I think was the case from the later dynasties up to pre-Communist era. In times past, the ideal "gentleman" was an expert at "wen" and "wu" (culture and war). For example the old imperial entrance exams required candidates to write dissertations and poetry as well as show skills in archery and horsemanship. Though these martial elements were eventually eliminated. In the Communist era, a career in the People's Liberation Army is still very respected. Sports and martial arts (well, we all know about the "diluted" Wushu) are considered a point of pride and athletes again are very respected.
"Also in Chinese culture, martial arts and sports in general is not highly thought of. A military career even less. Emphasis was on education, family and money. I don't agree with this but that's the facts. So it has nothing to do with the efficieny of the martial arts but the culture."
During the l8th century, China and Japan were engaged in trade both material and cultural. At that time a senior member of the Mitosi clan of Japan traveled to China to study the martial arts at the Shaolin Temple where he remained for many years. Upon his return to Japan he introduced the art of Chu'an Fa which he called Kempo (Japanese for "Way of the Fist"). This was later developed into a system for healing, health, and fighting called Kosho-Ryu Kempo. The Okinawans had always termed the Martial Arts as "Te" which literally means hand. During this period (1609-1903) "Karate" meaning "Hands of China" replaced the word "Te" (during the latter part of the 19th century) until the Chinese character which denoted "Hands of China" or "China Hand" (the latter being more correct) was changed by the Japanese to their character which meant "empty hand". This change (officially dated to 1923) angered many of the Okinawan masters who were proud of the term designating their fighting style. They also did not wish to dispense with their loyalty and association with China. However, there was great pressure by the Japanese and the masters very reluctantly accepted the new character change. The change was spearheaded by a student of Chogun Miyagi named Nagashi Hanage of the Goju-ryu style of karate. It was actually Chogun Miyagi himself who desired to make the change and compelled his disciple Nagashi Hanage to pursue the change with great vigor. While the change may have brought a deeper meaning according to Chogun Myagi, in which spiritual overcomes the physical, it is yet another example of how the Japanese managed to make many think that the Art was theirs and not the Chinese from whom it descended. The Bonsai tree is also an example because the Bonsai tree was propagated in China long before anyone ever heard of it from Japan.
This art was practiced and passed down in the Mitose line until James Mitose, who lived in Hawaii in 1940, began teaching publicly. One of his students, William Chow, who also extensively studied Chinese martial arts from his own family, took over teaching the classes. William Chow taught a young Hawaiian named Edmund Parker who eventually developed Kenpo into the art we know and practice today. For further clarification, refer to the Infinite Insights Into Kenpo books written by Grandmaster Parker. If the reader will observe the last two oriental characters on the right hand side of the Parker System patch, you will note that these are the true Chinese characters referring to "empty" and "hand" respectively. This was done intentionally by Mr. Parker to honor the Chinese from which our system descends. It is not a mixture of Japanese and Chinese. This has always been a primary mistake of many students of the Kenpo system and others. It is due primarily to the fact that both the Chinese and Japanese character for "te" meaning hand, are identical. This is the last character on the right hand side of the Parker patch. Consequently, it is easy to mix the two or rather to think they are mixed when you look at both the Chinese and Japanese characters -- the character for "kara" is different in both languages. If one uses the word Kenpo, which took on the Japanese meaning when "kara" was added before "te" as described above and has generally been the accepted norm ever since, it literally means fist law. The Pinyin pronunciation in Chinese for fist law is "Ch'uan Fa" and is sometimes incorrectly called "Ch'uan Shu" which is the Chinese term for Kung Fu. We give credit to the Chinese from whom our art descends. Mr. Parker taught for many years and is considered to be the Grand Master of the modern Kenpo system. He died unexpectedly in 1990 without naming a successor. Mr. Parker had many brilliant students who have continued to teach the principles and concepts of American Kenpo Karate.
this was a cut and paste job from http://home.austin.rr.com/americankenpo/kenpohistory.htm
IronMonkey and takada4life,
Hello guys! Okay, here's what I basically have to offer on the current debate...
