History of Tea Kwon Do

[terryl965]

I know I am opening a can of worms:

Let me start of by saying in some of the other threads people have said that TKD history was not accurate, saying it nicely.

I would like to hear what they believe to be fractual and the reference in which they used to come to there decission?

I would also like to know seniors names if you are going to say my seniors said so, if you can say senior you should be able to provide a name for us. I am really interested in the Korean history, culture and event of TKD. I would also like this not to be calling people out for what they are saying but rather a decussion about what is or could be fractual in TKD.

Hopefully we can get into some deep topics matter and how it came to be.



I will start out with the old line it is a 2000 year old art derived from tekkyon the childern game. How there is early drawing on caves showing this and how it needed to be kept a secret during occupation. I will differently come back when the thread gets going and add my two and a half cents and what is really my fractual experiences and you have told me or given me those facts.

 

[tinker1]

Good luck with that.

All societies have some sort of martial training in their history. These societies and their martial training were all influenced by contact with other societies and martial trainings.

What any of us believe is true history all boils down to hear say. No one was there taking pictures, so no one really knows what went on.

I've even read someone speculating that eastern martial arts all evolved from Pankration.. that Alexander's troupes brought it to India, it then was brought into China, and spread from there.

Every martial tradition has their storied history.. much of it is probably revisionist in my view.

 

[oftheherd1]

Good luck on this one. Search for antiquity applies to most martial arts. Even in the western world we are likely to ascribe more dererence to age/longevity ("... in business 25 years!"). My Grand Master, Yi Chong Mun, told me Hapkido came from Choi, who learned his MA in Japan. Yet Dr. Kimm has written a book where he goes to great lengths to show Hapkido dates to the Hwa Rang Warriors. Even if someone names "elders" or GMs, who will you beleive?

Besides any teacher's desire to show great antiquity for his beloved art, there are deliberate changes in written history. Do you know the story of the Emele bell in Korea? Would you think it interesting that the story dates from the Yi dynasty, and that the Yi dynasty made the state religion Confusionism, replacing Budhism? Even in modern times there have been news reports of the Japanese revising WWII history in their favor. And the Japanese when they came to Korean, attempted to destroy everything Korean, in favor of Japanese, just as they had done on Okinawa.

Yep, a difficult task you have. I truely wish you luck and peaceful discourse.

 

[rlobrecht]

I don't have any first, second, or third hand knowledge of the events, so I can't really contribute in a meaningful way.

I do agree that the skills associated with TKD must have a multi-thousand year history.

Sometime last year, I tried to read Tae Kwon Do and I, and could only get 100 or so pages into in (life got in the way, and it was difficult reading.) At my Sabumnim's recommendation, I've just started reading A Killing Art.

I look forward to reading what the board has to say.

Rick

 

[troubleenuf]

There is an old saying that history is written by the victors so I guess since the Japanese were eventually thrown out of Korea the Koreans can re-wright history anyway they want and eventually it will be true. Although that saying was coined before the advent of the modern age when we had computers, cameras, and ways to store so much documentation so then again... maybe not.....

 

[terryl965]

OK I guess I am a little confuse, some on this board are always saying you have history wrong or that is not fractual about TKD history. I started a thread to give all these so called expert a place to put there views about TKD out for us to see and all I get is this. I do appreciate the responses so far but I was truely looking from those that keep saying me and some here do not know the true history but will never say anything to educate us on what is or is not true.

Why is it in thread after thread all people do is say that is wrong or that is made up or this is not the thread to ask these questions? Know we have a thread and nobody wants to say anything, sometimes I do not understand keyboard TKD'ers, talk talk talk call people a liar never explain anything except you are wrong. Come on please tell me and those of us liars what is the true history or what you have been told to be the true history of TKD? Step up to the plate, you know who you are? You know you always say this is not the thread, you know you never can give a name or reference materials because it is top secret stuff. Am I pissing somebody or anybody off yet and to be honest when I see those in other threads saying **** about that is not true I am going to become a bigger burden in those threads. If you know so much please share, make us little people feel good because you are wiser and know more please teach me the way to enlightment or at least to a good resource of the history of TKD........:rofl: :erg:

 

[oftheherd1]

Sorry if I am one who has not answered as you had hoped. I guess you are targeting some posters who have made comments to you that something said on the history of TKD wasn't true, and you are seeking proof from them to back up what they say.

