Origins of Wing Chun?

[KPM]

It's a point of logic, again not a popularity contest
See above. The pole contains the system. As it came first it is logical to conclude that all or most of the system was based on the pole.

Your logic seems to be that:

1. The Pole came before the empty hands
2. The empty hands and Pole share concepts and principles
3. Therefore the empty hands must be derived from the Pole

But this is not necessarily true, and is based on your view that the Pole contains everything found in the empty hands, which I disagree with. It is also perfectly logical to say that:

1. The Pole and the Empty Hands existed independently.
2. The Pole and the Empty Hands came together at some point.
3. Each influenced the development of the other and have been taught together long enough that they have naturally come to share concepts and principles.

The idea that one is derived from the other is only one possible logical conclusion. I see enough difference between the Pole and the Empty Hands to lead me to believe that they were two independent methods that came together. Much like the Empty Hands and the Knives were two independent methods that came together. I don't see any closer relationship between the Pole and the Empty Hands than I do between the Knives and the Empty Hands.

It is possible you are seeing more than is really there and making a "stretch" to connect everything from the Empty Hands to the Pole. It is also possible that I am missing something or not seeing something that you are seeing. No. Its not a popularity vote. But seeing that my view is in the majority and yours in the minority leads me to believe that I am not the one that is missing something. But you can go on believing anything you want. ;-)

 

[guy b.]

I don't take the legends literally either and agree with what you say about Leung Jan being the first historically verifiable WC master. But WC has roots that go back well before Leung Jan as do the other related systems of Southern Chinese Short-Bridge boxing.

How would you know that if Leung Jan is the first real person we have any knowledge of? Who is to say that Leung Jan didn't create it himself? What we can be pretty sure about is that the shaolin stuff, the ng mui legend, is pure BS most likely stolen from a trashy MA novel by YM.

The pole system is not the core of the WC I train. It does share core principles and is useful for training, but it is not the core and like KPM, I believe it was a 19 Century addition to the early empty-handed art.

Chances are that wng chun was created in the 19th century, had nothing to do with shaolin temples, red boats or opera performers, and was an amalgamation of native village boxing and military pole methods taught to the militias. Knives grafted on later by YM because the knives and methods used are 20th C ones, not militia era.

The fact that the two, pole and empty-hands, have been combined for nearly two centuries would explain how they integrate so tightly. I don't believe you have to assert that one produced the other.

Consider that Lam Sai Wing is said to have added 6.5 point pole to hung gar, and that he apparently lived 1860 to 1943. Set is a bit different, but close to exactly the same in usage. Same goes for a multitude of other south chinese MA, e.g. Chow Gar Bai Gua Kwan, Lung Ying heart penetrating pole. None of these other systems have the same idea for idea mapping of pole to hand that is found in wing chun. Wing chun has a unique relationship to the pole compared to all of the other systems that came out of that militia era Southern China. And blatantly the pole isn't anything to do with opera performers or river barges, exposure to it is much too wide. It is a militia weapon from mid 19th C and standard methods were taught to conscripts who already had village boxing experience, which have since been messed with and had legends attached.

Wouldn't you expect the pole and empty hands to share core principles by now?

Why don't hung ga, dragon, southern mantis, bak mei, and choy lay fut all share principles with the pole and look like wing chun? Wing chun looks unique among these, it is a reworking from the ground up of those village boxing methods. One thing that wing chun does share with all the others is legends that are a work of total fiction. Fact is that none of these "styles" existed as distinct entities until mid 19th C. Up until then they were just a continuum of southern Chinese village boxing.

 

[wckf92]

@guy b.
Guy, just curious...have you already learned the entire WSL lineage curriculum, or are learning pole now?

