Which came first?

[wckf92]

Saw some mentioning (on another thread/forum) about WC being either "knife-based" or "hands-based" (with knives being taught last and altogether different usage from hand fighting). Thought this was quite interesting so figured I'd start a thread on it...

Just wondering what y'all think regarding this? Do you think WC is based around the knives or the other way around? Did WC empty-hand evolve from knife-based ideas or was WC already codified as a "system" and then somewhere along its history the knives were added and molded to fit the hands?

Thanks!

 

[guy b.]

I don't know if the knives were added later, but there are some fundamental differences in the use of the knives compred to the use of the hands (and the pole). I don't see the system as being knife based because of these differences. The knives are not fundamental to the functioning of the hands, and the system is functional without them. Hands come first rather than knives first.

I do think that the knives build upon and integrate fully with the rest of the system (i.e. they are not just bolted on), but they are still different. Both pole and knives feed back into the empty hand parts of the system, i.e. it works both ways. Traditionally knives were only taught to very few people. This is in contrast to blade based systems like escrima or silat where blades are taught early and other skills build upon the blade skills. The analogue in wing chun would be the pole.

 

[guy b.]

The 19th Century Hudiedao (Butterfly Sword) on Land and Sea

Through a Lens Darkly (8): Butterfly Swords, Dadaos and the Local Militias of Guangdong, 1840 vs. 1940.

A Social and Visual History of the Hudiedao (Butterfly Sword) in the Southern Chinese Martial Arts.

Butterfly Swords and Long Poles: A Glimpse into Singapore’s 19th Century Martial Landscape


Info here on how these weapons were used at the time wing chun was developing. Both were common

 

[geezer]

Do you think WC is based around the knives or the other way around?

I feel certain that WC evolved as an empty-handed system of "Chinese boxing". However, a well informed source shared with me that the Biu Tze form developed later than SNT and CK, and was essentially "reverse engineered for hands from principles used with the Bart Cham Dao. Considering the nature of the movements in the Biu Tze form, I find this very likely ...but that is speculation on my part. As for the rest, the hands came first.

With blade rooted systems, such as some escrima, arnis, etc. the empy hands work reflects the blade orientation far more than what you see in WC. One of my DTE coaches spent a lot of time in Pekiti and this blade orientation permeates everything he does. The Latosa Escrima system I have my roots in, has a greater boxing influence --at least at the lower levels with a corresponding emphasis on impact/percussion and that also shows in the general character of the system.

With WC I feel it is the same. The general character of the system (in spite of some principles shared with Western fencing) does not show vestiges of once being primarily a blade art.

 

[wckf92]

I don't know if the knives were added later, but there are some fundamental differences in the use of the knives compred to the use of the hands (and the pole). I don't see the system as being knife based because of these differences. The knives are not fundamental to the functioning of the hands, and the system is functional without them. Hands come first rather than knives first.

Hi Guy. Thx for responding.
To your point: Yes, hands come first, knives last... but do you think the hands are functional 'because' they were designed around the knives?

I do think that the knives build upon and integrate fully with the rest of the system (i.e. they are not just bolted on), but they are still different. Both pole and knives feed back into the empty hand parts of the system, i.e. it works both ways. Traditionally knives were only taught to very few people. This is in contrast to blade based systems like escrima or silat where blades are taught early and other skills build upon the blade skills. The analogue in wing chun would be the pole.

Agreed

 

[wckf92]

I feel certain that WC evolved as an empty-handed system of "Chinese boxing". However, a well informed source shared with me that the Biu Tze form developed later than SNT and CK, and was essentially "reverse engineered for hands from principles used with the Bart Cham Dao. Considering the nature of the movements in the Biu Tze form, I find this very likely ...but that is speculation on my part. As for the rest, the hands came first.

With blade rooted systems, such as some escrima, arnis, etc. the empy hands work reflects the blade orientation far more than what you see in WC. One of my DTE coaches spent a lot of time in Pekiti and this blade orientation permeates everything he does. The Latosa Escrima system I have my roots in, has a greater boxing influence --at least at the lower levels with a corresponding emphasis on impact/percussion and that also shows in the general character of the system.

With WC I feel it is the same. The general character of the system (in spite of some principles shared with Western fencing) does not show vestiges of once being primarily a blade art.

Interesting. I also heard a similar story like the one you mention. I've also heard that they (the three forms) were constructed in reverse... and that is why (and how) the first form ended up with 'seeds' to all the rest. Oh well, I suppose we'll never know for sure.

