Origins of the Wooden Dummy

[BruiserBrody]

What are the earliest origins of the wooden dummy? Is is accurate that they were first built in the Shaolin Temple?

[KPM]

What are the earliest origins of the wooden dummy? Is is accurate that they were first built in the Shaolin Temple?

My guess is that they've been around for a long time! I doubt they were invented in the Shaolin temple. It doesn't get much more simple or basic than a post driven into the ground. Then it only makes sense that someone would try to put arms on it. :-) One origin story that I have heard for the Wing Chun version is that since Wing Chun is supposed to have originated on the Red Boats and a lot of practicing was done between ports, the mast of the boat was drilled out so that arms could be attached for practice. But then pictures I have seen of modern versions of what the Red Boats weren't very big, and certainly wouldn't have had a mast big enough to be a wooden dummy trunk. So who really knows?

[Lee Chiang Po]

Wing chun was a military fighting system and they used different versions of the wooden dummy so that the troops could practice their hard techniques without injuring themselves or others. The Red Boat people were made up of some ex military and they practiced this style of fighting, also using the dummy. Most of the lineages today are products of individuals interested in financial reward. Whatever they are calling their Wing Chun, it is just another version that evolved from the original military fighting system.
The reason Wing Chun system is no longer a military fighting system is because they eventually invented machine guns and assault rifles. Way better systems of fighting.

[Sihing73]

Wing chun was a military fighting system and they used different versions of the wooden dummy so that the troops could practice their hard techniques without injuring themselves or others. The Red Boat people were made up of some ex military and they practiced this style of fighting, also using the dummy. Most of the lineages today are products of individuals interested in financial reward. Whatever they are calling their Wing Chun, it is just another version that evolved from the original military fighting system.
The reason Wing Chun system is no longer a military fighting system is because they eventually invented machine guns and assault rifles. Way better systems of fighting.

Hello,

I do not believe that Wing Chun was a "military" system. For one it is just not that popular and seems to have been kept fairly low key, even secret maybe. IMHO, if the art were tuahgt widespread to the military it would have been more well known prior to Yip Man in Hong Kong and he would not have been the only openly teaching Sifu. Just a thought.

Also, Wing Chun seems to be geared more towards a revolutionary or even assasination type of fighting method. I can see ot being taught to rebels but not the army per se. There are plenty of other arts which are associated with the military but for the most part Wing Chun is not one of them.

As to the origin of the dummy, I go along with KPM, the simple concept of a post or "jong" has been around for many years. Bagua for example utilizes stakes for movement exercises which also include striking the posts. Also, Wing Chun is not the only art with a dummy, Choy Li Fut has a very interesting dummy as well.

Just some thoughts.

[t_niehoff]

And it's not just a chinese invention:

http://www.thearma.org/essays/pells.htm

[sanjuro_ronin]

Wooden dummies in MA can be traced back to the Romans for sure and probably to the Greeks and Arabs as well.

[anerlich]

I do not believe that Wing Chun was a "military" system. For one it is just not that popular and seems to have been kept fairly low key, even secret maybe. IMHO, if the art were tuahgt widespread to the military it would have been more well known prior to Yip Man in Hong Kong and he would not have been the only openly teaching Sifu. Just a thought.

Also, Wing Chun seems to be geared more towards a revolutionary or even assasination type of fighting method. I can see ot being taught to rebels but not the army per se. There are plenty of other arts which are associated with the military but for the most part Wing Chun is not one of them.

I strongly agree. There have been few if any weaponless wars since before the stone age, and WC's weapons are IMO of the concealed or improvised variety, suitable for the types of people Dave described.

[t_niehoff]

Instead of trying to speculate (or just repeat stories we've been told) as to whether WCK was a "military" fighting method, just look to evidence -- where is there any evidence that WCK was ever a part of any military?

[Vajramusti]

Dangers in specultaion.

Meanings of that term (military) can vary specially projecting terms backwards- centuries ago.
Good existing histories of the Ching movement into South China describes riots and rebellions and alliances between
martial groups and deprived peasant groups against the Ching. Wakeman's work and others come to mind.
The scholars were not knowlegeable enough about martial arts to provide details on specific styles.

joy chaudhuri

[Lee Chiang Po]

What makes me believe what I said is that my dad told me that he was taught to fight WC when he was in the military. Later learning more from ex military men within his organization. He taught WC to his own group of young recruits within their organization and even after coming to the USA he taught WC. He never made mention of Ip Man either. I am assuming that he didn't even know of him. There are a lot of Chinese you know. In my early training he showed me some of the now obsolete techniques for defending against spears and bows and arrows, knives and such. You know, The WC that Ip Man taught was more of a citified street fighting style than the original system. If there is no proof that it went that way, equally there is no real proof that it didn't. And even today when machine guns are in the hands of every soldier, they still undergo some form of hand to hand combat training. And if you look at all the legends about how WC came to be and all, you have to realize that not all of them can be true, and if one is not true, what makes you think the rest is true? I personally do not believe any of them. Besides, I have it straight from the source that the Chinese are the masters of bull ****. They can never just tell it straight. They always have to come up with some fantasy story about it. I guess it is supposed to make it more believable.

[KPM]

The "sales pitch" in the west is typically..."New and Improved!" That in the east is typically..."old, original and traditional!"