Chinese Martial Arts: From Antiquity to the Twenty-First Century by Peter Lorge

[William123]

A new book on CMA history:


"In the global world of the twenty-first century, martial arts are practiced for self-defense and sporting purposes only. However, for thousands of years, they were a central feature of military practice in China and essential for the smooth functioning of society. Individuals who were adept in using weapons were highly regarded, not simply as warriors but also as tacticians and performers. This book, which opens with an intriguing account of the very first female martial artist, charts the history of combat and fighting techniques in China from the Bronze Age to the present. This broad panorama affords fascinating glimpses into the transformation of martial skills, techniques, and weaponry against the background of Chinese history, the rise and fall of empires, their governments, and their armies. Quotations from literature and poetry, and the stories of individual warriors, infuse the narrative, offering personal reflections on prowess in the battlefield and techniques of engagement. This is an engaging and readable introduction to the authentic history of Chinese martial arts."
http://www.amazon.com/Chinese-Martial-Arts-Antiquity-Twenty-First/dp/0521878810/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1323810933&sr=8-1#reader_B006H3TR62

Cheers,

William

[GeneChing]

It's by Peter Lorge, a history scholar from Vanderbilt. Published by Cambridge.

[sanjuro_ronin]

authentic history of Chinese martial arts.

Always worry when I read those words...

[David Jamieson]

well, every book is simply perspective as written by the author(s).

Good thing there is more than one book or else we would have a very narrow perspective of what martial arts are...or anything else for that matter. :)

[ginosifu]

Martial Arts history is always subject to suspicion. Mostly because there is no real proof. I believe that many histories were written by survivors of certain eras. Who is to say if those survivors are telling the truth or not? Also governments step in and alter the truth / history to make them look good.

Also we need to look at exaggeration, many story tellers of history exaggerate or stretch the truth a bit, which alters the real facts of the history. Compound that over 100's of years and now you have guys flying thru the air and fireballs coming out of their fingertips.

My Sifu told me: Since we can not prove anything, you must have faith in your teacher's explanation of your systems history. That's the best we can do.

ginosifu

[sanjuro_ronin]

Martial Arts history is always subject to suspicion. Mostly because there is no real proof. I believe that many histories were written by survivors of certain eras. Who is to say if those survivors are telling the truth or not? Also governments step in and alter the truth / history to make them look good.

Also we need to look at exaggeration, many story tellers of history exaggerate or stretch the truth a bit, which alters the real facts of the history. Compound that over 100's of years and now you have guys flying thru the air and fireballs coming out of their fingertips.

My Sifu told me: Since we can not prove anything, you must have faith in your teacher's explanation of your systems history. That's the best we can do.

ginosifu

Its funny because a few of my teachers were more of the:
Anecdotes are just that, no way of knowing what was true, false or exagerrated, so it is best for YOU to focus on what YOU can do.

[Drake]

Always worry when I read those words...

I winced, lol.

[ginosifu]

Its funny because a few of my teachers were more of the:
Anecdotes are just that, no way of knowing what was true, false or exagerrated, so it is best for YOU to focus on what YOU can do.

Nothing wrong with that !

ginosifu

[MightyB]

This is my favorite type of MA book. Looking forward to it.

[Jimbo]

The thing that raised a question mark for me was "an intriguing account of the very first female martial artist." Nobody knows who, when or where the first female MAist or fighter was.

[ghostexorcist]

William123 is going all over the net mentioning the book. He just posted something about it on a Chinese history forum I frequent. I came here to start a thread on the subject, but he beat me to it.

I've been corresponding with Prof. Lorge over the years concerning his expertise in Song Dynasty history. Naturally, I asked him plenty of questions about Yue Fei. He told me that he was writing a book on martial arts sometime ago, but I totally forgot about it. I'm looking forward to reading it.


The thing that raised a question mark for me was "an intriguing account of the very first female martial artist." Nobody knows who, when or where the first female MAist or fighter was.

He is most likely referring to the Lady of Yue. Stan Henning wrote a really neat article about her a few years ago.

[ShaolinDan]

Hmm. If the author is a Yue Fei expert (if there's even enough info to be an expert) then as an eagle claw practitioner I'll have to check this out.

[William123]

William123 is going all over the net mentioning the book. He just posted something about it on a Chinese history forum I frequent. I came here to start a thread on the subject, but he beat me to it.


You bettcha! Better hurry before I finish posting in all the Forums!

