Is Southern & Northern Praying Mantis Linked?

[AdrianChanWyles]

It is interesting to see the dichotomy that exists between Northern Praying Mantis - and Southern Praying Mantis. The premise being that the two styles, although emphasising the copying of the insect by the same name, developed independently of one another. Wang Lang is said to have invented the northern version toward the end of the Ming Dynasty (1600), and that the Chinese Hakka ethnicity developed the southern version during the 19th century - as a response to oppression experienced at that time.

However, this might be far too simplistic, obscuring some very important facts in the process.

The Hakka (or 'Guest People'), although living in southern China today, actually originated toward the north of China (some Hakka experts maintain that they might even be of non-Han -i.e. 'non-Chinese' ethnic origin), and migrated down through central China toward the south, over a thousand year time span, in a series of migrations triggered (it is thought), by natural disasters, war and famine. The last great migration into Guangdong province was toward the end of the Ming Dynasty (1600 onward), in response to the Manchurian (i.e. 'Jurchen') invasion, that eventually conquered China - forming the Qing Dynsty (1644-1911).

Could it be that migrating Hakka from north and central China, migrated southward, bringing with them a form of Northern Mantis? Perhaps Wang Lang, traditionally associated with the creation of 'Tang Lang' (i.e.'praying Mantis'), actually practiced a style that was much older and preserved within a family lineage - perhaps his own. And if we specualte further - it is well known that there are some Hakka in the south who carry the family name 'Wong' (i.e. 'Wang'), who can even today, trace their family history to an area of Henan.

If migrating Hakkas brought Northern Praying Mantis southward - then why did it change? The answer is simple - the social, economical and political situation in south China brought much suffering to the Hakka people. They were considered an unwanted minority amongst the indigenous peoples. This friction eventually led to all-out warfare (Hakka-Punti Clan Wars 1840-1867), and the Taiping Rebellion (1854-1864). The Hakka, hopelessly outnumbered and compressed into an ever shrinking geographical area to live, had to adapt their culture very quickly to the new situation.

People were being killed at an alarming rate - meaning that Hakka men and Women did not have the time to dedicate themselves to lifelong studies of the martial arts (as had once been the case in north China). Also, many traditional arts had a definite 'external' and a definite 'internal' element or phase to the training. This could take year to practice - and many of the movements were elongated and expansive. In the south of China during the 19th century, the Hakkas had neither leisure time or the necessary space for the elongated practice of the northern styles. The response to this was to 'compact'the 'external' and 'internal' aspects of northern training, into just one training regime - shortening the stances, but maintaining the internal curves of the body (i.e. 'Dragon Backing'), allowing for stabilty at medium to close range. And unlike today, the Hakkas of old fought in extended clan groups - various clans would come together and form 'armies' of thousands of men and women. The emphasis on 'single combat' today, is a modern development - designed to replace or replicate the dangers and vigours of the battlefield.

The southern development of Praying Mantis simply reflects the needs of migrating Hakka in the 19th century - they would always be out-numbered and fighting from the back-foot. This simple strategic and tactical observation is seen clearly in the southern version. The Hakka ancestors of northern origin, existing thousands of years ago in north China, and probably on horse-back, always had the advntage of surprise and speed. Being nomadic, they did not have villages or towns that could be easily identitified and attacked. However, as the Hakka migrated southward, they lost their nomadic ways - gave up their horses and developed their martial arts for fighting on foot. Many martial arts of north China may well have had their origin in this way. As those arts were taken southward, they were changed to represent the new situation. What must be realised, is that Praying Mantis is not the only surviving Hakka style of martial art. Hakkas, by nature, are very secretative and much is deliberately kept hidden.

[AdrianChanWyles]

http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/foru...hp/t-5805.html

This is just one story about the possible origins of southern mantis;

'I have a question for anybody out there who knows the answer. I heard that that Southern Mantis came about when a disciple of a Northern Mantis system got into a fight and killed someone related to a high ranking official in the government. The disciple was then wanted for murder and had to flee to the South. The disciple then changed his system around and then called it Southern Mantis. When he was later questioned, he denied he was the killer saying he knew nothing of Northern Mantis he was someone else who taught Southern Mantis. The story goes something like that. Is there any truth to this?.'