 

[KPM]

Consider that Lam Sai Wing is said to have added 6.5 point pole to hung gar, and that he apparently lived 1860 to 1943. Set is a bit different, but close to exactly the same in usage. Same goes for a multitude of other south chinese MA, e.g. Chow Gar Bai Gua Kwan, Lung Ying heart penetrating pole. None of these other systems have the same idea for idea mapping of pole to hand that is found in wing chun. Wing chun has a unique relationship to the pole compared to all of the other systems that came out of that militia era Southern China.

---But here is where you let your bias color your conclusions. You've already decided that Wing Chun empty hands comes from the Pole. The fact that other systems have such similar poles but dissimilar empty hands does not prove your point. Because it is not established nor widely accepted that the empty hands come from the pole. I have seen nothing yet to make me even start to believe that.

 

[geezer]

---But here is where you let your bias color your conclusions. You've already decided that Wing Chun empty hands comes from the Pole. The fact that other systems have such similar poles but dissimilar empty hands does not prove your point...

Keith, I fully agree with your point above. The pole did not precede the hands. Guy himself already stated that WC probably evolved from earlier southern village boxing systems. Something else was at play too, since WC does have a distinct character. Some, such as LT have pointed to Western Chinese influences, many have suggested a connection with Fukien Yongchun Baihe. A few insist on an early, bare-knuckle Western Boxing connection. Others, perhaps Guy among them, believe that perhaps Leung Jan himself initiated this transformation.

I don't pretend to know the answer. But as you pointed out, there was more to it than joining the pole set to the empty hands. Otherwise, all the other Southern systems that have similar pole fighting would have developed similar hand techniques.

In short, Guy's argument in the previous post (#22) seems to work against his own thesis. Either way I find his idea interesting. I'm just not sold!

 

[guy b.]

@guy b.
Guy, just curious...have you already learned the entire WSL lineage curriculum, or are learning pole now?

I have learned pole but not knives. I am in the process of learning knives.

 

[guy b.]

But here is where you let your bias color your conclusions. You've already decided that Wing Chun empty hands comes from the Pole. The fact that other systems have such similar poles but dissimilar empty hands does not prove your point. Because it is not established nor widely accepted that the empty hands come from the pole. I have seen nothing yet to make me even start to believe that.

You have already agreed that pole and empty hand share a large amount of principles and concepts, even though you disagree that there is an exact correspondence. If wing chun has nothing to do with the militia pole method that was being taught mid 19th C., then why does this correspondence between pole and empty hand occur in wing chun but not in all of the other styles which were created around the same time and which contain the same pole method?

 

[guy b.]

Keith, I fully agree with your point above. The pole did not precede the hands.

There is no reason to say this. There is good reason not to say it, see response to KPM above.

Guy himself already stated that WC probably evolved from earlier southern village boxing systems.

Things don't appear in a vacuum. All of the styles discussed above appeared around the same time from Southern Chinese village boxing. I don't think that this was systematised in any way before the mid 19th C. Most current systems probably originated with the first guy we have a picture of, i.e. Leung Bik for wing chun, Lam Sai Wing for Hung Ga, and so on.These guys made up the foundation stories about legendary fighters, often couching it in popular anti qing rhetoric. Later (when the styles went to HK), founder stories were added, like the female monk Ng Mui in WC.

The fact is that despite very similar conditions around the time of their creation, wing chun ended up looking very distinct from these other styles and with a close correspondence to the pole method that the others share but do not integrate anywhere near as completely.

Something else was at play too, since WC does have a distinct character. Some, such as LT have pointed to Western Chinese influences, many have suggested a connection with Fukien Yongchun Baihe. A few insist on an early, bare-knuckle Western Boxing connection. Others, perhaps Guy among them, believe that perhaps Leung Jan himself initiated this transformation.

I think almost certainly that Leung Jan or someone immediately preceding him created wing chun. Mid 19th C was when all of these styles began. Before that none of them have anything but legends. Wing chun is very different to the others, has a close correspondence to the pole method which was in use by the militias at the time, and I don't see any reason to postulate any influence which lacks similar evidence.