Prof. Lorge does not refer to the Maiden of Yue, but Fu Hao, a woman who is mentioned in Shang oracle bones as leading armies into battle. See the free preview in Amazon.

Cheers,

William

[wenshu]

From the intro.

http://goo.gl/aC8sz

Chinese martial arts has a written history and is part of the society in which it developed.
One of the greatest myths about Chinese martial arts is that it has no written record. Many people assume or assert that the only source of knowledge about its origins and development is the tradition orally transmitted from martial arts teachers. Adding to the misunderstanding of the past, this imagined oral tradition seldom places martial arts in the broader context of Chinese history or, when it does, uses a simplistic, static and inaccurate description of that past. In fact, the amount of available written material on martial arts history in Chinese History is enormous. As a first step in confronting such a vast body of information, this book will describe the origins and development of the Chinese martial arts across Chinese history. I will argue that these arts are the developed physical practices of armed and unarmed combat, which must be understood primarily as military skills, not methods of self-cultivation or religious activity.

That said although the martial arts stemmed from military requirements and related activities like hunting, these skills took on added meaning as markers of status and of certain mental or spiritual qualities. Warfare and hunting were important in the identity of early Chinese aristocrats, for example and their class was closely associated with chariot-borne archery. Aristocrats not only fought with certain weapons but they also fought uner specific rules of combat the reinforced their shared sense of class.

***

The modern understanding of martial arts as only unarmed fighting skills for self-defense, abstracted movements for self-cultivation, or the wielding of archaic weapons for aesthetics or improved helath is a modern perspective inconsistent with most earlier practice. By contrast, the performance of martial arts for entertainment and even ritual is fundamental and original to their practice. Nevertheless, the modern understanding of Chinese martial arts is not wrong because it differs from its earlier place in Chinese society; it is simply an example of how things change. And indeed it is hard to fix martial arts into a single meaning in the modern era since Chinese society is itself currently in flux

Bought and bought.

[rovere]

It looks like an interesting book but the illustration of the axe head he refers to as 'ge' in the sample chapter is actually a 'yue'. The ge is quite different in shape but both are found archaeologically in the Shang dynasty. The yue is quite rare in the Zhou dynasty but the ge continues up through the Warring States period.

(The oracle bone character of the ge makes up part of the character we know as wu; martial.)

[bawang]

i dont buy martial art books because they always say the things you already know. instead i use the money on fried chicken.

[Lee Chiang Po]

i dont buy martial art books because they always say the things you already know. instead i use the money on fried chicken.

I think like you do. Fried Chicken is real, and where martial arts history will not really amount to s--t, fried chicken will if you eat it.

[GeneChing]

Lorge's new book is an excellent overview of the history and development of the Chinese martial arts, dynasty by dynasty. Lorge offers a fascinating perspective of Chinese history built around military advancement and political developments, that will interest both martial artists and sinophiles alike. Lorge's research has a military focus, so there's a lot of discussion of ancient armies and the advancement of military weapons. I loved his take on archery, which I have always felt is the missing link in Chinese martial arts research. I also enjoyed his take on women in Chinese martial arts. His opening essay AUTHENTICITY AND REAL KUNG FU is spot on. His observations on performance are excellent as well. I get so tired of hearing 'that's just dance' when the history of sword dances goes back centuries. Lorge's analysis of sword dances and other martial performances are very insightful. His comments on the development of internal martial arts are good reading too - it's something everyone espousing internal methods should read.


The thing that raised a question mark for me was "an intriguing account of the very first female martial artist." Nobody knows who, when or where the first female MAist or fighter was.
He acknowledges this in the body of the text. He cites it as the first recorded female.

My main criticism is the lack of Chinese characters. There are some, and Lorge cites several Chinese texts, so he clearly has access, but without the characters, it makes it hard to reference. I've had the same criticism leveled at my book, Shaolin Trips (http://www.amazon.com/Shaolin-Trips-Gene-Ching/dp/1424308976/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276188031&sr=1-1), but that was a compilation of newsstand magazine articles, not a scholarly work. Popular publishing and scholarly publishing are completely different. We've made an effort to include Chinese characters in our mag, but we're probably the only one on the newsstands that does this. That being said, a current issue of Kung Fu Tai Chi just might just contain more Chinese characters than in Lorge's book. This was a problem for me when he was discussing weapons, as it was often described as 'halberd' or 'long sword' and I, being a weapons nut, would have liked more details (or even diagrams).

