Wujiang, I think your debate was with Warlordgeneral, not with me. I haven't really disagreed with anyone here because this is not my area of expertise at all.

Wuxia (xiaoshuo) has its place as entertainment and enjoyment. All the hinggung and such are fictitious, so I see no relevance to the battlefield. It is highly unlikely that the fictitious hinggung could have any effect on soldiers.

Mr Boarhuntr, you do have quite a bit to learn about Wushu and Warfare. I would not presume to say I know a lot, but here are my two fen.

Peace!!

Mok (the Lady Marshal)

In the end, I don't think it's the Civilian or the Military that counts in MA, but the skill of the practitioner. So the soldier has no inherent advantage over the civilian (with the exception of armament, and perhaps armoring), and the civilian has no inherent advantage over the soldier.

TMPikachu, I have giving you a reminder, now you will get a verbal warning. Material of sport fighting and non-Chinese martial arts are in violation with forum rules. If you continue to submit such materials, further actions will be taken

Well, I know that Wing Chun was developed by anti-qing organizations to be a quick, efficient, killing style meant to fight the Qing. Seems that the Qing emperor was so amazed at how practical and efficient the Wing Chun fighters are, he had to overwhelm them with massive amounts of soldiers and burn down South Shaolin.

No it didn't. Wing Chun's developement had no direct connection to the anti-qing movements of the time.



As noted before, there are not evidence except for folklore to suggest that the temple ever existed. Second, why would the military need to actually 'fight' civilians. All they would have to do be to shoot them with firearms. Yes, guns were quite common at the time. Or better yet, just run them over with a small cavalry charge. In fact, there are no reliable incident where Wing Chun was ever placed into actual combat against the Qing gov forces

i see... i stand corrected. Do you know how and why Wing Chun was developed? I always thought that it was the anti-qing thing. Is there really no evidence that the temple existed? I thought they found various artifacts where the temple was thought to have been?

Thats for another thread


This is a rather complicated question. Going by actual historical sources, there is nothing that indicates the 'burning of shaolin' ever took place. Of course, one can argue that won't be something that the Qing gov would put onto this history books. A few decades ago, they did find runes to a buddhist temple in Fujian that was believed (inconclusively) to have bee burnt down. However, before excavation was completed, the ever respectable PRC govenment build a "Southern Shaolin" temple right on top of the dig site and has been a tourist trap ever since so there is no confirmation as to whether the tempe was indeed a 'southern shaolin' as those mainland chinese seem to claim. The fact that it was a buddhist temple really doesn't say much. During that time, there were literally hundreds of buddhist temples in the region. I am sure more than a few would have been burnt down just from things like cooking negligence or a bolt of lightning.

That depends on the type of military system existing in a dynasty/period/polity. For example, the use of crossbows seem to have decreased during the Age of Fragmentation and cataphract cavalry charges were the main deciding factor in battle at the time. They specialized in melee combat, and it does take considerable strength and skills to be able to wield polearms and swords on an unstable platform like a horse. And a large amount of infantry at the time seemed to have had armour, indicating that alot of the soldiers engaged in melee frequently. On the other hand, Qing seemed to have emphasized horseback archery/light cavalry, and heavy artillery as well as matchlock firearms.




And not all, not even the majority of civilians knew martial arts as there is no evidence of such. Most of the people in China during all times of history were peasants. That all peasants would spend most of their time training in hand-to-hand martial arts and ignoring their farm duties does not make sense.



That only occurs during times when the quality of government troops have declined greatly, such as the mid-late Ming period where village guards and mercenaries were considered more effective than government wei-so soldiers. I highly doubt that a Zhengguan, Xianqing, or Tianbao era Tang frontier veteran soldier would not be able to defeat a peasant-farmer who spends most of his time in the fields every day in one-on-one hand-to-hand combat duel. During periods of peace and prosperity within the empire like the Zhengguan period, there would be no bandits or outlaws for the civilians to fight.




There was constant civil warfare during the late Ming and late Qing period.





As I've said before, there is absolutely no historical evidence that most civilians in China were martial arts masters. It is illogical to think that a peasant/farmer who spends most of his/her time during the day tilling the fields would be more experienced in combat than a battle-hardened veteran cavalryman/infantryman who has spent pretty much his entire life battling on the frontiers against tons of enemies. The only sole exception where the odds of a civilian defeating a melee military man are high would be a professional civilian mercenary hired by rich folks to guard carriages/merchant caravans on the road, but then again most of the population in China were not private guards/mercenaries and besides, at least before the Song period, most of these private guards/mercenaries would turn into professional soldiers serving their warlords during times of chaos like the late Eastern Han, Three Kingdoms (buqu soldiers).



And the decrease in archery skill does not necessitate an increase in emphasis on hand-to-hand combat. Such an implication would seem to suggest that martial arts training for all civilians was mandatory, which was not the case at all. Most would simply be on their farms tilling the fields all day, without much time to learn and practice martial arts for no purpose. Civilian mercenaries and private bodyguards of rich folks like large landowners or merchants, on the other hand, would be far more likely since that was their profession, but then again they were a small minority compared to the number of peasants/farmers in the empire.