In the sense that they may not be able to back up what they say, I agree. I think your real problem will be in backing up anything you say if you propose ancient history of TKD over any other MA. One of the reasons being people's attempts to give any MA history it doesn't deserve.

That MA come from much older times is a pretty much accepted fact. Exactly what any of those styles may have been is open to question, and therefore if there is a direct lineage to any modern MA is an even bigger question.

But I will leave your thread alone if you prefer, to see if you can get those you are targeting to respond. Have a good day sir! :asian:

 

[Twin Fist]

can..........open


worms............................everywhere

 

[terryl965]

Sorry if I am one who has not answered as you had hoped. I guess you are targeting some posters who have made comments to you that something said on the history of TKD wasn't true, and you are seeking proof from them to back up what they say.

In the sense that they may not be able to back up what they say, I agree. I think your real problem will be in backing up anything you say if you propose ancient history of TKD over any other MA. One of the reasons being people's attempts to give any MA history it doesn't deserve.

That MA come from much older times is a pretty much accepted fact. Exactly what any of those styles may have been is open to question, and therefore if there is a direct lineage to any modern MA is an even bigger question.

But I will leave your thread alone if you prefer, to see if you can get those you are targeting to respond. Have a good day sir! :asian:

No not really I am not targeting anyone but at the same time everyone. In alot of threads I read people say that this and that is wrong about the history. I am one of those that would like to hear what they believe to be true instead of it is wrong everytime. I would also like to hear a name instead of my senior said so. I am more than happy to give people name to what I have been told simply because whether it is right or wrong I have in some way believed them. Since they said it I am just saying and repeating what I have been told, I do not believe in hiding behind a senior without a name to tell someone they are wrong. Please comtribute whatever you have o say thoughout this converstation and I will either believe or not to believe but I will not mock or degrade you for what you believe. I am really trying to understand some of the posters on this site that just will not explain but insteed just say you are wrong.

 

[puunui]

All societies have some sort of martial training in their history. These societies and their martial training were all influenced by contact with other societies and martial trainings.

What happened was this: At an IOC meeting, Dr. Un Yong Kim proposed that Taekwondo become an Olympic sport. The Japanese representatives asked why should Taekwondo be admitted instead of Karate, since Taekwondo is obviously a Korean form of Karate. Dr. Kim's response was to the effect that Korea has a long history and culture of the use of kicks, and that this emphasis made Taekwondo unique and different than Karate.

Everyone knows this. Everyone knows that Taekwondo and other Korean Martial Arts' distinction in the martial arts world is the emphasis on, and use of, kicks. Some people have asked where did this come from. Others have attempted to answer by using what they have, historical references from Korea to: a) show that Korea has a long history and tradition of the martial arts; and b) a long history of the use of kicks in the martial arts.

But in the end, no one really knows where the emphasis of kicks came from. But we all acknowledge that it is there, and has been there from the very beginning, this emphasis and history of kicking. It certainly did not come from karate, which had few kicks, which generally were not used in either self defense or competition sparring.

When the kwan founders started opening their schools, they generally taught what they knew, which was karate or kung fu based arts. Chung Do Kwan founder GM LEE Won Kuk for example, attempted to teach exactly as was taught to him, mainly from FUNAKOSHI Yoshitaka Sensei. However, his students, who did not learn karate in Japan, had different ideas. Even back in the 1940's, there was a keen interest in and emphasis on, kicks. GM UHM Woon Kyu for example was known for his use of the side kick in sparring. I cannot say that I have ever heard of any karate practitioner back in the 1940's or earlier emphasizing side kick or any kick for that matter. Mostly it was lunge punch and reverse punch. When I trained in Shotokan Karate, we used front kick, but it was not really to score, but rather to make the opponent drop their guard so we could score with a lunge or reverse punch.

