All these movements are the same

[Sal Canzonieri]

nice. i think 李叟 should be li sou. that helps.

so his sets were named hongquan because...? thought it was because it was based off the same hongquan sets from zhao kuangyin, taizu changquan (and whatever else). hence calling it part of the same system, just a later development. was the name due to this relation?

speaking of the development, do you have approximate dates for which these sets were developed? starting from zhao's (lao)hongquan sets, his generals' taizu changquan sets, li sou's xiaohongquan sets, and the monks' dahongquan sets?

Yep, Li Sou is the right pinyin, sorry.

He named them hong quan because the were flowing sets, like the Lao Hong Quan, and that they were based on the older Shaolin material. Sometimes all the old Shaolin is called Hong Quan, and sometimes it is called Luohan Quan and sometimes it is called Chang Quan and sometimes Chan Quan.
They are used interchangeabley, making for a lot of confusion today.

Zhao's Lao Hong Quan are said to be from from before 960 AD, from right before he entered into the service (you can figure it out from one of his bios on internet).

Tai Zu Chang Quan is from 961 AD, when they first started the meetings.

Li Sou's Hong Quan is from later yuan/ early Ming, so 1300s? right on the border of the two times.

Da Hong Quan is most likely from the 1700s.
If it is from the Ming instead of the Qing, then the 1500s.

But I doubt it is from before the Qing, because I have never seen any mention of it before the Qing era.

[LFJ]

cool, thanks for that!

[LFJ]

so that 3rd set of xiaohongquan (erlu) was not created by li sou, obviously. i've not seen this form anywhere- that i know of. is there any place to find something on it?

[Sal Canzonieri]

so that 3rd set of xiaohongquan (erlu) was not created by li sou, obviously. i've not seen this form anywhere- that i know of. is there any place to find something on it?

It's a great short set, and the interesting thing about it is, there is a whole section of it that is in the Chen TJQ Yi Lu set, in the same order of movements.

Well, I haven't seen any videos of it, but it is shown step by step in the Shaolin Encyclopedia.

[LFJ]

as i mentioned earlier, i recall in the discussion with master deyang that he said after zhao kuangyin had studied at shaolin he created the taizu changquan set himself and later it was taught back to shaolin.

since, he is now in hungary and i cant go into it further with him until later i decided to look back over some of the demo videos i have, wherein the history of taizu changquan set is explained in brief.

it says, after studying at shaolin zhao kuangyin created his own set (taizu changquan) and used it in battle upon founding the song dynasty. during hand-to-hand combat with his enemies it proved to be extremely powerful and effective. and so he passed it on to his officers and soldiers. later to repay the kindness of the shaolin temple's teaching, the set was combined with shaolin's material as well as a few sets he put together through condensation of his knowledge. (apparently the (lao)hongquan sets)

so now, it would seem that the taizu changquan set was created by zhao kuangyin, and in line with master deqian's explanation, taught to shaolin by his generals (more likely than by himself) during the meetings beginning in 961 and was used as a testing set to determine whether or not people were actually from shaolin- as this set was only known by zhao and his army. however, it was used in battle before zhao founded the song dynasty. so it was at least from between the time zhao went to shaolin (date?) and 960.

as for the (lao)hongquan sets, they appear to have been taught to shaolin at the same time as the taizu changquan set, putting it in shaolin at at least 961 rather than during the four days zhao was at shaolin.

besides, the (lao)hongquan sets were a summarization of his knowledge, apparently including that from shaolin. which i'm sure would have taken more than four days to produce.

[Sal Canzonieri]

as i mentioned earlier, i recall in the discussion with master deyang that he said after zhao kuangyin had studied at shaolin he created the taizu changquan set himself and later it was taught back to shaolin.

since, he is now in hungary and i cant go into it further with him until later i decided to look back over some of the demo videos i have, wherein the history of taizu changquan set is explained in brief.