And yet all the implements and traits gained from training in other areas of military arts could also be seen as further additionally supplementing the skill and force of a professional soldier if the latter were to fight in a situation requiring hand-to-hand combat skills. Training in military archery which would frequently involve pulling bows of immense draw weight apparently increases arm strength as does drawing crossbows of immense draw weight (like the 6-dan crossbows of the Han), carrying heavy shields and fighting wearing heavy armour increases the overall strength of a person, frequently marching for long distances non-stop increases endurance, horseback archery and fighting increases a person's ability to fight on an unstable platform, etc. Really, the only thing that implies that civilian martial arts are superior to military martial arts in close-combat are the larger number of techniques found in civilian martial arts than in military martial arts. And the number of techniques matter little in hand-to-hand combat duel than does the force, skill, speed, timing, and strategies (all of which can be gained from practicing military arts other than close-combat weapons and empty-hand) required to execute even a simple, but deadly technique.



All that suggests was that there was interaction and borrowing between both civilian and military martial arts. His shortened form was, after all, used by Qi Jiguang as part of the training curriculum for his conscripts during the war against the Wokou, and this form precedes the predecessor of Chen Jia, historically the earliest style of Taijiquan, the paochui style of the Chen family, which borrowed extensively from Qi Jiguang's form.




What is meant by "Tactical Revolution"? Also, simplicity of techniques does not in any way imply an inferiority or ineffectiveness in fighting; along with simplicity came practicality and deadliness.



I did not assume that your statements were fiction. It just occurred to me that jianghu is elaborated and the term used in fictional wuxia novels far more often than in real official history. It was simply my own personal preference not to call times of lawlessness "jianghu" because of its popular connotation with the world of wuxia.



And times where "reigional government are unable to enforce the law" do not happen all the time, so they happen only in certain times.



I agree that bandits and threats to civilians do not necessarily exist because of war. However, crime rates as well as criminal organizations exist because of the inefficieny of governmental rule in the area, such as corrupt government officials, underpaid soldiers and police forces, etc.



And so does the fighting quality of civilians because an area may not necessarily remain poor throughout all of history due to the different policies and areas of emphasis that characterized different governments/polities/dynasties. I've also yet to see evidence that Shandong throughout much of history was a poor place compared to other provinces, such as Qinghai, Gansu, or Inner Mongolia.



Both Chen Wangting's father and grandfather were government officials. During the reign of the Chongzhen emperor, he was already in charge of a township garrison after being promoted by the county magistrate. Before he became a recluse, he held the title of Xiangsheng/military Xiucai and participated in the local military examinations. This is all according to the book "Chen Family Taijiquan - Ancient and Present", published by CPPCC (the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference) Culture and History Committee of Wen County in 1992. Clearly, he was at least affiliated with the local military/security forces.

Hi,

are you by chance referring to the excerpt from here?:

http://www.chinafrominside.com/ma/taiji/TJQorigins.html

I would like to point out that the origins of Chenjiakou Taijiquan is shrouded in much legend. This is mainly because there were next to no written records of their martial art or its beginnings and evolutions. This is the situation with most traditional CMA and not unique to Taijiquan. There are 2 classic Taijiquan treatises written by members of the Chen family, they are reliably dated only from the 19th Century.

With regards to the above history on Chen Wangting I would suggest reading it with a pinch of salt. Published by an government or government linked organisation does not necessarily mean it is all factual; some things cannot be verfied.

You will find there is some of controversy with regards to Taijiquan especially its origins and the relations between Chen and Yang style. Here, I am referring only to Chen, Yang (Sun and Wus) family of Tajiquan. The name Taijiquan is also used by others. The PRC has however decide on a version of the history of Taijiquan which makes it official from their point of view.

While it is true that historically it is quite difficuit to verify due to an absence of sources, tactical disposition of Chen and Yang seem to support the case that Chen was the earlier compared Yang.

If you study both systems, you will find that Chen's fundamental doctrine is actually fighting against Shaolin influenced systems in the area. That being northern systems from the areas of Hebei/Henan. Yang on the other hand, has a doctrine geared towards fighting Shuaijiao. I find it hard to believe that this is a coincidence that the 'history' was that Chen Taijiquan was born from Shaolin while Yang was born from Yang Luchan fighting against or adapted from Qing imperial bodyguard training which was at the time very Shuaijiao dominated.

Hi Wujiang,

you will note I specifically did not mention about which one being first. I am not here to argue either way, but incidentally my Laoshi believes Chen is the original as well.

Hi,

This is a point which I hold very close to my heart, I don't think that martial arts is just about fighting. I have been training for quite a few years now, I have used it only once in a real situation, and that one time was really enough for me.

If it were not for my martial arts training, I would most probably be in a wheelchair right now because of my back problems. These fighting arts are also used to fight very hard for your life and I am not talking about physical fighting but spritual fighting. It can give you the will to live and to want to walk again, I am certain that my training is what really saved me.

Although some people see in martial arts a way of self defence and will never see anything else or are even willing to accept the fact that there is anything else in it apart from fighting physically. This also applies on the battlefield, the will to live and the will to win for your country.

This is my humble view of what I have lived through martial arts.

I hope that everyone has a great day
Pierre