Some have come out with the fact that none of the pioneers learned Taekkyon or any other native Korean Martial Art prior to their study of Kwon Bup or Tang Soo Do. However, that doesn't mean that Taekkyon or some other native art did not influence the pioneers' thoughts and interests with respect to the martial arts.

The emphasis on kicking in Korea is similar to the emphasis on boxing in the US. Taekwondo practitioners who have never studied boxing still emphasize to each other and their students to "keep your hands up" during sparring, just like a boxing coach would. "Putting up your dukes" means you are going to fight. We can argue that the coaches and instructors who teach this (keep your hands up) never took boxing so boxing did not influence their martial arts. But would that be accurate?

In contrast, Korea did not have a cultural or historical attachment to boxing like Americans do, so they do not naturally "put up their dukes" when thinking about fighting. Instead, they bounce around with their arms dangling at their sides and use steps to try and kick each other. Where did this come from?

Again the answer seems to be Taekkyon, which has a unique system of steps which are used in conjunction with kicking. These are called "poom bal ki". Incidentally, the beginning stepping motions, where you step forward with one foot step back and then step forward with the other foot, looks to me like the hanja character "poom" with the three squares arranged in a triangle. Maybe that is where the stepping motions came from. I don't know. I leave that to the hanja experts to figure out, since I've been told that I obviously don't understand hanja.

Is the stepping used in Taekkyon exactly the same as the steps used in modern competition Taekwondo sparring? No. But I do not think it is a stretch to say that the concept is the same, which is to use steps in conjunction with kicks to score. This is different in philosophy from the american boxing influenced method of competition, which is to stand in range with your "hands up" and throw blows from reachable distance, just like in boxing.

This to me, is the message and point that is being conveyed with the "ancient history" stuff, the emphasis on the use of steps and kicks, a concept which did not come from Okinawan or Japanese Karate. And because the message and point was being made to the IOC, for inclusion of competition sparring only (not poomsae), we do not need to focus on that aspect of Taekwondo, forms, which is influenced greatly by Okinawan karate. I don't get into the specific details of soo bahk, or the hwa rang or any of that. I only look to those references to show that Korea indeed does have a long history of the martial arts, which some people dispute, due to Korea's confucian based value system. We are only talking about sparring, or at least Dr. Kim was when addressing the IOC, which did come from Korea.

 

[Tony49]

What happened was this: At an IOC meeting, Dr. Un Yong Kim proposed that Taekwondo become an Olympic sport. The Japanese representatives asked why should Taekwondo be admitted instead of Karate, since Taekwondo is obviously a Korean form of Karate. Dr. Kim's response was to the effect that Korea has a long history and culture of the use of kicks, and that this emphasis made Taekwondo unique and different than Karate.

Everyone knows this. Everyone knows that Taekwondo and other Korean Martial Arts' distinction in the martial arts world is the emphasis on, and use of, kicks. Some people have asked where did this come from. Others have attempted to answer by using what they have, historical references from Korea to: a) show that Korea has a long history and tradition of the martial arts; and b) a long history of the use of kicks in the martial arts.

But in the end, no one really knows where the emphasis of kicks came from. But we all acknowledge that it is there, and has been there from the very beginning, this emphasis and history of kicking. It certainly did not come from karate, which had few kicks, which generally were not used in either self defense or competition sparring.

When the kwan founders started opening their schools, they generally taught what they knew, which was karate or kung fu based arts. Chung Do Kwan founder GM LEE Won Kuk for example, attempted to teach exactly as was taught to him, mainly from FUNAKOSHI Yoshitaka Sensei. However, his students, who did not learn karate in Japan, had different ideas. Even back in the 1940's, there was a keen interest in and emphasis on, kicks. GM UHM Woon Kyu for example was known for his use of the side kick in sparring. I cannot say that I have ever heard of any karate practitioner back in the 1940's or earlier emphasizing side kick or any kick for that matter. Mostly it was lunge punch and reverse punch. When I trained in Shotokan Karate, we used front kick, but it was not really to score, but rather to make the opponent drop their guard so we could score with a lunge or reverse punch.