it says, after studying at shaolin zhao kuangyin created his own set (taizu changquan) and used it in battle upon founding the song dynasty. during hand-to-hand combat with his enemies it proved to be extremely powerful and effective. and so he passed it on to his officers and soldiers. later to repay the kindness of the shaolin temple's teaching, the set was combined with shaolin's material as well as a few sets he put together through condensation of his knowledge. (apparently the (lao)hongquan sets)

so now, it would seem that the taizu changquan set was created by zhao kuangyin, and in line with master deqian's explanation, taught to shaolin by his generals (more likely than by himself) during the meetings beginning in 961 and was used as a testing set to determine whether or not people were actually from shaolin- as this set was only known by zhao and his army. however, it was used in battle before zhao founded the song dynasty. so it was at least from between the time zhao went to shaolin (date?) and 960.

as for the (lao)hongquan sets, they appear to have been taught to shaolin at the same time as the taizu changquan set, putting it in shaolin at at least 961 rather than during the four days zhao was at shaolin.

besides, the (lao)hongquan sets were a summarization of his knowledge, apparently including that from shaolin. which i'm sure would have taken more than four days to produce.

I'm just going by Shaolin's own records.

Lao Hong Quan was given to them by Zhao when he was not yet in the military, so it was when he was much younger. He might now have even created it, it was based on Shanxi martial arts, where he was training.

The Tai Zhu Yi Lu set is not named after him, it was the ancestral set, he wasn't named Tai Zu yet and it would be forbidden to use the Emperor's name. The Er lu and San lu sets are not named Tai Zu, just plain old Chang Quan.

The Tai Zu Chang Quan set is composed of 32 separate techniques from 18 different sources. Because of this it has 'off-timing" which makes it unique and interesting. Each technique is from one person, and it can be traced to which person because there are various quan pu that delineate them.

Your teacher, like many teachers, though we all love, honor, and trust them, simply repeated the legendary story about this set that I am sure his teacher's told him. But Shaolin's own records give a more logical, plausible, simpler version, and it is considered not legendary.

If that version were true, there would be manuals somewhere that state this and there is not (so far) and there would be lineages or regions that do this set and can trace this set to a specific time or person and there is not one lineage or region known in China (so far) that can trace their knowledge of this set from BEFORE Shaolin created, most people can only trace it back to the Ming dynasty, at the earliest, and Qing dynasty at the most commonest era.

The Shaolin version makes so much more sense and is verifiable and doesn't sound like hero aggrandizing, no offense to you or your teacher. My teachers said the same story too, but they said that was the official legend.
Digging deeper Shaolin itself (not modern garbage there, but the material that Shi De Qian and others as well have spent 50 years investigating and compared actual hand written records that have long been preserved in lineages to each other for consistency, and also some surviving records that were saved from the 1920 burning of the Shaolin library.

Of course, at any time so artifact might show up out of nowhere and changes the story, but so far after 50 years of research, that's what has been found.

[LFJ]

there may well be two stories- the legend, and the actual history. although, what i've seen here is basically a very plausible record of events, on both sides. a legend would have more fantasticated aspects to it.

the difference between the two stories is not much. basically only who actually put the set together (zhao who taught it to his officers and soldiers who took it to shaolin, or his generals that worked it together at shaolin) and when it was put together (before or after reaching shaolin). the fact that the techniques were effectively used in battle only differs in that they were random techniques from different styles, or the whole already formulated set.

beyond that i dont see much of a difference, and i see how the history of it such a long time ago could get mixed up. i'm just trying to bring this version of the history out here though. until the next chance i get to talk this over with master deyang. i can see either as plausible.

[Royal Dragon]

LFJ,
The legend you put forth is the one I was originally taught. It is not unique or un circulated, but after talking to Sal for years about this now, and listening to how he came to his conclusions, I tend to believe his findings are the accurate history and what we were told is a mix of confusion and ancient legends.

Sal, I have a question, you are saying he taught the Lao Hong Set to Shaolin BEFORE he entered the military? You had told me one time he had been injured in battle, an arrow wound or some such thing, and spent a year there recovering. Does it not make much more sense that THAT is when he would have taught the set?

I have been working on this set for a year myself now, and I have just finally gotten halfway through the 4rth road (hoping to finish it by September)

Also, I am not sure I buy that he was able to absorb the "Soft" aspects in 4 days either. It took me several years of tutelage under my LHBF friend to even get in the ball park.

