I love finding these little fantasies!
From the mid 1970's through the mid 1990's Grandmaster Lee has served honorably in many distinguished positions and taught both the Korean and U.S. Military forces in specialized combat techniques. He served as the Chief Instructor of the TANG SOO DO MOO DUK KWAN Headquarters in Korea (TANG SOO DO has evolved into what is known today as TAE KWON DO). He also served as the Chief Instructor for the Tang Soo Do Greek Federation, the Chief Instructor for the Tang Soo Do Italian Federation, and the Chairman of the Technical Advisory Committee for the European Tang Soo Do Federation.
In 1996 Grandmaster Lee founded the Greek and Italian Hwal Moo (Tae Kwon Do) - Jung Do Kwan Federation. During this time period Grandmaster Lee created the HWAL MOO (Life Defense) martial art forms, and today remains honored as the lifetime president of the Jung Do Kwan Federation.
In 2001 Grandmaster Lee relocated to the Washington D.C. area and opened the World Martial Arts Center in Warrenton Virginia, where he continues the teachings of HWAL MOO (Tae Kwon Do).
http://www.wmacusa.com/GMLee.html
Guess I have to have all my uniforms redone then huh?
haha looks like, unless you are doing traditional TKD MDK another kettle of fish, anyway here is a pretty good quote from : http://www.beckmartialarts.com/ctkdfaq.html
The 5 original kwans:
Chung Do Kwan - founded in 1944 by Won Kyuk LEE who'd studied Shotokan karate and called his art Tang Soo Do.
Moo Duk Kwan - founded in 1945 by Hwang KEE. Kee had studied Tai Chi and some types of Kung Fu with *** Jin YANG in China and opened a school . His first two attempts were unsuccessful, he then met with Won Kyuk Lee and visited the Chung Do Kwon periodically. Lee claims Kee was his student, Kee says no, *** Jin Yang was his only teacher. Kee says he learned the Shotokan forms from Gichin Funakoshi's books. Kee started teaching the Shotokan forms and his school became successful. Kee was close friends with some noted Japanese karate people as well. Regardless of the source of his skills, what Kee taught was obviously very influenced by Japanese karate. Kee originally called his art Hwa Soo Do, then Tang Soo Do, then Soo Bakh Do.''
Song Moo Kwan - founded in 1946 by Byung Jick RO, who'd studied Shotokan karate and called his art Tang Soo Do.
Kwon Bop Bu/Chang Moo Kwan - founded in 1947 by Byung in YOON who had studied Chinese kung fu (chu'an-fa, or 'fist law') in Manchuria and Shudokan karate with Kanken Toyama in Japan, originally called Kwon Bop Kong Soo Do (meaning fist method of karate). Yoon disappeared during the Korean War. Yoon's teachings were carried on by his top student Nam Suk LEE, who changed the name of the school to Chang Moo Kwan.
Yun Moo Kwan - founded in 1946 by Kyung Suk LEE (judo) and Sang Sup CHUN (karate), called originally Choson Yun Moo Kwan (The Choson Yun Moo Kwan had been the original Japanese Judo school in Korea for over 30 years previously). Lee became missing and Chun died during the Korean War, and this kwan essentially became the Ji Do Kwan.
Later important kwans:
Ji Do Kwan/Chi Do Kwan - founded in 1953 by Dr. Kwa-Byung YUN, who had studied ****o-Ryu karate in Japan. Yun became the head of the Chosun Yun Moo Kwan after its leaders were lost and renamed it.
O Do Kwan - founded in 1954 by Hong Hi CHOI, offshoot from Chung Do Kwan
Jung Do Kwan - founded in 1954 by Yong Woo LEE, offshoot from Chung Do Kwan
Han Moo Kwan - founded by Kyo Yoon LEE in 1956, offshoot from Yun Moo Kwan
Kang Duk Kwan - founded in 1956 by Chul Hee PARK offshoot from the Kwan Bop Bu Kwan.
Hong Moo Kwan - founded ? by Jong Pyo HONG, offshoot from the Kwan Bop Bu.
Again, *every* founder of the original kwans had studied or been heavily influenced by some sort of karate.
It is no disservice to TKD to admit that it is not 2000 years old and came primarily from karate. Karate came from kung fu. Kung fu came from whatever Indian art Bodhitsuharma studied before travelling to the Shaolin temple. All have developed into something quite different from their source.
I think in your last post you answered your own question as how Tae Kwon Do in part evolved from Tang Soo Do. Or at least how it can be looked at that way for convienience.
The issue often is that Tae Kwon Do often has an identity crisis with many wishing to claim such things as it came unbroken from the Sillan Dynasty 5,000 years ago (yes I know this is more than 3,500 years off) but this is the myth. Many schools promote such myths, not all, but many. How much of it is plain ignorance or a case of revisionist history is up for debate perhaps, but certainly it is more a question to be asked on a case by case basis.
Tang Soo Do, most schools have little problem tracing their lineage back to KJN Hwang Khee. As fractured as we are, often we can not agree on the best way to throw a punch, but at least we can agree on this Historical Fact. Not so with many of the TKD practitioners I know, and I say many, not all. It would be wrong to paint everyone with such a gross generalization. But, I have noticed since TKD became a sport, there were a great number of TKD schools that converted (many in name only) to Tang Soo Do, it didn't last long...but as a result, many claim to be from Tang Soo Do a "much older art." I have been flat out called a liar when I tell them how old we are and that Hwang Khee is the source, again they prefer to believe the myth.