Some have come out with the fact that none of the pioneers learned Taekkyon or any other native Korean Martial Art prior to their study of Kwon Bup or Tang Soo Do. However, that doesn't mean that Taekkyon or some other native art did not influence the pioneers' thoughts and interests with respect to the martial arts.

The emphasis on kicking in Korea is similar to the emphasis on boxing in the US. Taekwondo practitioners who have never studied boxing still emphasize to each other and their students to "keep your hands up" during sparring, just like a boxing coach would. "Putting up your dukes" means you are going to fight. We can argue that the coaches and instructors who teach this (keep your hands up) never took boxing so boxing did not influence their martial arts. But would that be accurate?

In contrast, Korea did not have a cultural or historical attachment to boxing like Americans do, so they do not naturally "put up their dukes" when thinking about fighting. Instead, they bounce around with their arms dangling at their sides and use steps to try and kick each other. Where did this come from?

Again the answer seems to be Taekkyon, which has a unique system of steps which are used in conjunction with kicking. These are called "poom bal ki". Incidentally, the beginning stepping motions, where you step forward with one foot step back and then step forward with the other foot, looks to me like the hanja character "poom" with the three squares arranged in a triangle. Maybe that is where the stepping motions came from. I don't know. I leave that to the hanja experts to figure out, since I've been told that I obviously don't understand hanja.

Is the stepping used in Taekkyon exactly the same as the steps used in modern competition Taekwondo sparring? No. But I do not think it is a stretch to say that the concept is the same, which is to use steps in conjunction with kicks to score. This is different in philosophy from the american boxing influenced method of competition, which is to stand in range with your "hands up" and throw blows from reachable distance, just like in boxing.

This to me, is the message and point that is being conveyed with the "ancient history" stuff, the emphasis on the use of steps and kicks, a concept which did not come from Okinawan or Japanese Karate. And because the message and point was being made to the IOC, for inclusion of competition sparring only (not poomsae), we do not need to focus on that aspect of Taekwondo, forms, which is influenced greatly by Okinawan karate. I don't get into the specific details of soo bahk, or the hwa rang or any of that. I only look to those references to show that Korea indeed does have a long history of the martial arts, which some people dispute, due to Korea's confucian based value system. We are only talking about sparring, or at least Dr. Kim was when addressing the IOC, which did come from Korea.

When I was in Korea in 2001, I saw a lot of volleyball courts but the players were not using their hands but their feet. Does anyone now when that started? From a quick search it seems that a version of foot volleyball has been around a long time in the South East Asia Area. Puunui is right from just an outsider view it seems the Koreans really like to use their feet. You should have seen all the Soccer fields. Granted they were co-hosting the worlds in '02. There were a lot of fields.

 

[puunui]

One place where Karate did influence Taekwondo the most was not so much the technical aspects but rather the philosophical or policy making aspects. Specifically, the pioneers read FUNAKOSHI Gichin's autobiography and really took to heart what he said in there, especially with regard to Funakoshi's Sensei's ideas about unification. It was Funakoshi Sensei's position that there was only one Karate. Funakoshi Sensei also had radical ideas with regard to changing of terminology, especially names. He himself changed not only the name of the art from toudejutsu to karatedo, but also changed the names of the kata from okinawan names to Japanese names, because the Okinawan names were hard for Japanese practitioners to pronounce.

The autobiography was written and published in 1956, at a time when the Taekwondo pioneers were enamored by Japanese Karate and studied as much as they could, which included reading books and also visiting Japan frequently for further study.