My other criticism is his pithy treatment of modern kung fu and wushu. That is probably due to my own personal bias, being a magazine publisher. Newsstand mags have to stay on top of pop culture, so my focus is more modern. Lorge doesn't promise to go very far here anyway, so it's more a personal issue of mine. It would have been grand if he drew connections with the historical figures to the styles that are attributed to them. While this is clearly apocryphal, like the Bodhidharma story, there's still meaning there. He only discusses modern wushu in passing. His take on Shaolin is somewhat negative and somewhat repetitive to Meir Shahar's work (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49464) which he is critical of - Shahar is not cited in his acknowledgements, but Henning (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=62352), Polly (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26966) and Kennedy (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36566) are. He makes one error in his discussion of Shaolin abbots as he overlooks Venerable Shi Xingzhen. These are all minor criticisms however, just me being picky. Overall, this is a wonderful contribution to the field and you should all give it a read.

I read it over New Years, which is always an exhausting time for me because I work in the music industry, so I did three concerts leading up to NYE. I will have to read it again, when my brain is a little less tired. Perhaps I'll have more to say later, as I digest it.

[GeneChing]

Current Questions in Authenticity symposium: Authenticity in Local Contexts 3: Peter Lorge (http://townsendlab.berkeley.edu/society-cultural-heritage-arts-and-law-schal/audio/current-questions-authenticity-symposium-authent-1)
Submitted by Bryan ****rell on Thu, 02/23/2012 - 9:13pm

Title: Authenticity in Local Contexts 3: Peter Lorge
Length: 17:37 minutes (16.13 MB)
Format: MP3 Stereo 44kHz 128Kbps (CBR)


Lorge gives us a little 'shout out' during the talk. I'm not sure if it's on this recording because I don't have time to listen to it all the way through right now.

[GeneChing]

Peter Lorge on CHINESE MARTIAL ARTS: FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY Part 1 (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=1032)

[GeneChing]

Enter to win CHINESE MARTIAL ARTS: FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY Autographed by author Peter A. Lorge (http://www.kungfumagazine.net/index.html)! Contest ends 6:00 p.m. PST on 04/05/2012. Good luck everyone!

[GeneChing]

Peter Lorge on CHINESE MARTIAL ARTS: FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY Part 2 (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=1034)

[GeneChing]

See our Chinese Martial Arts autographed by author Peter Lorge winners thread (http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1166628).

[PalmStriker]

Looks like a great read from just skimming the content. Excellent ! :)

[MasterKeaton]

I actually posted my comments on the thread I started on Jiayo.com. But I'll put my take on the book up here as well to let members of this forum respond.

As a scholar and wushu practitioner I'm critical of the book. Here a few reason why.

1.) There are a number of contradictions in the book. In the introduction, for example, he speaks of "reality of the practice of martial arts" and "their real social historical meaning" one minute and then talks about "real" as being constructed when it comes to authenticity the next. So which of the two does Lorge think he's making visible? He thinks it is the former, but in actuality it is the latter. This confusion permeates the book. Another is that he claim that there are numerous documents that can used to work out the history of Chinese martial arts but he goes pages without citing works.

2.) A major mistake appears in his discussion of the Ming Dynasty in the form of the wakou, the pirates who operated in the islands around Japan and between Japan and China. Not only does he misspell the term (wokou) but he often characterizes them as having samurai among their ranks. The wakou was a diverse group with individuals from both Japan and China. They were a plague to both because they raided the ships that carried goods between both places. He overemphasizes the role of the Japanese swords, thinking that this indicates samurai. It only indicates, as Japanese historians have pointed out, that swords were one commodity that Japan used as part of its trade. The wakou have Japanese swords because they stole them and not necessarily because samurai were among their ranks.

3.) Lorge is critical of Meir Shahar's book The Shaolin Temple, saying that it is biased toward Shaolin. Having read about 40% of Shahar's book, I would say Shahar does the better job of the two in constructing a logical history. Shahar actually goes through and reads documents and tries to understand what they say and how they are used to create and support the myth of Shaolin. Lorge often reads texts that come after the specific period he is discussing and then makes a reconstruction based on the latter work, never trying to work out what things might have been like at the time in question.

There's more I could present but I'll stop here.

[GeneChing]

'Martial Arts' studies intriguing history (http://www.bgdailynews.com/community/martial-arts-studies-intriguing-history/article_8154c424-0be9-5b5f-b63b-988b26058554.html)
Reviewed by Dan Forrest Apr 17, 2016

http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/bgdailynews.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/1/51/151ac25d-410c-56be-a936-80e9cc8f87af/5710dcbcd9aa0.image.jpg

“Chinese Martial Arts: From Antiquity to the Twenty-First Century” by Peter A. Lorge. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 282 pages, $39.99 (hardcover).