When was the first historically verifiable person in white crane recorded? I bet it was some time around the mid 19th C. when all of these styles were created as styles. Before that they were just boxing.

Why postulate western boxing- there are only so many ways to hit someone with hands. Unsystematised western boxing around mid 19th C. probably looked a lot like village boxing in southern China, boxing in Thailand, Burma, or anywhere else. Silly theories, origin legends, and secret methods only get added when things become styles. Wing chun does look quite a bit like old western boxing- but that is probably because hitting looks that way when you don't wear gloves to protect your hands.

I don't pretend to know the answer. But as you pointed out, there was more to it than joining the pole set to the empty hands. Otherwise, all the other Southern systems that have similar pole fighting would have developed similar hand techniques.

What happened was that wing chun was thoroughly based on the weapon usage system of pole fighting, whereas other similar systems included but did not systematically base themselves upon pole fighting methods. How does wing chun emerge as a system with such a close correspondence to pole fighting if not based upon it? Mere inclusion of pole into an already existing style is not an option when other systems did the same and end up looking nothing like wing chun.

 

[guy b.]

Hung ga 6.5 point pole sparring

 

[KPM]

You have already agreed that pole and empty hand share a large amount of principles and concepts, even though you disagree that there is an exact correspondence. If wing chun has nothing to do with the militia pole method that was being taught mid 19th C., then why does this correspondence between pole and empty hand occur in wing chun but not in all of the other styles which were created around the same time and which contain the same pole method?

I didn't say that Wing Chun has nothing to do with the mid 19th C. pole method. That might very well be what was combined with the empty hand methods. Maybe there is a closer correspondence between Wing Chun and Pole than between other systems empty hand and their Pole method simply because the person that initially united the WIng Chun empty hands and Pole methods chose to make the correspondence. Maybe he was particularly impressed with the Pole and the empty hands were not a fully developed "tradition" yet, so he did some innovating. We've already said that it is likely that the Pole influenced the empty hands, and probably vice versa as well. And besides, I'll state again, you seem to be the only one seeing such a CLOSE correspondence between Wing Chun empty hands and Pole. And Wing Chun is not that unique. Lots of southern CMAs share some similarities, especially the Hakka arts. Southern Mantis in particular has some similarities to Wing Chun such as use of the centerline, 4 quadrant defense, simultaneous attack and defense, etc. Did they learn this from the Pole as well?

 

[KPM]

. Most current systems probably originated with the first guy we have a picture of, i.e. Leung Bik for wing chun,

---You do realize that a good percentage of people think Leung Bik was also a myth?


The fact is that despite very similar conditions around the time of their creation, wing chun ended up looking very distinct from these other styles and with a close correspondence to the pole method that the others share but do not integrate anywhere near as completely.

---Again, you seem to be the only one seeing the "close correspondence to the pole method." And as I noted before, Wing Chun is not necessarily "very distinct". Other southern CMAs share similarities. I've even seen it postulated that Wing Chun and Southern Mantis were connected in some way. And of course, many people connect Wing Chun and Fujian White Crane because of some strong similarites. I see nothing to suggest anything other than the developer or developers of Wing Chun simply innovated along their own creativity and inclination to vary from the typical southern village boxing styles. Some of this innovation may very well have been due to input from studying the Pole methods. But that still does not prove that Wing Chun is simply the Pole methods adapted to empty hand and that the empty hands are based entirely on the Pole. Wing Chun empty hands shares enough similarities to other southern boxing styles to suggest it was from the same root.



Wing chun is very different to the others, has a close correspondence to the pole method which was in use by the militias at the time, and I don't see any reason to postulate any influence which lacks similar evidence.

---Again. You conclusions are based on your own bias. I certainly don't think there is such a "close correspondence to the pole method" nor that "Wing Chun is very different to the others."