Obviously there are numerous factors which play into a nation's successes and failures, militarily-speaking. In Ancient, Medieval, and Renaissance times, martial arts were the basis for training fighting men. Skills included wrestling, fencing (not just swords, of course), horsemanship, archery, etc. These were all part of the equation. My initial argument was that martial arts DID have something to do with these military successes and failures. If you look at successful fighting nations from back then, you'll notice that virtually all of them placed a very strong emphasis on martial arts--we're talking "warrior cultures" here. Look at the Spartans--they were a militocracy. The Romans are another good example--they possessed a highly trained professional army to defend and expand their Empire, and their most well-known "sporting" event, the gladiatorial games, was used not simply to appease the blood-lust of the masses, but was also clearly a "living laboratory" for comparing different fighting styles. Peter Connolly has commented on how there was obviously an exchange of ideas between the Roman army and the gladiatorial schools. This was a culture that took martial arts EXTREMELY seriously. The various steppe peoples like the Scythians and the Huns are also great examples of "warrior cultures"--the Greeks commented on how the Scythians worshipped only the God of War, and the Huns and others were known to worship a War God in the form of a sword thrust into the ground. In Medieval Europe, we of course have the knights, and in Japan, they had an equivilant warrior caste, the samurai. The "lower classes" also took martial arts seriously, both for protection of themselves and loved ones against brigands, and as training for wartime. Just look at the English yeomen--so famous for their archery--who were also widely regarded as top-notch sword-and-buckler fencers and billmen. We also have the German landsknechts and their mountain-shepherd enemies, the Swiss. The Venetians, being a mere city-state with limited manpower, placed great emphasis on martial arts and military training amongst all of the people, rich or poor. They had an event known as the "Guerre di Canne" ("War of the Sticks"), where two teams of stickfighters, armed with tapered, POINTED wooden or rattan ("Canne di India") sticks and bucklers or cloaks, would have a "king of the hill" game over one of the many bridges spanning Venice's canals. These competitions helped to train the common people in the intricacies of galley warfare (there was indeed a method to this apparent madness). Many of the early Bolognese fencing manuals were first printed in Venice. Over in the East, you had the various Filipino tribes (especially the Moros, of course), who had to constantly defend their land against the depredations of foriegn peoples--Spaniards, Chinese pirates, Japanese "wako", etc. Martial arts were held in high esteem.
(continued on next post...)
(continued from last post above)
China, however, is a complicated beast. Like many other countries, China had to deal with constant invasions. Also like other nations, she was able to deal with these incursions better sometimes than others. However, the fact that the Chinese did seem to have mixed feelings about martial arts and military science clearly hampered them. Look at the dynamics of the Japanese army that invaded Korea in 1592, when compared to their Korean and Chinese opponents. Competence in martial arts, as well as the use of effective weapon designs and techniques, clearly played a role. It may not necessarily have been a central role, but it was certainly a contributing factor. Some arts clearly ARE better than others (depending on the application, of course) on some level--NHB has shown that. Does that mean that CMA are no good? Of course not. The Chinese have certainly contributed their share to both MA and military science. The siege engines that the Mongols employed so enthusiastically against their numerous and varied opponents were of Perisan and Chinese manufacture (and were operated by Persian and Chinese engineers). Like other cultures (such as the Romans), they also excelled in the science of fortification--like the Great Wall. They were also adept at incorporating the fighting styles and weapons of other cultures (their wrestling and archery being heavily influenced by the Mongols). Still, they are generally not regarded as, say, the premier swordsmen of Asia. Many aspects of CMA and Chinese military history remain problematic at best, as far as I can ascertain. I do NOT mean that in a disrepectful way towards ANYONE who is Chinese or practices CMA. It's just my personal opinion.
Respectfully,
TFS
"Some arts clearly ARE better than others (depending on the application, of course) on some level--NHB has shown that."
But was it the "style" worse or the fact that the Chinese troops were just less trained and more poorly equipped? It seems from what I remember, Chinese armies tended to depend more on quantity rather than quality of soldiers.
"Look at the dynamics of the Japanese army that invaded Korea in 1592, when compared to their Korean and Chinese opponents."
In fairness, this was only one incident in China long history of conflicts..
"Still, they are generally not regarded as, say, the premier swordsmen of Asia."
I believe their armies consisted primarily of spearmen.
I agree with your general points though.
takada4life,
"But was it the 'style' worse or the fact that the Chinese troops were just less trained and more poorly equipped?" I suspect that all 3 reasons were a factor in that case. Certainly, author Stephen Turnbull has stressed the apparent superiority of Japanese swordplay, when compared to Continental Asian methods, during this War.