Author Peter Lorge, a history professor at Vanderbilt University, has written an intriguing and thorough history of martial arts in China. Readers interested in military history or the nation of China will find this a rewarding book.

An important distinction for readers to be aware of is that martial arts literally mean the arts of war. Drawing on the written record that stretches back many centuries, Lorge examines how men really fought in battle as well as how subsequent fictional accounts embellished the skills of warriors and heroes. There is much more in this book about the development and use of weapons and battlefield tactics than unarmed fighting techniques or spiritual matters. Readers looking for a critical discussion of the differences between Crane Technique and the Cobra Kai school should look elsewhere.

China is both an ancient country and a large one, so it comes as no surprise that the history of warfare in that nation is long and varied. The most important and longest-lasting martial skill is that of archery. From the nomadic warriors of the northern steppes who practiced on horseback to the refined gentlemen scholar/bureaucrats of the latter dynasties who were more concerned with form than with hitting or piercing the target, archery was the primary skill expected of warriors. In the early years of battle in China, mounted archers would ride to the enemy line, fire a quick volley of arrows and then dash back out of range. As technology advanced and first crossbows and then gunpowder-based weaponry assumed a greater importance, a graceful and smooth form as one drew and released the bow became a symbol of one’s own refinement and status since only the upper class had the time to devote to the study of archaic matters.

Most foot soldiers carried spears, both to attack other infantry and to defend against cavalry. Knives and axes were carried in the early periods, but as metalworking skills increased, bronze and then iron swords became more generally issued to troops. These blades also grew in durability as they lost their individuality. Armies grew in size over the centuries, and generals became administrators as much as warriors. Skill in logistics and strategy supplanted excellence in weapons handling as the mark of a good commander.

As time goes on, the written record, including the first novels, grows larger, and the documentation of weaponry and its use grows as well. By the 17th and 18th centuries, there is a general consensus about when various weapons arose and how their use changed over time. During the Ming period, the Shaolin monastery became famous for its fighting monks and their amazing martial arts skills. Lorge is careful to keep separate what the historical record will support and what popular culture has imagined the Shaolin monks to be. Apparently there was a small coterie of skillful monks, most of them probably retired military, at the monastery who might be considered adjunct faculty. Not technically part of the greater monastery, which was dedicated to nonviolent religious practices, these monks did bring publicity and paying students to the area, which was good for the whole community.

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, China developed more and greater contact with the western world. Events such as the Opium Wars and the Boxer Rebellion demonstrated the effectiveness of the western way of war. China adopted many of the forms and tactics of the western armies for their own soldiers. After the ascension of the communists to power, anything that smacked of religion or imperial nostalgia was ruthlessly suppressed, including traditional martial arts. Increasing interest in the west in eastern spiritual practices in the 1960s led to the relaxation of some of these rules. Westerners were able to travel to China and practice tai chi or visit the famous sites to expand their consciousnesses, all the while leaving hard currency in their wake.

The other major factor in the growth of interest in the martial arts, in China as well as abroad, was the rise of Hong Kong martial arts cinema. Trained fighters and performers who had left the mainland found a way to make a living working in the motion picture industry. With often no more than a nod to actual history, many of these films made use of historical people and places (like the Shaolin monastery, vital to kung fu cinema and the Wu Tang) to attract audiences in China and around the world. The critical success of films such as “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” have added another layer of interest in both the history and the popular culture of the weapons and the fighting styles in China from the earliest times to the present.

“Chinese Martial Arts” provides a well-written and thorough introduction to the evolution of military tactics and fighting styles in China. Readers interested in the military history of one of the largest and oldest countries in the world will find much information here that helps broaden their understanding of this immense subject. Even a casual reader will enjoy the many interesting characters and vignettes that populate this work.

— Reviewed by Dan Forrest, associate professor and access services coordinator, WKU Libraries.

— Editor’s note: The author will discuss his book in WKU Libraries’ “Far Away Places” series at 7 p.m. Thursday at Barnes & Noble Booksellers on Campbell Lane. The public is invited.

If any of you are near Western Kentucky University, I highly recommend checking out Professor Lorge's talk. He's a good speaker, scholarly yet down to earth, and quite approachable.