As for FMA hands/weapons...my thinking is that there are too many repetitive moves in their unarmed version. Armed with knives, who knows if that stuff would work... but when I've seen and done FMA unarmed there appears to me at least to be less efficiency than WC. Just my .02

 

[guy b.]

Hi Guy. Thx for responding.
To your point: Yes, hands come first, knives last... but do you think the hands are functional 'because' they were designed around the knives?

We are all speculating but my guess would be no, due to the difference in approach between hands and knives. You need to modify the hand and footwork from hands to knives, and also the principles differ. Ergo knives are not the foundation of the stye in any meaningful way. They are often perceived as the pinnacle of the style, but that is a different thing.

In reality village boxing styles probably picked up or had weapons training reinforced due to militia service in the 19th C. This may or may not have provoked style re-design around those weapons. In the case of wing chun I think it probably did to some extent, with pole (spear) being the main weapon of the style and very similar to the hands to the point where I would say influence is obvious. Since the same pole moves are not unique to wing chun, I think it looks like pole influenced the style, rather than vice versa.

Where pole was a ubiquitous weapon owned by everyone, double knives were a bit more prestigious and uncommon (although still very popular at the time). This may have lead to knives being the final pinacle of the system for elite students. Who knows?

So while I don't think wing chun is a system fundamentally based on blade combat but this is not to say that the knives don't have large benefits to someone who has reached the appropriate level. Most obviously they offer different footwork, they encourage a do or die attitude to combat, they encourage awareness of danger and also the ability not to hesitate in the face of danger, they provide conditioning benefits, and so on.

 

[KPM]

When Fung Chun was alive he was interviewed and said that Leung Jan did not teach the knives. Knives were added to Ku Lo Pin Sun Wing Chun later. There are no knives in Tang Yik Weng Chun and it is said that no one in the prior lineage taught knives...including Chi Sim and Fung Sui Ching. In Sifu Sergio's new book he posits that Fok Bo Chuen was one person that added the knives and this is how it became part of the Yuen Kay Shan system. Ip Man created his own knife set...implying he did not learn a formal knife set in his own training. One way that the knives are now taught in Ku Lo Pin Sun is to simply adapt each of the short sets to an application with the knives in hand. I definitely think the knives were an "add on" as time passed, and likely a mix of both direct adaptations of empty-hand Wing Chun techniques and dedicated knife techniques incorporated from other systems. The double knives are pretty common in southern Chinese martial arts. If you follow the historical evidence that says a lot of the primary Wing Chun players became involved in secret societies of a rebel nature, you'll find that one of the main ones was called the "Small Knife Society." So lots of opportunities to get exposed to knife techniques and say "hey! this would work great with Wing Chun!" ;-)

I've also been told this....note that when most lineages demonstrate the double knives in application they do so against the long pole, and they typically will show the long pole losing! I've been told that this was because the knives were the "new" thing and to further their acceptance and show they were worthy of learning they were showed defeating the "old" thing....which for Wing Chun/Weng Chun was the long pole.

 

[guy b.]

When Fung Chun was alive he was interviewed and said that Leung Jan did not teach the knives. Knives were added to Ku Lo Pin Sun Wing Chun later. There are no knives in Tang Yik Weng Chun and it is said that no one in the prior lineage taught knives...including Chi Sim and Fung Sui Ching. In Sifu Sergio's new book he posits that Fok Bo Chuen was one person that added the knives and this is how it became part of the Yuen Kay Shan system. Ip Man created his own knife set...implying he did not learn a formal knife set in his own training. One way that the knives are now taught in Ku Lo Pin Sun is to simply adapt each of the short sets to an application with the knives in hand. I definitely think the knives were an "add on" as time passed, and likely a mix of both direct adaptations of empty-hand Wing Chun techniques and dedicated knife techniques incorporated from other systems. The double knives are pretty common in southern Chinese martial arts. If you follow the historical evidence that says a lot of the primary Wing Chun players became involved in secret societies of a rebel nature, you'll find that one of the main ones was called the "Small Knife Society." So lots of opportunities to get exposed to knife techniques and say "hey! this would work great with Wing Chun!" ;-

I'm not a huge believer in all of the secret society stuff. I bet the reality is much more mundane. But there is no doubt that wing chun as it is now called arose during a violent period of history.

I also think that it is risky to construct events for named indiviuduals. How could Fung Chun (for example) know what Leung Jan did? He might have neen told that Leung Jan did something, but then so have all of us. The first identifiable and real person we have in YM lineage is Leung Jan, but he was dead before the system rose to prominence. Yip Man himself is the first person about whom we have much specific information. It may well be that Yip Man made up everything of the wing chun origin story from scratch (it seems possible that the story of ng mui was lifted from a 1930s martial arts adventure for example).