The thread goes on to say that Lung Ying and Bak Mei are both Hakka styles - but that 'structurally', the northern and southern mantis are related. This is a contextual problem. Of course, there is no reason why either style should be related - other than the fact that both styles are supposedly based upon the obervation of a Mantis. I also note in English translation - the peculiar smelling of the 'Preying', and 'Praying' - which would suggest a differing Chinese character for each. But there are many styles that have evolved, one from the other - with the latter version bearing little or no resemblance to the original;

1) Fujian White Crane - Goju Ryu Karate Do
2) Shaolin Gongfu - Nippon Sorinji Kempo
3) Bagua - Japanese Aikido.
4) Chinese straight sword - Japanese curved sword.
5) Variants of Longfist Gonfu - Muay Thai. (The Thais originated in Yunnan).

There are many more - so we may conclude that just because a system does share the 'same' structural dynamics - that does not necessarily mean that it is not related to some older style. And throughout Chinese histories - styles have invariably travelled north to south. And there is the rather thorny issue of how styles were created - as illustrated by the above quote. On the Shaolin Gong Fu Institute web page - it says that ALL Hakka arts developed in Guangxi and are called 'Juk Lum'. Whilst research a thesis a few years back, I remember a story that says that a Chu family member worked in the kitchen of the Fujian Shalin temple, and secretly copied the monks training regimes, etc. Another tells of two sisters named Chu being taught a system by a Shaolin nun, etc. The stories go on and on. The one that you believe - will be the right one for you - and who is to say that there might not be a glimour of truth in all of it somewhere?

The point is this - the origins of southern praying mantis are obscure and treat Hakka history totally out of context - as if there has been no hstory. There is a oil painting of an artist's impression of one of the Taiping battles with Qing troops - the artist was an eye witness - the Hakka warriors were stripped to their waistes, they wore a head-band and carried spears in rows three ranks deep. The stancs were long and deep. And it is said that in the Hakka clans-Punti war - thw Hakka woemn would race the men toward the enemy to see who could kill one first. The 19th century was a time of great upheavel - and the convenient 'soundbites' of martial history, when viewed in the light of the actual events that happened - appear totally out of place and lacking in context. Further more, the implications are stark for Hakkologists - if there were no Hakka martial arts prior to the 19th century - then it would imply that there was never any great northern origin or culture. And yet the linguistic structure of the Hakka language is clearly northern in origin - and Patricia Lim - a Cambridge graduate originally from Hong Kong - Herself a Hakka - is of the view that the original Hakka language formed the basis for Guan Yu - or old Manderin. And what other evidence do we have for northern origination?

1) Clearly observable migration routes southward over two thousand years.
2) A Language of Northern origin.
3) A unique cuisine.
4) The myth and legends passed on in families by the elders.
5) Clan houses in the New territories that bear the name of an area in Henan - the place migrated from.
6) Clan villages with the clan name stone - bearing prominent clan members and areas of origination - all northward.
7) The refusal to bound Hakka women's feet - as was the Han tradition.
8) The well known fighting spirit and thirst for education.
9) The differing physical characteristics.


The Hakkas are often described by non-Hakka as 'warlike' and troublesome - hardly a description befitting a people who did not possess effective martial arts prior to the southern migrations - or indeed the catastrophic 19th century!

The fact that the Hakkas effectively lost the 19th century wars, led to a time of the denial of Hakka culture - and many Hakka bringing their children up to act, speak and think that they are Cantonese. This has served to obscure much history and tradition, and what has survived - may not be the full story - or indeed , be in historical context.