We spent some time going over the Chen Hsi I (Chen po) legend that says Zhao had learned Taiji ruler from him in his youth, and you were able to at least place them in the same geographic area, at the same time. Doesn't it stand to reason that maybe he got the soft aspects from Taiji Ruler, and just compared methodologies during those 4 days? especially since the Taiji Ruler mechanics are so remarkably similar?

[Sal Canzonieri]

LFJ,
The legend you put forth is the one I was originally taught. It is not unique or un circulated, but after talking to Sal for years about this now, and listening to how he came to his conclusions, I tend to believe his findings are the accurate history and what we were told is a mix of confusion and ancient legends.

Sal, I have a question, you are saying he taught the Lao Hong Set to Shaolin BEFORE he entered the military? You had told me one time he had been injured in battle, an arrow wound or some such thing, and spent a year there recovering. Does it not make much more sense that THAT is when he would have taught the set?

I have been working on this set for a year myself now, and I have just finally gotten halfway through the 4rth road (hoping to finish it by September)

Also, I am not sure I buy that he was able to absorb the "Soft" aspects in 4 days either. It took me several years of tutelage under my LHBF friend to even get in the ball park.

We spent some time going over the Chen Hsi I (Chen po) legend that says Zhao had learned Taiji ruler from him in his youth, and you were able to at least place them in the same geographic area, at the same time. Doesn't it stand to reason that maybe he got the soft aspects from Taiji Ruler, and just compared methodologies during those 4 days? especially since the Taiji Ruler mechanics are so remarkably similar?

Historical records about Zhao's life show that he traveled around China when he was a teenager (remember people then lived a lot less longer than they do now) because he wanted to be a martial art instructor (ah, the folly of youth!). In this pursuit he learned many different things, mostly weapons. ANY GREAT Martial Artist learns to master spear, sword and knife or he is considered nothing. After spending a lot of time learning in Shanxi province, where he most likely learned something like Tong Bi (not the Tong Bei Quan that Dong family developed later, but related to it), which is a type of long fist, often called Hong Quan, that comes from military weapons training (what to do if you drop you weapon), he eventually made his way to Shaolin. BEFORE he went back to his family and joined the military.

At Shaolin, the records they have say only that he stayed there a short time, he was already masterful of martial arts and that they exchanged their Rou Quan for his Lao Hong Quan. That's all it says, even in the Shaolin Encyclopedia that Shi De Gian researched.

Anways, the story about the arrow and recuperating at Shaolin, I never said it was "true", it's a legend, and I think it is about his brother> Many things his successor brother did gets confused with him. Records show that HIS BROTHER MET WITH CHEN Po, not Zhao. Chen Po kept refusing to attend the Emperor's Court. Finally Chen Po was forced to visit and he strongly disliked Zhao's brother, the new emperor. Rumor had it that Zhao was poisoned by his brother, since he dies suddenly in the night by 53 years of age, and only being emperor for a few years.

Now it is possible that he knew Zhao Kuan Yin and Zhao learned from him at some point. There is no way to prove it at this time.
Everything in the Tai Ji Ruler exists in the Shaolin Ape Monkey set and in the Rou Gong sets (such as Luohan 13 Gong). So, who knows what means?

Makes sense that Zhao didn't need to spend too much time learning at Shaolin, since his Hong Quan and their Rou Quan BOTH have their roots in Tong Bi Quan.

As you know, some say that all this is false and that during the 1600s Tong BEI Quan was developed by Dong family and THIS is the real root of Shaolin martial arts and Tai Zu Quan CAME AFTER Tong Bei Quan was developed and that Tai Zu is from really just from the Qing Dynasty. I know that Tong Bei Quan has a set called Tai Zu Chang Quan.
BUT< I think that Tai ZU Chang Quan is from Song Dynasty originally and that this Tong Bei Quan absorbed it later, not the other way around.
Well, until there is more evidence, people can only argue.

[Royal Dragon]

You are right about the confusion. I know the Taiji Ruler story about the chess game is often attributed to Zhao, but then also to his brother who took the throne from him.

There is the second story about Zhao learning from him in his youth though, so BOTH stories may be true.

[GeneChing]

Check out The Rosetta Stone of Traditional Chinese Martial Arts by Salvatore Canzonieri, just posted on our e-zine. We have a downloadible chart, plus Sal's collection of vids on the subject.