Yes, the Imjin War is only one incident in China's long military history, but it was an incident that took place (according to Mr Marcus) during one of China's stronger Dynasties--the Ming (and the Ming do hold the distinction of booting out the Mongols back in 1368). In fact, the Ming Chinese put so much effort into the Imjin War (and were so comparatively unsuccessful) that, even after the Japanese left, the Chinese were so weakened by the conflict (a conflict that had never even left Korean borders!), that within another 38 years or so, the Ming Dynasty was toppled by the Manchus. One has to wonder how the Imjin War would have turned out had it not been for the superlative efforts and performance of the Korean Navy under Admrial Yi Sun-Shin. One also has to wonder what Dutch naval intervention (on behalf of the Japanese) would would have meant for the fate of the Korean Navy.
The spear was the standard infantry weapon over much of the world--not just amongst the Chinese. The ashigaru that made up the bulk of the invading Japanese army during the Imjin War were mostly spearmen and arquebusiers. Likewise, in Europe at the same time period, those infantry that were not either arquebusiers, musketeers, or sword-and-buckler men, were pikemen (a pike simply being a long spear, much like the Japanese "nagae-yari"). My point in mentioning that the Chinese were never noted as the "premier swordsmen of Asia" was simply to clarify that point for the people on this forum who may not have known that--especially since many modern Chinese MA styles feature a lot of swordplay, with the curved saber ("dao") and the straight double-edged sword ("jian" or "jien").
In all fairness, though, the widespread use of firearms by the Japanese army during the Imjin War was doubtlessly a huge advantage.
TFS
"it was an incident that took place (according to Mr Marcus) during one of China's stronger Dynasties--the Ming"
At the time of the Imjin War, the Ming Dynasty had already gone from being the most powerful empire in Asia during the 15th century to it's weakened stance of irrational isolationism and overwhelming corruption by the 1500's.
When the Imjin War rolled around, the imperial Chinese government had already been subverted by the court eunuchs, who were immesely corrupt and gutted the military.
Here's a link:
http://xenohistorian.faithweb.com/china/ch05.html
From the link:
"The Ming dynasty fell from a combination of the three evils that brought down all Chinese dynasties: invasion, rebellion, and corruption. Of those three, the last one was the worst. As in the Han era, the court eunuchs grew in numbers and power until they became the ones who really ran the country. Gradually the emperors abdicated their political responsibilities; after 1582, they would not conduct court business or even attend meetings with government ministers. When the eunuchs came with something that required a top-level decision, the usual imperial response would be: "Don't bother me with that. Just do what you think is best." And they did! Soon the eunuchs had private armies, secret police, and other agents, with which they terrorized the administration and the common people alike.
At a time when the treasury was depleted from famine, plagues, widespread unemployment, and a costly war against Japan in Korea, the eunuchs saw no limits to their corruption, offering command of the armies to the highest bidder. This was a particularly dangerous action, because in 1606 a barbarian chief named Nurhachi united the tribes of Manchuria into a powerful kingdom. Then the Manchus pushed south; thanks to the incompetence of the leaders picked by the eunuchs, they won again and again."
I found an interesting interview with Sifu McSweeny, a first generation Ed Parker student. Here are a few pieces of that interview. THe full interview can be found at http://www.kungfu.org/messagegm28.shtml
Question four: Could you enlighten the readers as to why Master Parker called his system Kenpo Karate, and not Chinese Kenpo? There seems to be a bone of contention as to why Master Parker used the word Karate instead of Kung Fu, when in fact we know Kenpo comes from China. Would you please explain to us your understanding of this matter?
"Parker got his training from Professor K. S. Chow in Hawaii. Chow was also known as thunderbolt Chow, because he hit so hard. Professor Chow's instructor was his father, who was also well-versed in the martial arts. Parker also studied with James Mitosi, another fierce fighter. Since Chow and Mitosi both came from Japan they called it karate, which is a Japanese word meaning shell hand. They added the title of Kenpo, which means fist law, and so Kenpo Karate was born there. Technically speaking, it is Chinese Kenpo, as it all came from China originally."
Question seven: Kenpo's history tells us originally Kenpo had very few classical forms. We know Master Parker included six forms to this style after he came to the United States. Could you tell us how Master Parker went about creating his Kenpo forms and why he decided to add them to his system?
"When Parker came to America from Hawaii, he studied at Brigham Young where he got his degree in 1957, and as soon as he got his degree, he went to Pasadena, California and opened his school. He had not learned any forms and sets from Chow. He learned strictly self-defense techniques and sparring, so he was excellent in both. He created his short form one himself. Then he created another form called the Book Form, which is in his first book, "Secrets in Chinese Kenpo." It was a two-man form, that each man did individually, then at the end, they combined to show what the moves were for.