The time it takes to 'penetrate' the deepest essence of an art - is infact the time it takes to penetrate the deepest essence of our minds. Regardless of physical structure of the art learnt - in the end, the physical structure is transcended and transformed by insight. In times of existential war - NO ONE - has the leisure time to pursue a gentlemanly path - and considering the millions of people whi died in the 19th century - not to excellerate learning in a time of utmost need for survival, would be suicidal. This is why any recent martial history that DOES NOT contain an influence or a mention of the horrendous death and destruction that befell the Hakka not even 200 years ago - to my mind, smirks of 'denial', and post defeat propaganda that depicted Hakka culture as somehow 'inferior'. It simply does not make any sense not to have a mention of a happening that nearly toppled the Qing Dynasty! And when stood in their huge armies - the Hakka did not advance in high stances, shuffling to maintain technique - on the contrary - they charged across open ground, to close with the enemy as quickly as possible. Whatever the 'truth' of the matter as to the origins of northern and southern praying mantis - one thing is sure - we will believe whatever version of the truth best suits our current requirements. And we may also say - that it is only in times of relative peace, that martial arts can be learnt in a leisurely manner - because the teachers and students are not getting killed are an alarming rate. One teacher dying - effectively removes that knowledge for all time.

[Cang Long]

Hello Adrian,
What was the Hakka number one battlefield weapon of choice and why?

[AdrianChanWyles]

Quoted By canglong:
'What was the Hakka number one battlefield weapon of choice and why?'

Hi There!

That is a very good question indeed - and one that I have not been asked before. I thought that I would share the above posts - as they were the product of discussion elsewhere.

Now to your question - I am afraid that the best answer I can give is rather cryptic - but bear with me. The Hakkas were/are reknowned for three outstanding cultural traits;

1) Farming.
2) Scholarly study.
3) Martial study.

In the Hakka pre-history, when the norhern Hakka ancestors rode into battle on horse-back - the six foot spear - used in either the left or right hand (often both), was the favoured weapon or its flexibility on the battlefield. Of course, stirrups were unknown at this time, so the horses (i.e. Steppe ponies) were controlled primarily with the legs, which gripped the horse around the middle and literally steered it - using the rider's bodyweight as the momentum of directional movement. The requirement for the legs to be able to do this, serves as the basis for 'horse stance' (i.e. Ma Bu) training. Of course, not having stirrups meant that Hakka warriors could mount and dismount at rapid intervals as situations required. Coupled with the spear, would have been a variant of the northern 'Jian' (i.e. straight sword) - its relative reach being something of an advantage. Nomadic fighting often involved either the chasing down of an opponent - or the moving away from an opponent - the longer sword is ideal for this. This is all supplemented by the use of the body without weaponry - incase the warrior is left without arms in combat.

Over time, the battlefield shifted and evolved. The loss of the horse created a more or less ground based martial system - that then diversified further into the many Hakka styles in existance today.

But perhaps the most important weapon of the Hakka - is a strong and clear mind, that can penetrate through all adversity, and see the peaceful essence beyond.

[Cang Long]

- I am afraid that the best answer I can give is rather cryptic - but bear with me. The Hakkas were/are reknowned for three outstanding cultural traits; Adrian,
Not a problem around here we understand that Chinese Martial Art history is one part written history, one part insider information and one part legend. Thank you for you answer.

[Cang Long]

Cynikal Mantis,
For your review...

[AdrianChanWyles]

Well, if a Mantis can 'Pray' - I am sure it can be cynical!:)