Why postulate western boxing- there are only so many ways to hit someone with hands. Unsystematised western boxing around mid 19th C. probably looked a lot like village boxing in southern China, boxing in Thailand, Burma, or anywhere else.

---Ah! You are wrong there! Here is a theory that is just as valid as yours. British Merchant Marines in the 19 Century sailed some of the same waters and put into some of the same ports as the Red Boats carrying the Opera performers. Amongst those Merchant Marines were men good at western bare knuckle boxing ala John L. Sullivan. Obviously they would meet and have altercations with the locals and more often than not came out on top. Some members of the Opera troupe saw this and watched closely. The picked up things from the westerners and started incorporating it into their own empty hand methods. This "old school" western pugilism used a relatively upright stance, footwork similar to modern fencing, a 4 quadrant system of defense, centerline punching with a vertical fist, a "straight up the middle" attitude with lots of forward pressure, a forearm parry that looks like Biu Sau, a "rolling elbow" parry that looks like a Bong Sau, a "cuff" that looks like a Pak Sau, etc. When the Red Boat members saw these things they copied it and this is what lead to Wing Chun looking relatively distinct from other southern village boxing methods. I've already pointed out that much of the things you attribute to the Pole are also found in western fencing. Western sword methods had a big influence on old school western pugilism. So some these "pole specific" things you are seeing in Wing Chun empty hands might very well have come from western pugilism! Again, just a theory. But also just as valid as yours.

 

[KPM]

 

[guy b.]

Maybe there is a closer correspondence between Wing Chun and Pole than between other systems empty hand and their Pole method simply because the person that initially united the WIng Chun empty hands and Pole methods chose to make the correspondence.

Absolutely there is a close correspondence, and it explains why wing chun looks different to all of the other systems which arose at that place and time. Unfortunately there was no wing chun empty hands before mid 19th C. because there was no wing chun. There was just southern Chinese boxing. The other systems that arose from this time and place don't look or work anything like wing chun. Pole explains why wing chun is different.

Maybe he was particularly impressed with the Pole and the empty hands were not a fully developed "tradition" yet, so he did some innovating. We've already said that it is likely that the Pole influenced the empty hands, and probably vice versa as well. And besides, I'll state again, you seem to be the only one seeing such a CLOSE correspondence between Wing Chun empty hands and Pole. And Wing Chun is not that unique. Lots of southern CMAs share some similarities, especially the Hakka arts. Southern Mantis in particular has some similarities to Wing Chun such as use of the centerline, 4 quadrant defense, simultaneous attack and defense, etc. Did they learn this from the Pole as well?

Having studied quite a lot of chow gar, I can tell you that it is quite different from wing chun. It is a completely different tradition, and in fact the way it works is almost directly opposed to wing chun. Of course it has long pole because of when and where it appeared, but there is no close mapping of empty hand to pole usage and principle as you find in wing chun. Chow Gar is not based on or influenced much by the long pole.

 

[KPM]

The other systems that arose from this time and place don't look or work anything like wing chun. Pole explains why wing chun is different.

---Pole may have influenced the further evolution and development of Wing Chun empty hands. But that doesn't mean that everything in Wing Chun empty hands is based on the Pole. Southern Mantis and Fujian White Crane don't look or work like each other either, and they are both southern village systems. I keep showing the logical flaws in your conclusion, but you just keep repeating the same thing. Restating it over and over doesn't make it true.

 

[guy b.]

. You do realize that a good percentage of people think Leung Bik was also a myth?

I personally think Leung Bik a myth. I mean Leung Jan


The fact is that despite very similar conditions around the time of their creation, wing chun ended up looking very distinct from these other styles and with a close correspondence to the pole method that the others share but do not integrate anywhere near as completely.

Again, you seem to be the only one seeing the "close correspondence to the pole method."

You yourself agreed that the hands and pole agree very closely in terms of concepts and related physical shapes. But again what other people think is not relevant in terms of the truth.

