First, are these the same style??
If so, what is the origine of those styles.
If not, as far as the Tai Tzu Hong Chuan goes, is the statement that “the first 4 shorter forms were developed by the Emperor Chao, Kuang Yin himself and the longer 6 were developed by his descendants” an accurate statement??
What, no one does Hong Chuan?
I believe you have the third word wrong. I have seen it as Tai Tzu CHANG Quan. Tai Tzu Long Fist.
Hongquan…there are several flavors and the northern one there are two basic ones. One includes Da Hongquan and Xiao Hongquan only. It is taught as part of the Zhaquan system.
The Tai Tzu version is a northern long fist but different origin and NOT to my knowledge a Hong quan…but I could be wrong.
Hi,
Thanks for responding
I discovered the Tai Tzu Hong Chuan in the mellenium addition of Kung Fu Qigong along with the regular Tai Tzu Chang Chuan. Later I came in contact with several players of a perticular line of Tai Tzu Hong Chuan who claim it is the same art as Tai Tzu Chang Chuan. But apon getting the list of the forms, they are different except both have Yi Lu, Er Lu and a Tai Tzu form.
Some have sugjested that Tai Tzu Chang Chuan, and Tai Tzu Hong Chuan are the same style, but others sugjest they are two seperate systems.
I have the lists of forms names from two lineages, one the Tai Tzu, and the other the Hong. and they are different. I also have a list of forms from Tai Tzu Hong Chuan, and it matches the regular Hong Chuan list. What I don’t have is any historical connection between the two.
I am trying to decide if Tai Tzu Chang Chaun is connected to Tai Tzu Hong Chuan. Are they actually the same style? OR, is Tai Tzu Hong Chaun an early off shoot of Tai Tzu Chang Chuan, OR is Tai Tzu Hong Chuan the same as regular Hong Chuan and has no real connection to Tai Tzu Chang Chuan at all? OR, are all of theses completely seperate systems with no relationship to one another at all other than being in the Long Fist classifaction of movement.
The histrical legand that the first 4 sets of Tai Tzu Hong Chuan were developed by Chao, Kunag yin and the 6 longer sets by his descendants would indicate the two styles are at least related, if not the same thing (Chao Kuang Yin being the founder of Tai Tzu Chang Chuan). BUT, I have only one source (A comercial Tai Tzu tape) that makes that claim. Since the tape has several other inconsistancies, I am trying to verify the relationship, or lack there of, from several other indpendant sources.
Maybe I should be asking if there is any connection between the regular Hong Chuan, and the Sung dynasty Royal court?
Well, here’s a teaser…
I just completed a piece with Gigi Oh on the connection of Taizu Long Fist and Hung Men. It’s sort of like tossing a left-handed monkey wrench into the already muddled research around the ‘hong’ (hung) styles. Hong is one of the most ambiguous terms in CMA since it appears in so many places with completely different contexts. Here, even getting to the chinese character doesn’t save you.
Anyway, you’ll have to watch for this piece, it’ll be in our May June 2003 issue.
There may well have
Hm, very interesting.
We too have a Xaio and Da Hong Chaun. They are TOTALLY different from the Shaolin sets though. I belive they are from the Tai Tzu Hong Chuan, but I don’t know for sure.
I am starting to think that Tai Tzu Chang Chuan was an early off shoot of the Tai Tzu Hong Chuan.
Do you have any info on the 4 short Hong sets being attributed to Chao Kuang Yin himself and the 6 comming fom his decendants?? or should this just be chalked up to the legands trying to connect Tai tzu hong chuan to him?
Gene, do you mean Tai Tzu’s influance on the Southern Hung styles, or the Northern Hong styles?
Originally posted by r.(shaolin)
[B]
I would point out that Song armies were very large and it is highly unlikely that only one style was practiced by an army made up of so many men coming from different regions.
r.(shaolin) [/B]
So true.
This is quite evident in our system, many of the forms are different from each other and apparently come from different influences. It is truely a diverse system.
I think Tai Tzu is like Shrek, you know, an onion, Lots of layers.
I bet by the Southern Sung dynasty, those in the military were doing the Southern Tai Tzu system as basic training. Apon graduating from that, they would get into the Hong Chuan as they moved up the military ladder and became Imperial guards, and the Chao family them selves did the Tai Tzu Chang Chuan. Or most likely followed the same path themselves as far as styles go.
I know a Tai Tzu branch I am in contact with now has 10 Northern forms, but my next question is “When were those forms added?”
They are different in name than the Tai Tzu Hong Chuan, except for Yi Lu, Er Lu and both have a Tai Tzu named form. One being Tai Tzu Hong Chuan, and the other Tai Tzu Chang Chuan.
If they are more reacent, is it possible that Tai Tzu Chang Chuan had 2-3 forms only, and it was considered a graduate style to the Tai Tzu Hong Chuan?
He he he, the more I dig, the more questions I have (Which leads to my now famous “Wild speculations” :eek: )
Gene,
Is Gigi Oh a Tai tzu player? If so, I may want to contact him after I am done with current projects.