I was looking at how Okinawan Karate developed into its modern incarnation. Basically, after the Japanese invaded Okinawa - people were forced to use their Chinese originated arts in a new and specific way. Karate today looks very different from the physical structure of the Chinese arts that gave it birth. However, unlike the link between Northern Praying Mantis and Southern Praying Mantis - the link between Karate and its earlier Chinese forms is still known and is common knowledge. The Karate Upper Block evolved to trap a Samurai swordsman with his hands holding a raised sword above his head in typical Japanese fashion - with the Karate man's forearm preventing the downward 'slice', the Karate man could then drive his conditioned hands into the wooden chest armour of the Samurai. Today, the average Karate style teaches he Upper Block to block straight punches the face, but anyone with combat experience will know that an Upper Block is too slow for this. In the Chinese systms, the Upper Block does not stop just above the forehead, but rather 'sweeps' attacks from weapons or body parts 'away' from the head and body. Social and historical forces changed Chinese Gungfu into Okinawa Karate - and yet physically they look as if they could not possibly be connected in anyway! We know that they are. China is vast, and she has many 'histories', all over-lapping and vying for supremacy. Ethnic groups will have their own view of the world, and these views can be subsumed by the 'official' history of the State - as is happening today in Mainland China. Modern Chinese history is also very bloody and destructive - this compounds matters even more. Just a thought.

[Cynikal Mantis]

Northern Praying mantis and southern praying mantis, are not said to be linked (from what i have reasearched into). They do however contain similarities. It is said that Northen praying mantis was created aroun 1600 and southern mantis about 1800. If two separate people study the same insect then what each indvidial takes from what he is studying will be different, as no two people are the same so it is reasnoble that Wang and Chow ah nam reconised the mantis as a feirce and deadly insect, and with so many animal styles allready coded they could of seen the potential style in the mantis. Thus creating styles from the same insect but in different era`s and locations!!! This is just my oppinion though I dont really know that much about Northen mantis but am starting to find intrest in it!!!!

[AdrianChanWyles]

I think it all depends upon how the evidence is viewed. I fully acknowledge that when viewed a certain way (perhaps the most obvious way), it would seem almost ludicrous to assert or assume a 'direct' link between Northern Praying Mantis and Southern Praying Mantis. For a start, Southern mantis is known as 'Hakka Kuen' (i.e. Guest Famly Fist), and is associated with southern Hakka people - whilst Northern Praying Mantis is not associated with Hakka people and originated in the north of China (Shandong province). Each Hakka sub-style of Southern Praying Mantis has its own unique origination - all apparently 'unconnected' - whilst the Northern version has its own origination story - on the face of it, the two arts appeared literaly thousands of miles apart in space, and perhaps two to three hundred years apart in time - and there would appear no connection at all.

That is definitely one way of looking at it - and perhaps the most common way at the moment. It is an opinion that is in vogue. Counter opinions are seldom popular because they tend to tread on too many 'sacred' toes!

The above opinion - although apparently logical, is terribly flawed, nonetheless. Why? Here is a list;

1) The Hakka people DID NOT originate in the south of China, but come Central North China thousands of years ago. There are even theories of non-Han origination outside of China, in the Altai Mountains. It is only within the last four hundred years that the Hakka have migrated into the far south of China, where they are found today. They migrated southward over the last two thousand years, in various stages movement, usually triggered by war and famine. They were once northern people, and are now southern people. However, they are not indigenous southerners.

2) Southern Hakka Kuen could not have developed in the south, just one or two hundred years ago. The Hakka are reknowned warriors, and have been for thousands of years. They brought their 'northern' arts southward, where, due to environmental pressure, much of the northern style was lost and replaced by a more relevant style (rather like Karate evolving out of Gongfu).

3) The Hakka-Punti Clan Wars (1840-1867), and the Taiping Uprising (1854-1864), both huge Hakka socio-military movements in southern and central China, led to the death of at least 20 million people and saw the Hakka people defeated and purged. Their culture was denied and their language banned. At this time, a rupture with the past occured. Hakka martial arts were either lost or practiced in secret. A break with the past led to a need to invent new origination stories as to the beginnings of Hakka martial arts, so as not to attract the attention of the non-Hakka Chinese authorities. Overtime, the true and real stories of northern origination was lost - and we were left only with the new stories.

4) The two Praying maintis arts suffered a permanent split that has not been repaired to this day. Overtime, the split has widened. But it is still possible, with a discerning eye, to see where they are connected.

As I said above, it all depends upon how the evidence is viewed. Above is an alternative view.

Thanks.

