Formosa Neijia

My personal martial arts journey

Formosa Neijia random header image

Stan Henning on General Qi

February 19th, 2007 · 5 Comments · CMA history

I’m quoting this whole article by Stan Henning because I find it fascinating, as I do with most things written by this author. General Qi’s book is highly regarded by scholars and the info given here shows how pre-modern MA training was conducted.

General Qi Jiguang’s Approach To Martial Arts Training
By Stanley Henning

Ming General Qi Jiguang (1528-1587), presents his views on martial arts training clearly and concisely in his New Book of Effective Discipline (1561) and Actual Record of Training (1571). [1] In these works, one can see practical application of the best in Chinese military tradition, They reveal that, probably even well before Qi’s time, the martial arts practiced in the villages as part of militia training had gradually evolved into a form of recreation as well, and had become characterized by the “flowery” movements associated with self expression and individual styles. Qi condemned these “flowery” martial arts as undisciplined and inappropriate for military use in combat and emphasized that, “…in training troops, the pretty is not practical and the practical is not pretty…” [2] Qi’s view of the role of boxing as the foundation for developing weapons skills (primarily broadsword and polled weapons in anti-pirate operations) conforms closely to the explanation contained in the Han History Bibliographies (c. 90 A.D.). [3] With this purpose in mind, Qi developed a boxing routine comprised of 32 forms selected from what he considered to be the foremost styles of the day. The result was his chapter titled, “Boxing Classic Essentials”, in the New Book of Effective Discipline. [4]

Although boxing, with its agile movements, was considered to be the foundation for weapons use, it was only one element in Qi’s overall training regimen. The training regimen included: maintaining an overall strong fighting constitution (through remaining “lean and mean”); strong hands and arms through training with heaver than normal weapons; strong feet and legs through running over 600 yards without gasping for breath an, using ankle weights (bags of sand) while running; and overall bodily strength and endurance by training while weighted down with heavier than normal armor. [5] Strength, endurance, and agility were physical traits prized in the Chinese military from earliest times. Weight lifting, long distance running, jumping, climbing, and swimming were among the activities associated with military training and martial arts prowess over the centuries. [6] However, this does not mean that brute strength was considered the determining factor in battle. To the contrary, brain was favored over brawn in the tactics of hand-to-hand combat. This is most clearly brought out in Yu Dayou’s (1503-1580) Sword Classic, which Qi included in its entirety as a chapter in his New Book of Effective Discipline. According to one of Yu’s general formulaic verses, “Use hard force prior to the opponent’s release of force. While the opponent is busy, I calmly wait; I observe his rhythm and let him struggle.” The key to Yu’s tactics is, “Take advantage of the point where his old force has passed and before his new force is released.” [7] Thus, one can see in Ming period military martial arts writings basic theories similar to those which later appear in the so-called taijiquan classics.

Qi combined his demands for physical fitness and effective hand-to-hand tactics into an overall training program which eschewed “flowery” routines and stressed realistic weapons techniques using sparring and striking at targets. Rewards and punishments were used to encourage high proficiency. [8]

I like how he points out that strength training played such a large role in their training. Note that they did study boxing routines as well, even though those would obviously have taken a backseat to weapon skills. But apparently Qi considered boxing to be the base of weapon skills instead of the other way around.

Also, we can clearly see that movements had been “flowerly” for some time, so modern-day wushu is actually carrying on a long tradition. Perhaps we are wrong to blame them for that emphasis. I remember some comments from Kan Ge-wu that sword dancing has been around a long time in China, and even a supposedly rough-and-tumble MA like shuai jiao was primarily used as a performance art (even for the emperor) for quite a long time. So flowerly movement has a long history in the CMA.

Interesting.

Tags:

5 responses so far ↓

  • 1 baichi // Feb 19, 2007 at 3:32 pm

    Aesthetic movement does indeed have a long tradition in CMA. Just think about the different forms of Opera, which almost always involved some kind of martial arts display, changed to entertain the masses (mainly peasants in most cases). Even in books from pre-imperial times you can quote passages which describe martial arts experts or acrobats performing for the king. And it is not easy to tell the two things apart. If I remember correctly, it was a Han emperor who had a group of acrobats and entertainers who also acted as his bodyguards.
    On the other hand, you have to keep in mind the position of Qi Jiguang. He himself was obviously highly skilled and interested in hand-to-hand combat, but his aim was not to teach raw recruits martial arts for years to make them masters in empty-hand combat. There was neither the time to do that nor any use in it. A battle is not decided by the fighting ability of a single soldier. In fact, there is the story about the soldiers of Qi (told by Meng-zi I think), who were ferocious fighters and highly skilled, but they lacked organisation and tactics (of large scale warfare), so they were annihilated.
    Still, it is very interesting to read about Qi’s ideas, and it might be useful to think about the flowery-ness of one’s own practice, and wether one can tolerate that or not.

  • 2 Graham // Feb 19, 2007 at 11:36 pm

    It might be interesting to speculate whether what General Qi, writing in China in the 1500s, meant by “flowery” is what we mean today by “flowery” when talking about WuShu forms.

  • 3 chessman71 // Feb 20, 2007 at 7:49 am

    What he meant may have been different or it may not. Stan Henning’s Chinese is obviously pretty good and from he seems to suggest that the concept is similar, so I’d go with it.

  • 4 baichi // Feb 20, 2007 at 3:48 pm

    I think Graham’s point is well taken, since it is not a question of how good Henning’s Chinese is. Qi may be using exactly the same terms, but the meaning could easily be different. We can only guess what Qi ment in case he gave an in-depth explanation of what he ment by ‘flowery’. Besides, it’s not like there is an absolute objective description of flowery in our time and age. It’s all open to interpretation.
    Most people seem to think that the skills developed through martial arts training are exactly the same as those needed for soldiers. Of course it is not so, and maybe Qi thought of many things as flowery because they were useless for large-scale warfare, but may have made some sense in a different context… who knows?

  • 5 chessman71 // Feb 20, 2007 at 4:44 pm

    “Of course it is not so, and maybe Qi thought of many things as flowery because they were useless for large-scale warfare, but may have made some sense in a different context… who knows?”

    People who read about MA history and Chinese history in Chinese so they understand the context maybe? :)

    Just saying it’s possible.

Leave a Comment