I've also been told this....note that when most lineages demonstrate the double knives in application they do so against the long pole, and they typically will show the long pole losing! I've been told that this was because the knives were the "new" thing and to further their acceptance and show they were worthy of learning they were showed defeating the "old" thing....which for Wing Chun/Weng Chun was the long pole.

Makes sense

 

[KPM]

I also think that it is risky to construct events for named indiviuduals. How could Fung Chun (for example) know what Leung Jan did? He might have neen told that Leung Jan did something, but then so have all of us.

Leung Jan was Fung Chun's Si Gung: Leung Jan -- Wong Wah Sam -- Fung Chun. So, at the time, he was the one living person with the closest connection to Leung Jan. So I think his word holds a bit more weight than most, don't you?

 

[wckf92]

When Fung Chun was alive he was interviewed and said that Leung Jan did not teach the knives. Knives were added to Ku Lo Pin Sun Wing Chun later. There are no knives in Tang Yik Weng Chun and it is said that no one in the prior lineage taught knives...including Chi Sim and Fung Sui Ching. In Sifu Sergio's new book he posits that Fok Bo Chuen was one person that added the knives and this is how it became part of the Yuen Kay Shan system. Ip Man created his own knife set...implying he did not learn a formal knife set in his own training. One way that the knives are now taught in Ku Lo Pin Sun is to simply adapt each of the short sets to an application with the knives in hand. I definitely think the knives were an "add on" as time passed, and likely a mix of both direct adaptations of empty-hand Wing Chun techniques and dedicated knife techniques incorporated from other systems. The double knives are pretty common in southern Chinese martial arts. If you follow the historical evidence that says a lot of the primary Wing Chun players became involved in secret societies of a rebel nature, you'll find that one of the main ones was called the "Small Knife Society." So lots of opportunities to get exposed to knife techniques and say "hey! this would work great with Wing Chun!" ;-)

I've also been told this....note that when most lineages demonstrate the double knives in application they do so against the long pole, and they typically will show the long pole losing! I've been told that this was because the knives were the "new" thing and to further their acceptance and show they were worthy of learning they were showed defeating the "old" thing....which for Wing Chun/Weng Chun was the long pole.

KPM, do the Ku Lo Pin Sun knives have any specific shape or features to them? (i.e. lineage specific adaptations?)

 

[KPM]

KPM, do the Ku Lo Pin Sun knives have any specific shape or features to them? (i.e. lineage specific adaptations?)

No. Like I said, they were an add on at least a generation after Fung Chun. Not everyone in Pin Sun even practices the knives.

 

[KPM]

Thought I would just provide a brief on my view on practicality.

I don't think the double Wing Chun Knives are very practical. They certainly aren't practical today, and I doubt they were even very practical a generation or two ago in China. But back not so long ago in China along coastal and farming areas, poles were everywhere. It wouldn't have been unreasonable to expect that if you were out and about and the **** was about to hit the fan, that you would be able to search the surrounding area and come up with something to use as a pole. But people weren't strolling around routinely carrying swords...even relatively short ones like the Wing Chun knives! Maybe you could find a big knife to substitute for your Wing Chun weapon laying around in the area....but TWO such knives? Unlikely! I certainly can't picture Ip Man or Yuen Kay Shan routinely strolling around in public in Foshan with two big knives/short swords on their person. Can you?

Now, it may have been practical for those involved in the rebel societies that were training for battle with imperial forces. But it is unclear how many Wing Chun people this applied to. It certainly didn't apply to Leung Jan, Chan Wah Shun, Yuen Kay Shan and most of the more recent Wing Chun ancestors.

I have trained the knives as part of my Pin Sun sets. I can wield them fairly well. But I don't put any emphasis on it at all. Its just something that is fun to do on occasion. I am more interested in how Michael Janich's "Martial Blade Concepts" method "cross-references" with my Pin Sun. And in fact, it "cross-references" very well! I think Janich's program is one of the very best blade methods out there. And very practical!

 

[wckf92]

I have trained the knives as part of my Pin Sun sets. I can wield them fairly well. But I don't put any emphasis on it at all. Its just something that is fun to do on occasion.

Makes one wonder just how long the weapons will survive the passing of years... Perhaps they are doomed to eventual deletion from WC...?

 

[geezer]

Makes one wonder just how long the weapons will survive the passing of years... Perhaps they are doomed to eventual deletion from WC...?