The pioneers studied Karate deeply and I believe were determined not to get mired in the same traps that prevented Japanese Karate from uniting and going forward. I believe they used the blueprint outlined by Funakoshi Sensei and ran with it, creating what we have today.

Some have stated that Funakoshi Sensei was not the best technician or physical practitioner. However, where Funakoshi Sensei stood head and shoulders over everyone else, which is perhaps why he was sent to introduce Karate to Japan in the first place, was his educated mind. He was progressive in a way that perhaps some of the other karate leaders were not. Had everyone unified under Funakoshi Sensei's ideas, perhaps Karate would have made it to the Olympics instead of Taekwondo. it certainly had the head start advantage.

So in that sense, I consider the Taekwondo pioneers to be Funakoshi Sensei's greatest and best students, because they took his ideas and philosophies and applied them to Taekwondo. They were the only ones who really did. The Taekwondo pioneers succeeded in Funakoshi Sensei's eyes, where Japanese Karateka failed. And I believe that Funakoshi Sensei would actually have approved of the changes made by the Taekwondo pioneers. He certainly would have had no objection to the name changes, or any other changes for that matter, since more than anything else, Funakoshi Sensei stood for change. It was what his Karate life in Japan was all about.

Try reading his autobiography to see what I mean. It is a skinny book that can be read in two or three evenings.

 

[MSUTKD]

If I were an ITF guy I would quote any number of books that would give a very different history. If I used Korean history books, they also give a different history because it is not from a TKD view. Quoting a "source" does not make it fact. Because someone told me does not make it fact. I really believe the truth is somewhere in the middle and what we hear is mostly legend now.

 

[puunui]

If I were an ITF guy I would quote any number of books that would give a very different history. If I used Korean history books, they also give a different history because it is not from a TKD view. Quoting a "source" does not make it fact. Because someone told me does not make it fact. I really believe the truth is somewhere in the middle and what we hear is mostly legend now.

What specifically are you talking about? And as a Kukki Taekwondoin, why would you be quoting ITF material for anything?

 

[MSUTKD]

And as a Kukki Taekwondoin, why would you be quoting ITF material for anything?

Lol, I would not. The point is that there are many ITF people and their written history of Taekwondo is different.

As I am sitting here I am reading all the TKD books history sections and it is amazing the quotes you could pull from them. R. Chun and H. Cho are different. So is Donn Draeger, etc. Many common themes but which one is fact?

 

[puunui]

Lol, I would not. The point is that there are many ITF people and their written history of Taekwondo is different.

I've come to the conclusion that if you include anything from General Choi, then your facts will be incorrect, because General Choi misstates many things. It is one of the mistakes that Steven Capener makes in his paper, citing to General Choi.

Instead I choose to believe the pioneers' rendition of history, which are all substantially similar to each other, the reason being because they were actually there. They are remarkably consistent. Mastercole and I live in different parts of the country, have spoken to different pioneers at different times, and yet we independently ended up in the same place as far as historical facts go. That should tell you something right there.

As I am sitting here I am reading all the TKD books history sections and it is amazing the quotes you could pull from them. R. Chun and H. Cho are different. So is Donn Draeger, etc. Many common themes but which one is fact?

The one who actually wrote the original upon which all of these were based. And even though those short obligatory history sections are in these books, I wouldn't put too much emphasis on that. They may not have even written those sections. There is a book written by Masters Y.H. Park Sr. and Jr. I forget the title but I am sure you know what I am talking about. Anyway, in it there is a short obligatory section on history, which Dakin Burdick included in his history paper. Mr. Burdick even quotes from the book, stating that Master Y.H. Park said this or that. At one of the USTU meetings, I asked Master Y.H. Park Sr. about the history section in the book. He had no idea what I was talking about and then proceeded to tell me history from his perspective, which was completely different than what was written in his book. What happened was the american co-author Mr. Gerrard i think it was, obviously had pulled out some facts from Cocoran and Farkas' book (or one that quoted from it) and threw that in there, which Dakin ended up quoting.

 

[MSUTKD]

Dakin ended up quoting.