[Cynikal Mantis]

The traditions of the Chow Gar and Kwong Sai Jook Lum branches each maintain that their respective founders Chow Ah-Nam and Som Dot created their styles after witnessing a praying mantis fight and defeat a bird. Such inspiration is a recurring motif in the Chinese martial arts and can be found in the legends of Northern Praying Mantis, both White Crane styles, T'ai Chi Ch'üan, and Wing Chun.

However, the traditions of the Chu family branch contend that the name "Southern Praying Mantis" was chosen to conceal from Qing forces its political affiliations by pretending that this esoteric style of Ming loyalists was in fact a regional variant of the popular and widespread Praying Mantis style from Shandong.

Adrian if history is your thing then you are more capeable of findind out the answers you want, the truth is though we are talking hundreds of years ago and none or little litriture written about it in its time. The only evidence comes from word of mouth and there are probaly grandmasters who share the secret but do not wish to prevail it.

[AdrianChanWyles]

Good and helpful post! Thank you.

I think that there is a narrative problem for Chinese arts practiced outside of general milleu of Chinese culture. In the New Territories, Hong Kong, much culture remained undisturbed for centuries. What is known in the outside world, is the tip of the iceburg, so to speak. After-all, it is in languages other than Chinese, and the transmissions are on going. As I am sure you are aware of, Chinese culture is made up of checks and balances - one family can do anything without virtualy all other families being aware. Chinese culutre outside of these checks and balances, tends to be a one dimensional affair - with much 'everydayness' literally missing. Chinese culture, is, after-all, far more than an hour or two in a training hall, one or two days aweek! Also, the mainland government outlawed the 'making-up' of lineages that were blatantly false - which were designed to bring 'face' to a certain family. With false lineages came fabricated history. With the Hakka - history is not so much 'hidden', but rather repressed. Much of what passes as 'history' outside of the Hakka ethnicity, is infact nothing more than the propaganda of defeat. In my local area (Sutton, south London), the Hakka are in the majority, and the Cantonese in the majority - but due to cultural pressure, the Hakka allow the few Cantonese to control the community - even the local Chinese school teaches Canonese language over Hakka! This mindset was set into place after the defeat of the Hakka armies in the 19th century. And it just o happens that Hakka Kuen, as a product of this mindset, has adopted a psuedo-history whereby it is said that it orignated in the south, etc. This deprives the Hakka of its rightful hstory. I think that there is more to this than meets the eye.

Anyway, I am very grateful to you.

Thanks.

[Cang Long]

Adrian,
Thank you for your interesting and inforamtive views. I am enjoying learning from all the post being made on this topic.

[AdrianChanWyles]

Well, there are numerous viewpoints about gungfu - as you are aware. And Gene Ching once said to me that much of martial history is oral anyway - so in a sense, history is very much up for grabs. I suspect that the true nature of Hakka arts, and the possible connection (or lack of it) between Northern and Southern Praying Mantis is going to be probably something inbetween all the entrenched viewpoints - my own included.

Chinese history (like many other 'historys') can be very complexed. We all know that modern WuShu is not the 'real' traditional arts of Old China - and yet the dogmatic Mainland government behaves in such a way so as to 'deny' this fact. So we are left with a whole new generation of people, in China and abroad, who think that a government must always be 'right'. So they accept without question. However, the Chinese outside of China never underwent the trauma of the Communist Revolution, and by and large, still practice their traditional arts. The Hakka left China hundreds of years before the Nationalist and Communist Revolutions and take-overs. The rhetoric the earliest migrants brought with them, was the propaganda of defeat from the bloody 19th century. I can't help but think that much of what passes as Hakka history today, is infact a product of this propaganda. And many Hakka intellectuals are now striving to uncover the pre-19th century history, to set the record straight. The history passed down in old Hakka families does not tally with the official history that s available on the Net.

Thank you for your kind words.