"In 1961 I went to Phoenix, Arizona after I had been with Parker for a few years. I was a brown belt. I trained with Bob Trias for a week because I was there on business. Bob was a former marine who brought Japanese-style Karate to America, even before Parker. Parker started Kenpo, but Trias, to my knowledge, was the first American Karate man who brought it to America. He started in Phoenix in 1955. He was a big fellow. About 6 foot 7, and 260 pounds. He was a hard hitter. Now with that kind of physique, you can understand, he would be going for power. So when I trained with him, he said my sparring was OK, and so was my self-defense. He had a high regard for the "Hawaiian boy," which he called Parker.
"But he said 'one thing you don't have, and tell Parker this, is that you don't have any forms'. So I went back to Parker in the summer of 61, and I informed him of what Trias said, and he looked at me, didn't say anything to me. The next day I was with him before training class, he looked over to me and said, 'You know, I've been thinking about what Trias told you, and he's right. I don't have any forms, I don't have any sets. Just some simple stuff I created myself.'
"Then he said, 'I'm going to solve this problem.' And within a month he brought down Jimmy Wu from San Francisco, who was a Kung Fu man, a specialist in White Crane and Tai Chi, and other animal sets, but he especially loved the internal arts. So, Jimmy Wu lived with Parker for a full 12 months. Parker paid his room and board, but unfortunately, not any salary, and that's why Jimmy Wu left us eventually, because he needed more money to survive and Parker gave very little, not enough for his needs, so he left.
"But before he left, Jimmy Wu created our forms. I was there when he created them, with the other belts like Al Tracy and Jimmy Ebrao and Rich Montgomery, guys who were my seniors at Kenpo. I was in the group, and we learned these forms together from Jimmy Wu. Parker learned the forms too, but then Parker made his own adjustments, especially to form one, two and three. He made more linear moves and some Kenpo moves in form two, but if you notice in forms four, five and six, they have the Chinese influence exclusively.
"I would say there was 90% Jimmy Wu and 10% Parker in those forms, and forms one through three would be half and half, Parker and Wu. But without Jimmy Wu, we wouldn't have had forms one through six, a lot of people don't realize that, and it's essentially Chinese and that's the basis of Parkers forms."
Question twelve: We know that Kenpo is very good for hand technique but, there is a lot of talk today about grappling technique and on-the-ground moves. Does Kenpo emphasize that? If so, why don't people know about it and if not, did you add it to the style?
"I added ground grappling to my style years ago because I had a heavy background in Judo. It is my opinion that you need defense against grapplers especially if you're thrown to the ground. In Kenpo which is an in-fighting art, if you miss with a strike, or if you're not powerful enough to stop something, they can grab you and immobilize you and throw you to the ground. Then you have a major problem.
"My theory is to learn enough about ground fighting, for instance bridging and escapes. If you're not a grappler don't try to become one. Stay with the art you learned but, learn enough ground fighting to enable you to escape and get back to your feet. I don't train people to be wrestlers because that's a whole separate art, and to be a good wrestler takes years, just as it is to be a good boxer or Kung Fu man. You don't do it overnight, it takes years of training. It's also a whole different philosophy. The wrestler wants to grab and hold you and choke you out or lock you into a submission hold. Kenpo people e are taught to knock people out quickly.
"So to answer your question, Kenpo does not teach anything about grappling, and it is a shortcoming of the art. But this is true of many of the hand arts. Grapping is just not part of the systems. But, just as a good grappler would want to learn a few good hand strikes, so too would a hand man want to learn a few tricks from the ground. My students are taught ground work but that is because of my background. I teach them enough to get a person off them. A well-rounded instructor should be able to give you some instruction in basic ground work. However, if your teacher is not a grappler, then I suggest find a good teacher in Judo and learn the basics. This knowledge can serve you well.