I actually know Dakin. He was at MSU for a short time.

 

[puunui]

When I was in Korea in 2001, I saw a lot of volleyball courts but the players were not using their hands but their feet. Does anyone now when that started? From a quick search it seems that a version of foot volleyball has been around a long time in the South East Asia Area. Puunui is right from just an outsider view it seems the Koreans really like to use their feet. You should have seen all the Soccer fields. Granted they were co-hosting the worlds in '02. There were a lot of fields.

I don't think anyone will dispute that Koreans culturally like to kick. But try explaining how or why through historical research and you will come up with little, if any, information. That is the challenge that the book writers faced, and what they came up with were cave murals, the muyedobotongji, some references about soobahkki, hwarang, and taekkyon. that's all that there is to explain Korea's affinity and attachment to kicking and kicking games.

In the beginning, I started off at the exact same place that many people are today. I read those little historical blurbs in books and magazines. I also saw other books like Master Henry Cho's which said that Taekwondo was basically Korean Karate, which was the title of his book. It can be confusing.

But one thing that I decided to do early on was to assume that the people who developed Taekwondo: a) were intelligent educated hardworking individuals; b) who knew what they were doing; and c) did things for a good reason, even if I did not understand what that good reason was at the moment. To take a different approach would have been disrespectful, both to the art and to the practitioners who developed it. I did not fly off the handle and make wild baseless accusations because that sort of emotional response would not lead me to where I wanted to go, which was towards the truth. Sometimes the answers came quickly; for other topics it took years or decades before I understood.

But I have come to realize that for me Taekwondo (and Hapkido) were the right choice in the long run, as was my approach to their study. If I thought that those who developed Taekwondo were lying or that the art was based on a lie, then I would have quit a long time ago. Why would I wish to stay in an art like that? People accuse me of a lot of things, but being a liar is not one of them.

 

[MSUTKD]

I had Donn Draegers and S.H. Chos books in the early 70,s They were my first martial arts books, I love them. When I finally started practice in 78, I think I memorized both books, lol.

 

[Tony49]

I don't think anyone will dispute that Koreans culturally like to kick. But try explaining how or why through historical research and you will come up with little, if any, information. That is the challenge that the book writers faced, and what they came up with were cave murals, the muyedobotongji, some references about soobahkki, hwarang, and taekkyon. that's all that there is to explain Korea's affinity and attachment to kicking and kicking games.

In the beginning, I started off at the exact same place that many people are today. I read those little historical blurbs in books and magazines. I also saw other books like Master Henry Cho's which said that Taekwondo was basically Korean Karate, which was the title of his book. It can be confusing.

But one thing that I decided to do early on was to assume that the people who developed Taekwondo: a) were intelligent educated hardworking individuals; b) who knew what they were doing; and c) did things for a good reason, even if I did not understand what that good reason was at the moment. To take a different approach would have been disrespectful, both to the art and to the practitioners who developed it. I did not fly off the handle and make wild baseless accusations because that sort of emotional response would not lead me to where I wanted to go, which was towards the truth. Sometimes the answers came quickly; for other topics it took years or decades before I understood.

But I have come to realize that for me Taekwondo (and Hapkido) were the right choice in the long run, as was my approach to their study. If I thought that those who developed Taekwondo were lying or that the art was based on a lie, then I would have quit a long time ago. Why would I wish to stay in an art like that? People accuse me of a lot of things, but being a liar is not one of them.

Well I am not sure why the pioneers just don't say, hey we learned karate from Japan and thought it was lacking a very useful weapon such as the legs which gives shorter individuals and advantage over a taller person punching. So we got together and developed Taekwondo(Just an Example). I belong to Hawaiian Kenpo and Eskrima(Doce Pares) which for all intents purpose was developed in the 40's and 30's. Nobody seems to care and nobody seems to question its legitimacy as an art. In my mind Taekwondo is a new art developed by the pioneers and constantly evolving to make it better. I for one don't see anything wrong with that.