RD
First of all, our Publisher Gigi Oh is a woman. She doesn’t practice Taizu, she practices qigong. But she was reporting on Taiwanese master Wang Jinn Fa, who is who you will want to contact. The article is in our next issue, on stands in about two weeks.
Opps, my bad o the he she thing.
Question,
Does Wang Jinn Fa, speak English?
I may be concluding some research on the art here soon. Maybe in a few months, I will be ready to contact him. Would you be willing to do an intro for me?
Taiwan
Wang Jinn Fa does not speak English. However, from the videos of his seminars, I’d rate his skill as quite high. Definately worth checking out if you go. He also seemed very open and easy to approach. If you drop the name of our magazine, he’ll surely remember Gigi. You’ll find out more about him (including his contact info) in our May June 2003. You’ll have to let me know what you think after you read that article.
Yeah, definately.
Quick question, does the artical refer to Hung as in Hungar, or Northern Hong Chaun?
RD - I’m looking at Qi Jiguang’s book right now (a modern annotated version), and there is a footnote where he mentions Song Taizu 32 postures longfist in his list of boxing styles that states:
32 postures longfist: Also called Hong boxing, Song Taizu boxing, Zhao family boxing. A relatively well-known style of boxing in the Ming dynasty, it has been passed down in the Shandong and Hebei areas, where there are those who practice it.
Yeah, I have often seen his 32 move form refered to as Tai Tzu Chnag Chuan. Suposedly 29 moves of it is from Tai Tzu.
Based on what little I know, I’m going to say Qi Jiguang’s 32 move form is his addition to the Tai Tzu style.
As for the area’s it is being practiced, unfortunetly, I dont speak Chinese, nor do i read it. What I am waiting for is to make an english speaking contcat who would be willing to help me get video of the main form.
There appear to be two main branches of Tai tzu, the Shaolin one, and the Folk branches descended from the Chao family (Which have an internal practice to them)
I have just gotten ahold of the first two sections of the long form. There are suposedly 16 in all, but this perticular lineage only has 6 left, the rest are lost. I am dying to find some way to get video of the whole thing, in a format that I could work the set out from.
The two sections I have are about 65-70 moves long. If I am conservative, and say they are 64, and all sections are 64 moves long, there are a possible 1024 techniqes in the long form. I figured that half of that would probably be a beter wild guess though, so i’m estimating 512. I already have the Shaolin 32 move form, which is said to be the closest thing to the original developed by the Emperor. I also have a chart on the 32 move Qi Jiguang form that is detailed enough to rough the set out.
I’m just wondering what the conection to Tai Tzu Hong Chuan is. They are differnt arts, wiht differnt5 forms, but if you look at them, other than the Hong being a bit smoother, they look the same. They have most of the same techniques, but arranged in vastly different orders. Both share certian things I consider “Signature” techniques. The relationship is undeniable. I just want to know what that relationship is.
Chang Quan :
Cha Quan, Hua Quan, Taizuquan, ErLangquan, HongQuan, PaoQuan and to an extent Yanqingquan are all known as ‘Chang Quan’ families and have common traits.
Shaolin Master,
Yes, I know that, but I’m lookig more for an evolutionary, lineage connection.
For example, if I compare “Cha Fist” to Tai Tzu Chang Chuan, I see the similarity in the body mechanics, but Cha Fist has quite a few of it’s own techniques. If I compare the Tai Tzu Chang Chuan to Tai Tzu Hong Chuan, I see a huge number of identical techniques. Although there are differences, it seems to me the organisation, and flow of the forms is what is most significant. If you were to dissasemble both arts, and compare them technique by technique, I think there would be too much similarity to tell them apart. How did this happen? Did an early Hong Chuan founder study Tai Tzu Chang Chuan previously?
This is a source of confusion for me, as I have several people telling me they are two different arts, and several people telling me they are the same art under different names. When I compare them, the Tai Tzu Hong Chuan seems to have better thought out forms, so far as thier arrangement and smoothnes in performance, but otherwise they look to be the same thing to my eye. I may need a more developed eye to see the differences, but at my level of understanding there’s not much difference.
Also, some fo the forms I have on comercial video are labeled Tai Tzu Chang Chuan, but have been identified to me as being Tai Tzu Hong Chuan by Sifu’s I know over seas. Yi Lu and Er Lu specifically. When I sent you a video of me, you recognised the form Yi Lu that I performed, and even commmented that although my performance of it was not very good, I at least had the right “Shape”. This tells me you clearly recognised the set. Is it possible both styles share certain sets?
I don’t know, the more I learn, the more confused I get sometimes. Of course, what I’m seeing as Tai Tzu Chang Chuan sets, might actually be the Tai Tzu Hong Chuan, and that is the source of the confusion.
Comments anyone?
From the early 1950’s All-
RD
The article should be on stands now. It is Hung Men as in Hung Gar, or Hong Jia. I’ve already received some nice comments about the piece. Another researcher, Benny Meng, said it fit into his research about Hung Men quite nicely. I had one Canton Hung Gar guy befuddled though - perhaps he needs a lesson in Chinese history and geography. Taiwan wan’t even on his map, so to speak.
Anyway, check out the piece and tell me what you think.