Origin of Martial Arts?

[RW]

Arts like Kung Fu, Karate, Taekwondo... were they ever used?

People say how they were developed in times of war, etc. MA's are a very important hobby of mine, but among the things that puzzle me is, how were they developed?

I have a hard time believing that people EVER fought using zen kutsu dachi (forward stance) or those hard to accomplish kung fu positions.

Were they just ARTS, as their name imply?

I am sure some of the expert guys here have an insight on this...

[tallgeese]

Well, you'l probibly get some mixed responses here. For my part, I think a fair degree of formalization occured during the modern era of ma's. This accounts for much of the things you're referring to.

Some can probibly be attributed to training drills that have since had the meaning lost, ie the bunaki of old kata. Some may have roots in combat, others just don't and are a modern creation. Some were probibly more combative in an era when the spear and armor were used.

My best guess is that the the roots of ma's from the east probibly looked very different from what they do now in most cases. Before I get blasted, note I said more, not all.

Just my take. And welcome to the boards.

[Grego]

Apparently, the alot of chinese and okinawan arts was the Monk Darma.

He supposedly developed fighting techniques that he tought to Shaolin monks. I don't know the whole story though.

Besides, I've never sparred in Zenkutsudachi. We spar in seisan dachi.

I've used martial arts in real fights before, i'm sure others have.

[ShoriKid]

Where martial arts ever used on the battle field? Yes and no. Yes, fighting arts and a lot of individual techniques were used. No always in the particular form that we see now, but men have been fighting for a long time and physiology hasn't changed in all that time.

If you have a hard time believing that anyone ever fought in zenkutsu dachi, factor in two things. All stances, in all arts, are transitory. And, I can find pictures(have to search the net I have them in books) of bayonette drills, sword lunges and cuts(lots of long sword work actually), mma fighters throwing the first long punch, in what is zenkutsu dachi.

Most of the arts we know and practice today did not exist during the periord of pre-modern warfare. However, their originator arts, they "grand parents" did. The techniques are decendant from those times. Then there is the misconception that all arts are battlefield born. Many were developed outside of the military, but still used during periods when fights were far more common, and hand held weapon use was the norm. Peasants didn't develope much, they didn't have a lot of time. Aristocrats, with traditions of military service, and time and resources on hand, developed a lot of what we do now. Their basis was the military training and experience they had. Karate for example, was not a "battle field" art. Most of the research I've seen indicates it was a body guard's art. It delt with attacks on a person you were protecting, armed or unarmed. It wasn't for fighting duels or battles. The deeper you dig, the more you see where arts came from, and generally, the more questions you end up with.

[Kuma]

Arts like Kung Fu, Karate, Taekwondo... were they ever used?

People say how they were developed in times of war, etc. MA's are a very important hobby of mine, but among the things that puzzle me is, how were they developed?

I have a hard time believing that people EVER fought using zen kutsu dachi (forward stance) or those hard to accomplish kung fu positions.

Were they just ARTS, as their name imply?

I am sure some of the expert guys here have an insight on this...

Kung fu has the whole Bodhidharma legend where he brought kung fu to the Shaolin temple. The Shaolin Temple has been involved in battles (anywhere from fighting off bandits and pirates, to battling alongside warlords and the like). So yes, you could say kung fu was used.

As for karate, it started off as Te in Okinawa (where they got it from the Chinese). There was many different styles, and since weapons were banned in Okinawa empty hand combat naturally became popular. I don't think it was designed necessarily for war, but it was for self protection.

Tae Kwon Do I don't know too much about, just that it's something like a combination of Taekkyeon and karate from when they were occupied by the Japanese.

As for zenkutsu dachi, the super low stance you see is actually a Japanese thing. In Okinawan karate, you'll see a much narrower front stance. In their kata, you'll see about 70% hand strikes (rough estimate, but I think close) so it makes sense for them to have a stance similar to a boxer, with more weight on the front foot than on the back foot.

[bushido_man96]

Well, you'l probibly get some mixed responses here. For my part, I think a fair degree of formalization occured during the modern era of ma's. This accounts for much of the things you're referring to.

Agreed. Much of the formalization that we see in the arts today was done so that it could be transitioned into a classroom setting. Itosu, and later Funakoshi, were known for this, so that Karate could work its way into the public school systems as physical education. Taekwondo has its roots for the most part in Karate, along with a few others (but not Taek Kyon; that's pretty much untrue), so therefore it has followed a lot of training aspects that are seen in Karate. I have read that Karate was initially a form of civillian self-defense, and has its roots in the various Te and Tegumi styles.

Apparently, the alot of chinese and okinawan arts was the Monk Darma.

Kung fu has the whole Bodhidharma legend where he brought kung fu to the Shaolin temple.

I'd be leary to jump on board the Bodhidharma legend as an MA originator. There isn't really any substantial proof that he brought any fighting styles to China. I think it would be more than likely that the Chinese already had some established form of fighting, at least on a military level.

Where martial arts ever used on the battle field? Yes and no. Yes, fighting arts and a lot of individual techniques were used. No always in the particular form that we see now, but men have been fighting for a long time and physiology hasn't changed in all that time.