TFS, what book did Stephen Turnbull write ? Sometime I will need to look up an interesting article about how a Chinese general dealt with Japanese pirates by designing a special two handed sword for his troops. It was effective. (The article was from Journal of Asian Martial Arts or Free China Review..)
note on the original topic.. I noticed watching the recent K-1 Max in Japan when they did an introductory piece showing styles from around the world, when they showed "Kenpo" they showed a Shaolin monk apparently doing wushu!
takada4life,
Stephen Turnbull is one of the most prominent Western authorities on the history of the samurai. He has written numerous books on the subject, including "The Samurai Sourcebook", "Samurai Warfare" and "Samurai Warriors" (both currently in print, I believe), and, "The Samurai: A Military History" (currently out of print). The following excerpt is from the last book mentioned:
"Until P'yok-je-yek no real pitched battle had been fought, and apart from Konshi's division the samurai had had no opportunity to test their mettle against the Chinese. The Chinese opened the attack at dawn, and launched themselves against the forward positions of the Japanese. Once again the arquebuses blazed away, but the Japanese were slowly but surely pushed back up the hill by the colossal Chinese army, swollen by Korean troops who had flocked to the victorious standard of Li jo sho. As they reached the crest of the hill the Chinese thought victory certain, and began a headlong pursuit with both foot soldiers and cavalry down the reverse slope towards Kobayakawa's 10,000. Kobayakawa waited until the enemy were too far distant from their camp to recieve reinforcements, and watched the Chinese become more exhausted and disordered as their horses became bogged down in the mud. Then the order to charge was given, and 10,000 samurai and footsoldiers [ashigaru--TFS] bore down upon the enemy, their curved blades glinting in the weak winter sun. The battle then became a gigantic hand-to-hand fight, on a scale never before witnessed in Korea. For the first time the Japanese sword was mearsured against the shorter Korean and Chinese version, with devastating results for the latter. The lower-class Japanese also did terrible execution, piling on to the Chinese horsemen mired in the churned up slush. The samurai wielded their long cross-bladed spears, tearing the Chinese from their saddles with the cross-pieces, and then finishing them off with a slash or a thrust. Particularly active in this was Kato Kiyomasa, whose silver helmet stood out in the midst of the fray. This close fighting continued from ten till noon, by which time it was all over, and the Chinese had lost 10,000 men. Their commander, Li jo sho, is said to have been so disheartened that he cried all through the night."
It should be pointed out that while Turnbull is a universally recognized expert on the samurai, he has also written at least one book on Medieval European knights. However, his knowledge of European martial arts and weapons is weak when compared to his main area of study (the Japanese), and his opinions on Western methods of swordplay are "old fashioned", to say the least. He even goes so far as to claim in "The Samurai Sourcebook" that European swordsmen did not know of the concept of parrying until the advent of the rapier in the 16th century(!), whereas the Japanese had of course known of that concept from much earlier times. Perhaps if Turnbull had actually taken the trouble to look at a few European fencing treatises (the earliest one known being a South German sword-and-buckler manual which dates from the the late 1200's or early 1300's), he would not have written such a blatantly careless and downright incorrect statement. This may cause some people to have some doubts about his analysis of Japanese swordsmen versus Chinese swordsmen, but the fact remains that the Japanese school of swordsmanship was considered to be among the very best in Asia.
TFS
P.S. I'd love to see that article on the Chinese two-handed sword. If you could find out exactly what magazine (and issue) it was from, or maybe post a link on it, that would be awesome. Thanks.
I'll try. I saw it in my school library years ago..
"P.S. I'd love to see that article on the Chinese two-handed sword. If you could find out exactly what magazine (and issue) it was from, or maybe post a link on it, that would be awesome. Thanks. "
I hope this is being archived!!!
Archiving... I gotta get back to Kirik on that point.
I just read an interesting article in Bizarre magazine about how China was the world leader in science, agriculture, art, medicine and warfare for 3000 years, but is now (and has been for centuries)lagging behind in all these areas. China is no longer famous as the mother of inventors, but rather the "dodgy brother of bogus rip-offs".
Keep in mind that the Chinese culture and society are to this day rather closed to the outside world, so it shouldn't surprise anyone that they still subscribe to the "Chinese anything is better then Foreign anything" line of thinking.
ttt
Just some thoughts to add, if you look at the early Ed Parker curriculum that the Tracy's still teach. The "book set" is actually the panther form from Hung Gar and they also taught the tiger/crane form as well. These were taught as the other forms were being developed. Interesting note, in Long form 2 there is a section that is out of Seisan kata (which is derived from a gung fu set).
Chow did not teach katas that I know of, only self-defense and sparring.
Mitose--unclear where he actually learned his MA, at one time it was said he was related to Choki Motobu, but that claim has been shown to be false by Motobu's son.
The only kenpo history we can be sure of is American Kenpo which started with Ed Parker. This is because Kenpo or Chuan Fa was a generic term just like "karate" is for most of us.