And as I noted before, Wing Chun is not necessarily "very distinct". Other southern CMAs share similarities. I've even seen it postulated that Wing Chun and Southern Mantis were connected in some way.

Either you don't know much about SPM, or you don't know much about wing chun, or both. These systems are very distinct, both in terms of the ideas behind them and the physical manifestation of those ideas. The only similarity is that they originated in the South of China around the same time and they are striking systems.

Of course, many people connect Wing Chun and Fujian White Crane because of some strong similarites.

Again ridiculous based on the main forms and body mechanics of these systems.

I see nothing to suggest anything other than the developer or developers of Wing Chun simply innovated along their own creativity and inclination to vary from the typical southern village boxing styles.

The original southern village boxing is represented in SPM, Bak Mei, White Crane, Lung Ying, in a catch all way as Hung Ga, and in many other styles. They all share the same or very similar basic platforms. Wing chun is very different to these. The most simple explanation for this is because WC is based upon pole or spear work, while these others are not. The force generation differences are the most obvious place to look for this pretty glaring difference. See my thread about tension for a hint.

Some of this innovation may very well have been due to input from studying the Pole methods. But that still does not prove that Wing Chun is simply the Pole methods adapted to empty hand and that the empty hands are based entirely on the Pole

The majority of people believe fairy tales regarding the origins of wing chun and think they received a complete system when probably on average 50% was made up or misunderstood, Modelling the system on pole is the best explanation for the differences we see comparing wing chun and the other systems with the same pole from the same time and place.

Wing Chun empty hands shares enough similarities to other southern boxing styles to suggest it was from the same root.

It really doesn't.

Ah! You are wrong there! Here is a theory that is just as valid as yours. British Merchant Marines in the 19 Century sailed some of the same waters and put into some of the same ports as the Red Boats carrying the Opera performers. Amongst those Merchant Marines were men good at western bare knuckle boxing ala John L. Sullivan. Obviously they would meet and have altercations with the locals and more often than not came out on top. Some members of the Opera troupe saw this and watched closely. The picked up things from the westerners and started incorporating it into their own empty hand methods. This "old school" western pugilism used a relatively upright stance, footwork similar to modern fencing, a 4 quadrant system of defense, centerline punching with a vertical fist, a "straight up the middle" attitude with lots of forward pressure, a forearm parry that looks like Biu Sau, a "rolling elbow" parry that looks like a Bong Sau, a "cuff" that looks like a Pak Sau, etc. When the Red Boat members saw these things they copied it and this is what lead to Wing Chun looking relatively distinct from other southern village boxing methods. I've already pointed out that much of the things you attribute to the Pole are also found in western fencing. Western sword methods had a big influence on old school western pugilism. So some these "pole specific" things you are seeing in Wing Chun empty hands might very well have come from western pugilism! Again, just a theory. But also just as valid as yours.

It is certainly a theory, and probably the second best one I have heard after the pole theory. However Occams razor means pole is the better theory for what we see because fewer assumptions are required, until we receive more information.

 

[guy b.]

Pole may have influenced the further evolution and development of Wing Chun empty hands. But that doesn't mean that everything in Wing Chun empty hands is based on the Pole. Southern Mantis and Fujian White Crane don't look or work like each other either, and they are both southern village systems. I keep showing the logical flaws in your conclusion, but you just keep repeating the same thing. Restating it over and over doesn't make it true.

Your assumptions are wrong and so no logical flaw is pointed out

 

[KPM]

Your assumptions are wrong and so no logical flaw is pointed out

Whatever dude. You are obviously are in your own little world. You go on thinking whatever you want! ;-)

 

[guy b.]

Explain to me the similarities between SMP and wing chun

 

[KPM]

Explain to me the similarities between SMP and wing chun

I'm not explaining anything to you because you've already proven that your mind is made up and you don't listen.

 

[guy b.]

I am prepared to listen and very sorry if I have offended you.