I follow along with these lines, too, for the most part. Fighting styles developed according to needs; many cultures that had established military systems, like the Greeks and Romans, taught their warriors the basics of hand-to-hand combat, along with weapon combat. These cultures also had their traditional forms of Wrestling, Boxing, and Pankration. It has been claimed that some of the hand-to-hand combat learned by these cultures was similar to some of the Pankration skills learned.

Boxing and Wreslting also developed in the Brittish Isles, as did their systems of sword combat, along with the polearms and other weapons, like the quarterstaff. Although the military of Europe may have fought with full shields and swords and armor, some civilian systems included the use of a smaller sword and a buckle, without armor.

An interesting look into the evolution of combat methods can be seen when studying the history of the development of the rapier. A rapier would not make a very good field-combat weapon, especially against the armor of the day. However, it became a very popular civilian method, and as wearing the long sword decreased, and the rapier became more a part of the civillian dress code, the rapier became the weapon of popularity, and so its system developed and became more intricate.

In the end, I am a firm believer that nearly every culture that has been around on earth had some native form of fighting style, be it a cultural Wrestling form (there are Egyptian heiroglyphics over 5000 years old depicting acts of Wrestling), or the use of a weapons system with a hand-to-hand supplemental combat for the warrior caste.

Taking ShoriKid's note that human physiology hasn't changed that much over the last 10,000 years, I have read several texts on Medieval European combat, and in them I have seen various fighitng techniques that can be found in many of the Martial Arts schools practicing today. The sword in Japan didn't work any differently than the sword in Europe, and you can find many similarities in those fighting styles, too.

[Kuma]

I'd be leary to jump on board the Bodhidharma legend as an MA originator. There isn't really any substantial proof that he brought any fighting styles to China. I think it would be more than likely that the Chinese already had some established form of fighting, at least on a military level.

That's why I said legend. They have proof of Chinese MA before the existence of the Shaolin Temple, but I don't know too much more than that. Not really my area of interest, I prefer Japanese arts.

[bushido_man96]

I'd be leary to jump on board the Bodhidharma legend as an MA originator. There isn't really any substantial proof that he brought any fighting styles to China. I think it would be more than likely that the Chinese already had some established form of fighting, at least on a military level.

That's why I said legend. They have proof of Chinese MA before the existence of the Shaolin Temple, but I don't know too much more than that. Not really my area of interest, I prefer Japanese arts.

I noticed that you did use the word "legend." I wasn't trying to point any fingers or anything; I just used your quote because you mentioned it, and I thought it would highlight my point.

I like to read on the history of the Japanese arts, too, and I am supposed to be getting some books on Karate history from a Classical Fighting Arts contributor, but they still haven't come yet.

[Kruczek]

I don't have much to say on origin...all kinda gray to me.

The comment about zenkutsu dachi - My understanding has always been that you would train with zenkutsu dachi to build muscles so that if you were ever in a fight and became worn out - seisan dachi would be a piece of cake because you were used to a deeper stance. I also think it is worth noting that there were no (I could be wrong) katas with zenkutsu before Itosu made the pinans.

[CanFightIt]

The primary, and really, only differences between TKD, kung Fu and Karate is geographic and philisophical. All are terms for martial studies, and are designated to a specific country and language used. Years ago the term "karate" was popularly accepted in the U.S. as referring to asian martial arts training, as opposed to european or american martial arts (such as savate or boxing, or even greco-roman wrestling). Many americans returning from japan during WWII were viewing these arts for the first time and brought the term and study back to America. Later into the century with the Korean war and resurgence of korean autonomy, the practice of TaeKyon was restarted, and of course General Cho instituted the Tae Kwon Do system for the Korean military. Kung Fu (sometimes referred in asia as Gung Fu) is generally considered to be among the oldest forms of martial arts training and dates to times of buddhist monks and the understanding of nature to incorporate into an exercise program. Wing Chun (sometimes referred to as Wing Chun Kung Fu) is currently the national fitness program of china and is praciticed in some instances during the work day as a meditative and exercise program at work.

Many historians believe that due to Japans' occupation of China, Karate became far more popular in Japan due to seeing Kung Fu in China. However, to lump most of japanese striking arts into the term Karate is a simplification of the types of karate and similarly with Kung Fu. So the essential answer would be the difference between TKD, Kung Fu, and Karate is that TKD is a martial art system, Kung Fu is a chinese term used most commonly to refer to several, or multiple martial art systems widely used in China, and Karate is the common japanese term used to refer to many of the japanese and okinawan martial art systems focusing mainly on strikes. The other key difference between the three terms, is that Kung Fu or Gung Fu was originally almost exclusively taught to and practiced by Buddhist monks in the mountainous areas of China, and was an important part of the religion practiced at the ShaoLin monastery.

The religious presence of Kung Fu is to my knoweldge unique to that art alone. Most, but not all of todays' martial arts have their roots in Kung Fu and it is believed that Shao Lin kung fu was the first ordered system of self defense techniques ever taught in a structured environment, though this is sometimes still debated.