taekwondo, even using the same forms.
Hapkido is primarily derived from Daito Ryu.
This really isn't a matter for debate. All you need to do is study the history of taekwondo.
Taekkyons survival of the occupation is still very much subject to debate.
In fact, it is a matter for debate, as I studied history of taekwondo and korean martial art, and have been led to a different opinion than yours
It's very easy to say that something is true or wrong and no one can contradict you because we weren't there at this time. This argument works both ways. I truly have no idea how to scientifically measure the influence on martial arts of more than 2000 years of melting pot, to demonstrate that it had influence or it had none at all is not possible.
There was a time when suggesting that anything japanese might have been maybe a long long time ago even just a tiny bit influenced by anything from Korea would have been a great offense. The same sentence with korean instead of japanese is also true, and it's still the case sometimes, depending on whom you're talking to.
In this kind of situation, I find it difficult to listen to a thesis without pondering it with other's opinions. The way history is presented is so drastically different depending on the speaker that it should really make us cautious.
I'm curious about weither or not people from chinese arts feel concerned about the debate ... I feel this debate is always Korea vs Japan (not very healthy ...) when a lot of other influences were in place.
Last edited:
In fact, it is a matter for debate, as I studied history of taekwondo and korean martial art, and have been led to a different opinion than yours
OK, so enlighten us. Present your historical evidence that supports the idea that Korean historical martial arts influenced the Japanese martial arts.
Cyriacus
Senior Master
Personally, id argue that Human Weapon did a very good job of researching and representing the modern sport fighting side of things, and just touched on history after the fact. Its a pretty functional formula, i think.
I have no idea why you're on such an edge, and wonder if you've read the rest of the post
I have read it. I didn't see any historical basis for your claims that indigenous Korean martial arts influenced the development of Japanese martial arts.
The historical record is pretty clear. Japanese martial arts can be traced back through Okinawa and China. Korean martial arts (as they exist today) can be traced directly to Japan and (to a much lesser degree) China.
So again I ask: do you have any historical basis for your claim, or is it merely something you've dreamed up?
And for the record, I am not on edge. You're presenting a claim that is in direct opposition to the hisorical record. If there's any basis for it, I'd love to know what it is. If it's just something you've dreamed up, then I'll just laugh and go on.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Having now re considered this post Vis a Vis "Roots" it's not all that inaccurate. However to say the roots were "Japanese Karate" does not really go far enough back since they extend furter to the Okinawan roots of Shorin and Shorei with Shorin being the Okinawan derivation of Shaolin.
Most credible accounts indicate that indigineous Korean MA's were wiped out during occupations and ressurrection of those arts was a reinvention with little prrof of historical ties much like the reinvention of Pankration.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
As a counterpoint there are 2 major conceptula difference between what many consider Hallmarks of Karate and ITF / Chang Hon, tose are:
Karate uses the idea of being "Deeply Rooted" as a requirement for making power. Chang Hon, / ITF does not always require this even using techniques to demonstrate tremendous power while airborne; and
Karate is known for the "Level Headed" movement when advancing or retreating, while The Chang Hon Sine wave uses the leg knee flexion to employ more of the body's musculature for powwer in hand techniques (In sports disciplines referred to as "Closed Chain" linking) resulting in an up and down motion of the body.
The post was deliberately simple to provoke discussion. The video does a nice job of illustrating Taekkyeon's long history. Now about all of you who want to chaulk TKD's existence up to karate, you are mistaken. I family that lived under the Japanese occupation. While the Japanese would like to have believed they snuffed out Korea's culture, this is was wishful thinking. Just like slaves on Haiti appeared to be practicing Catholicism, they really repurposed the veneer of it to celebrate African religions. Koreans, save a small minority if collaborators, kept their culture alive. I would happily offer scholarly sources but none of you read Chinese, Korean or Japanese.
The post was deliberately simple to provoke discussion. The video does a nice job of illustrating Taekkyeon's long history. Now about all of you who want to chalk TKD's existence up to karate, you are mistaken. I family that lived under the Japanese occupation. While the Japanese would like to have believed they snuffed out Korea's culture, this is was wishful thinking. Just like slaves on Haiti appeared to be practicing Catholicism, they really repurposed the veneer of it to celebrate African religions. Koreans, save a small minority if collaborators, kept their culture alive. I would happily offer scholarly sources but none of you read Chinese, Korean or Japanese.