[Sal Canzonieri]

Check out The Rosetta Stone of Traditional Chinese Martial Arts by Salvatore Canzonieri, just posted on our e-zine. We have a downloadible chart, plus Sal's collection of vids on the subject.

Thanks very much! Nice to see it available to others.

Stay tuned for my new 200 page book on the subject of how and why Bagua Zhang, Liu He Zinyi / Xingyi Quan, and Taiji Quan are interrelated and have common roots in Ba Shan Fan / Chuo Jiao, Tong Bei Quan, Hong Quan, Taizhu Chang Quan, Wu Quan, Meihua Zhuang, Mizhong, Yue Jia Quan, and more.
It's a mystery "who done it" historical book that traces all the interconnections of "who taught what to whom, when and where" and has many very surprising revelations and vary rare information that I gathered from over 20 years of research interviewing many old practitioners that are no long dead.
If I didn't write it, I would have loved finding a book like this.

[Sal Canzonieri]

This is really outstanding work and a great service to the martial arts community. Very meticulous scholarship.

I asked a Daoist monk here why everyone at these modern wushu temples is doing Taiji as it came through Chen Style which is lifted directly from hong quan, yet they claim more pure lineage than the Chen family directly to Jiang Fa.

Even CCTV was making these kind of claims. I am also sick of hearing that Shaolin is external. Its nonsense. There is internal and there not practicing enough.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMGO2...hp?article=807 This in particular is very well done.

Thanks.

Well, the reason that Chen credits Jiang Fa is all written about in my new book, and I also write about how and when Chen drew from Shaolin, and what exactly was taken.
It's a complicated story and the reason they don't credit Shaolin has to do with a massacre that happened at Shaolin by an invading army of rebels.
Chen style is a merger of Shaolin AND Taoist 13 Postures routine (5 elements and 8 trigrams or directions).
Jiang Fa and others taught the Chen's the Taoist 13 Postures.

But, the irony is that the 13 Postures came from Shaolin originally and they lost it over time. During that time, the Taoists had learned it and developed it into their Wudang Nei Jia Quan style, so now they are best known for the 13 postures.
Again this is all in my new book.
Soon as I get all the comments back from the reviewers I sent it too, I will make the final draft and layout the pages with graphics and then shop it to publishers.

On top of all this, Shaolin in the Qing Dynasty had a Chan Taiji Quan set that was developed by a nun, she had learned Wudang Taiji and merged it with Shaolin Quan to create it. I have seen versions of it on videos at Google video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...st+taiji&hl=en

[Baqualin]

Thanks.

Well, the reason that Chen credits Jiang Fa is all written about in my new book, and I also write about how and when Chen drew from Shaolin, and what exactly was taken.
It's a complicated story and the reason they don't credit Shaolin has to do with a massacre that happened at Shaolin by an invading army of rebels.
Chen style is a merger of Shaolin AND Taoist 13 Postures routine (5 elements and 8 trigrams or directions).
Jiang Fa and others taught the Chen's the Taoist 13 Postures.

But, the irony is that the 13 Postures came from Shaolin originally and they lost it over time. During that time, the Taoists had learned it and developed it into their Wudang Nei Jia Quan style, so now they are best known for the 13 postures.
Again this is all in my new book.
Soon as I get all the comments back from the reviewers I sent it too, I will make the final draft and layout the pages with graphics and then shop it to publishers.

On top of all this, Shaolin in the Qing Dynasty had a Chan Taiji Quan set that was developed by a nun, she had learned Wudang Taiji and merged it with Shaolin Quan to create it. I have seen versions of it on videos at Google video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...st+taiji&hl=en

Awesome!!
Thanks to Gene for publishing the charts & many thanks to Sal for your work!!!! GM Sin has told us for years about Chen drawing from Shaolin (legends of course).....now your putting it all together. Is there any way I can get an autographed copy of the book from you when it comes out???
BQ

[Sal Canzonieri]

Awesome!!
Thanks to Gene for publishing the charts & many thanks to Sal for your work!!!! GM Sin has told us for years about Chen drawing from Shaolin (legends of course).....now your putting it all together. Is there any way I can get an autographed copy of the book from you when it comes out???
BQ

Sure, why not?