I think they will become irrelevent and die out unless more people are taught. The excessive secrecy about them has made them pretty superfluous. In my lineage only a few of the very top guys learn them, and fewer yet really train them in any meaningful way. If you want to learn to defend yourself practically with weapons forget waiting for decades and then spending a fortune to learn the BCD. Just learn a good system of Escrima/FMA. I did. I also learned about half the BCD. If I ever have to use sticks or blades to defend myself, I'll use the Escrima.

 

[Vajramusti]

I feel certain that WC evolved as an empty-handed system of "Chinese boxing". However, a well informed source shared with me that the Biu Tze form developed later than SNT and CK, and was essentially "reverse engineered for hands from principles used with the Bart Cham Dao. Considering the nature of the movements in the Biu Tze form, I find this very likely ...but that is speculation on my part. As for the rest, the hands came first.

With blade rooted systems, such as some escrima, arnis, etc. the empy hands work reflects the blade orientation far more than what you see in WC. One of my DTE coaches spent a lot of time in Pekiti and this blade orientation permeates everything he does. The Latosa Escrima system I have my roots in, has a greater boxing influence --at least at the lower levels with a corresponding emphasis on impact/percussion and that also shows in the general character of the system.

With WC I feel it is the same. The general character of the system (in spite of some principles shared with Western fencing) does not show vestiges of once being primarily a blade art.

---------------------------------------
The weapons were added later in the red boat period, Similarly now weapons come after empty hand training.

 

[KPM]

Makes one wonder just how long the weapons will survive the passing of years... Perhaps they are doomed to eventual deletion from WC...?

Certainly possible! Especially how, even in the lineages that have the knives they teach them very sparingly. They aren't really needed. They aren't very practical. Nowadays they would be illegal to carry around almost anywhere in the western world at least. Some will say they will translate over to using a stick. Ok. If your end goal is to use a stick, then train with a stick...not the Wing Chun knives!!! Some will say they add some footwork. Ok. Then take that footwork and apply it to your empty-hand drills independent of the knives so that the footwork becomes part of the empty-hand method. Some will say they add some conditioning aspects. Maybe so. But you'll get more bang for your buck from something like kettlebell training. So, unless the majority of people train Wing Chun as an interesting traditional Chinese past-time with an eye towards preserving a cultural treasure.....rather than training Wing Chun as a modern and practical fighting/self-defense method...then yeah, I think we will see less and less of the traditional Wing Chun knives.

 

[geezer]

...So, unless the majority of people train Wing Chun as an interesting traditional Chinese past-time with an eye towards preserving a cultural treasure.....rather than training Wing Chun as a modern and practical fighting/self-defense method...then yeah, I think we will see less and less of the traditional Wing Chun knives.

Good to have another well thought out opinion. Especially ...since I agree completely! --So where the heck have you been lately, Keith?

BTW the BCD could become more popular if they were taught earlier and more widely, trained widely using the kinds of safely precautions used commonly in HEMA and FMA, and with greater emphasis placed on translating the techniques, including footwork, etc. to smaller blades (such as a Bowie) and empty hand applications. And can you imagine the fun people would have regularly trying to pit their BCD skills against escrima baston or short stick, staff, long pole, and Dao or Chinese Saber, etc?

 

[geezer]

---------------------------------------
The weapons were added later in the red boat period, Similarly now weapons come after empty hand training.

Yes, but the question here is when was the Biu Tze form developed? Was it created later, perhaps the late19th Century, inspired by knife movements added in the Red Boat period?

 

[guy b.]

Believing the wing chun story about Red Boats, revolutionary action, and especially the shaolin origins is an act of faith. All we really know about wing chun of the YM line is that a guy called Leung Jan existed in 19th C. Foshan who taught some people a method that was (maybe later) called wing chun. We don't know if knives were a part of this system or if they were added/made up later (maybe by YM). We do know that pole methods are older because the same exist in other MA from the region. We don't know how long they have been part of wing chun, or whatever it was called before.

Leung Jan was Fung Chun's Si Gung: Leung Jan -- Wong Wah Sam -- Fung Chun. So, at the time, he was the one living person with the closest connection to Leung Jan. So I think his word holds a bit more weight than most, don't you?

They were not contemporaries and so in many ways what Fung Chun said about Leung Jan is similar to what you or I might say.

Makes one wonder just how long the weapons will survive the passing of years... Perhaps they are doomed to eventual deletion from WC...?

I think that this is unlikely for the pole given the immediate and obvious benefits it produces and the understanding it confers. I am only beginning the knives and so I cannot tell you if the same applies. Some tell me that the knives do confer large benefits but my feeling is that these will not match the pole. But if they are beneficial then why should they not survive? The only issue mentioned which I agree could be a problem is the very low number taught knives in some lines of WC, and the lack of understanding that obviously abounds.