History is written by the victor... Oft times, history is destroyed by the occupier. I believe that TKD is built from Japanese Shotokan, that is obvious. But I also do not think it is fair to discount that the Korean's had native arts that involved some pretty spectacular kicking. The arts may have vanished during the occupation but the kick's clearly remain.
One thing I think that set's Hapkido apart is that Hapkido practitionaers generally agree that Hapkido's roots are Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu. It's something we are generally proud of. But strangely many Daito Ryu people are uncomfortable with Hapkido's link.
So we are forever being reminded that TKD is from Shotokan but asked to forget that Hapkido was from Daito Ryu...
It just demonstrates that history is a complicated subject. What really happened is sometimes difficult or impossible to nail down with any certainty.
One thing I think that set's Hapkido apart is that Hapkido practitionaers generally agree that Hapkido's roots are Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu. It's something we are generally proud of. But strangely many Daito Ryu people are uncomfortable with Hapkido's link.
So we are forever being reminded that TKD is from Shotokan but asked to forget that Hapkido was from Daito Ryu...
It just demonstrates that history is a complicated subject. What really happened is sometimes difficult or impossible to nail down with any certainty.
Well, no, it does nothing of the sort. Apparently, by your standards, I could use old re-runs of Kung Fu as historical evidence.
So you keep asserting, but Truth By Blatant Assertion doesn't really carry much weight.
Of course not. You're the only person here who can read anything other than English. :rofl:
oftheherd1
Senior Master
In fact, it is a matter for debate, as I studied history of taekwondo and korean martial art, and have been led to a different opinion than yours
It's very easy to say that something is true or wrong and no one can contradict you because we weren't there at this time. This argument works both ways. I truly have no idea how to scientifically measure the influence on martial arts of more than 2000 years of melting pot, to demonstrate that it had influence or it had none at all is not possible.
There was a time when suggesting that anything japanese might have been maybe a long long time ago even just a tiny bit influenced by anything from Korea would have been a great offense. The same sentence with korean instead of japanese is also true, and it's still the case sometimes, depending on whom you're talking to.
In this kind of situation, I find it difficult to listen to a thesis without pondering it with other's opinions. The way history is presented is so drastically different depending on the speaker that it should really make us cautious.
I'm curious about weither or not people from chinese arts feel concerned about the debate ... I feel this debate is always Korea vs Japan (not very healthy ...) when a lot of other influences were in place.
I think the differences between Korean and Japanese MA will always be clouded. During the Japanese occupation of Korea, they tried very hard to erase anything Korean from the culture, and change it all to Japanese. The Japanese had been mostly successful in doing the same to the Okinawans, but they had more time to accomplish it. They took over Okinawa about 250 years ago.
That the Koreans had some form of MA, besides sword use is probably correct. I can't quote sources, but I do recall reading while in Korea, of some unarmed as well as armed methods that had been set down in 'books' in older Korea. Again, I don't recall what time period.
However, conflicts between Japanese revisions of history betwee them and China, them and Korea, and them and the USA are well known, even to this day. Korea and Japan continue to take every opportunity to play one-upmanship even these days, on any subject they think they can.
Korean culture anything, were certainly surpressed. That is a matter of living memory amonst many people. It seems it was outlawed for Koreans to practice their own MA, and only a few were allowed to learn Japanese MA. Just one more problem in deciding an origin of any MA.
Interesting. It is similar to some of the things I remember being taught when I studied under Jhoon Goo Rhee.
Bolded: I guess you must have left that part out of the video you linked to. I missed that. The few mentions of ancient warriors aren't specific to anything. Have you read Dr. He-Young Kim's first book on Hapkido? He traces Hapkido all the way back to infinity and beyond. Touching on all the Korean dynasties, especially Hwa Rang Do, along the way. Yet all the Hapkido GM acknowledge its roots in Japanese MA.
Bolded and underlined: How do you know that? Have you asked all members? I am pretty sure there are members who can read and understand all the languages you mentioned. Hangul is an alphabet. I read it. But I don't recall many words any more. And I never really knew more than probably 500 words back when I knew more. So, if you are sure about Chinese and Japanese, leave those there, but take out the reference to reading Korean. But I think you will get in trouble all the way around. I have seen other members post about being from Korea, China, and Japan. They speak and read their native languages. You just make yourself look very foolish, and worse.
And be careful about mention of MA here only on your own authority. This is called Martial Talk for a reason.
All that said, please continue to contribute.