I agree, TKD, Tang Soo Do, all came from styles older than itself, as many of the Japanese styles such as Shotokahn have roots in Okinawa (again I am Aware Okinawa is Japan) and Okinawa from China. I also know people dispute this too, though the historical evidence has satisfied me.
The important thing to note in all of this, Tang Soo Do, and any art is not dead, it lives and evolves, sometimes it evolves for the better, sometimes not so good, but it is in constant flux pulled and warped by the time it is practiced in, the character of those practicing and teaching it. What really comes through all these centuries is the spirit of martial arts and some hard fast Laws. Like physics Martial Arts is based on certain Laws and Principles that do not change. Our bodies still have the same organs, strengths and weaknesses of folks 100s and thousands of years before us. In the end, an art can be evaluated in the time it is in, by these laws and the question....
Does this or that technique actually work? Does our training actually work?
Change is not in itself good or bad, just a reality. The Tang Soo Do you practice today is not the same exact Tang Soo Do practiced 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago and that is not always a bad thing. During Hwang Khee's life he grew and changed just as the art grew and changed, so one cheats themselves if they lock everything at a certain time and freeze it. Many of us split from the Moo Duk Kwan at some point, do we lock everything at the time we split and quit evolving? No. Sometimes in the flux we find ourselves we will go back, do away with the new cause it is bad, and sometimes we may heaven forbid do away with something old that is anachronistic.
My point is, when viewed in this manner, our connection with the past is still important, but it is no longer as important to claim some direct lineage to such and such, unchanged for the last 10,000 years to be worth anything. And in many ways, this is how such things start, in our case the myth that Tae Kwon Do perhaps evolved from the old but good Tang Soo Do, because at that one point in time someone had an epiphany and made something better creating Tae Kwon Do, and froze something into place.
Just my view of things. The spirit is what connects us with the past, not the age of our style.
And with all these comments, I do believe in tradition, but to be a real traditionalist one must understand where they came from and understand that what we do is not a dead (static) thing, but alive, ever changing, it is not necessary to pretend it was this way for 2,000 years and along came Grand Master Mickey Mouse who made it a little better yesterday.
Maybe this makes sense, it is not as easy to express in a post on a forum.
Martial Art Style Tang Soo Do
Thank you for the very thoughtfully written response.
I was only commenting on the sentence, "Tang Soo Do Evolved into TKD" Into and not From, that is the crux of the bisciut, but you did make very valid points that can invoke a great thread response.
b
Martial Art Style Tang Soo Do
True, you did :)
Guess it just sort of touched a nerve on some closely related topics.
I have also been told that Tang Soo Do evolved from Tae Kwon Do. *Sigh*
Jamie
Martial Art Style Tang Soo Do
Just sometimes, it seems neither fact nor reality is important to many Martial Arts schools. They teach history, but their history rather than being based on fact is most often a concotion. The concotion is designed I fear to cover up some perceived shame, which as you stated makes no sense. There is nothing to be ashamed about. Guess that was the nerve that was touched, and thus the tirade, though it was certainly not aimed in your direction, just at the state of things in many sectors of the martial arts world.
Martial Art Style Tang Soo Do
Well there is hope, My nephew went to a after school TDK program briefly(hated it) and when he said he was a green belt in TSD the instructor a nice Korean guy, said, Oh TSD that is the Old way, that TKD came from.
not too bad.
b
Martial Art Style Tang Soo Do
Its hard to believe that TKD evolved from Tang Soo Do.
From my point of veiw, Because Tang Soo Do Was there after the Occupation of Japan. And TKD I'm almost sure didn't show up until the 1950's. In my opinion that was Koreas way of getting rid of the Japanese and Okinawan and chinese influence. so they can say that korea has its on purely korean martial art. tell me if what I said makes any since??
Yes, in many ways what you are saying makes since. A lot of since, Tang Soo Do was one of the major arts that were involved in the formation of TKD, it certainly influenced the formation though I am not sure I would say it was a direct line. And Yes, most certainly Mr. Pope I would say that the creation of TKD was in some ways an attempt to unify Korean Martial Arts, but also an attempt to purify and erase outside influences. I think flawed from the beginning, but what they could not remove from techniques, some have attempted to remove by revising history. So what you are saying, certainly makes sense to me.
The problem I think come in are those that perhaps wanted to do this (whether in the beginning or as historical revisionist) have two small problems:
1) Their techniques have a basis some place and that is not necessarily Korea, especially if you follow the historical trail.
2) Many wish to claim a pure Korean Lineage (it was born, made, originated from Korea without outside influence). Problem is no one has ever been able to prove this and evidence is always to the contrary.
In some ways, I have read and am tending to believe that much of this stems from a problem of nationalism and prejudice. Nationalism can be good when it is pride in one's nation, it can be bad when it obscures the truth, especially when the spirit of Nationalism results in revisionist history.
Anyway, like I said, one can't paint all TKD artists with the same brush, just as for example it would be unfair if I do something ridiculous for someone to hold Mr. Redfield or someone else responsible because we both are Tang Soo. But, it still doesn't mean that listening to ridiculous takes on history that have no historical bearing is aggravating.
Jamie
Martial Art Style Tang Soo Do