[Cang Long]

Adrian,
Yes so much of what you say is true yet I always feel that "the truth is out there" we have the oral, the insider information and the writen histories to draw upon but beyond that regarding this particular subject we have the physical elements of the arts themselves which give us a greater insight as well. There is always someone a teacher, a master, a member of a particular era who lived to witness some of the things we question and slowly we can put some of our questions to rest with some good honest effort on our part and the teaching of people qualified to teach us those things we can not learn any other way "Hou Chun San Sao".

If you enjoy martial arts you must enjoy building a puzzle because in this building there is much joy and satifaction. Mostly though when you receive Hou Chun San Sao you can take pride in the fact that you are learning something of value that someone of note wants you in particular to learn and understand and to continue.

Keep up the good works

Good health always

[TAYLOR]

Cynical Mantis and Adrian,

Thanks for sharing your viewpoints and info regarding the northern and southern mantis systems. The history of the Hakka people is certainly not discussed in here (Arizona) in history classes. Most people have a difficult time getting people to pay attention to their own family history.

Either way, historical occurrences have seemed to play important roles in the development of all kung fu (Northern or Southern).

Again, I appreciate your sharing and look forward to more.

Respectfully,
Taylor

[Cang Long]

For your review:
Southern Chow Gar Praying Mantis kung fu belongs to the Hakka portion of the Chinese Martial arts. There are many theories regarding the development and its origins of these arts. But generally speaking the Hakka martial arts, as we know them today has a history that date back to some 600 of 700 years. The Hakka Chinese race are the only race in China that do not have a province of their own, unlike the Cantonese people who have Canton, Fukienese people have Fukien and so on. Therefore the Hakka people which means Guest family instead have relied on migration through China to the East, South, North etc. some settling down in the surrounding hills to become farmers. Some Hakka groups even migrated had far as Vietnam. So what is known about these Hakka Martial arts? Here is a short list of some of those famous Hakka styles of Martial arts

http://www.martialartschannel.co.uk/hakka.html

[AdrianChanWyles]

Originally posted by TAYLOR
Cynical Mantis and Adrian,

Thanks for sharing your viewpoints and info regarding the northern and southern mantis systems. The history of the Hakka people is certainly not discussed in here (Arizona) in history classes. Most people have a difficult time getting people to pay attention to their own family history.

Either way, historical occurrences have seemed to play important roles in the development of all kung fu (Northern or Southern).

Again, I appreciate your sharing and look forward to more.

Respectfully,
Taylor

Thank you TAYLOR. I think the work of Mr Lee M Lock and Professor Clyde Kiang are pivotal if true Hakka history is to be re-discovered.

[Cang Long]

Thank you TAYLOR. I think the work of Mr Lee M Lock and Professor Clyde Kiang are pivotal if true Hakka history is to be re-discovered. Adrian,
Though I don't know them now I will definetely look into their work. Are you currently studying Mantis or have you in the past or would you like to in the future.

[AdrianChanWyles]

Thank you Cang Long. Interesting. OK - so many stabs are Hakka history are either unintentially incomplete - or plain wrong, I think the research quoted is better than most general histories, but incomplete. The time scale (it gives) for the existance of Hakka martial arts does pre-date the founding of Southern Praying mantis - which is a step in the right direction. However, a major hakka migration occured circa 1600-1644AD, which saw the Hakka migrat into and around Guangdong province, retreating in the face of Manchu (i.e. 'Qing') military victories. So it is safe to assume that the Hakkas had their own Gongfu at this time. Prior to this date, the Hakkas are known to have migrated southward during the collapse of the Northern Song Dyanasty (960-1126AD) - where they helped stabalise the Southern Song Dynasty (1127-1279AD), The last Emperor of which - Bing Di was literally driven into Fujian and then southern Guangdong by the advancing Mongolians. There is a story that thousands of Hakka women dressed in men's clothing and formed up as an army infront of the advancing Mongolians - who were so shocked to see an army that they had not known about or prepared for, suddenly block their path. The story goes that the Mongolians retreated rather than face unexpected opposition - this action help save the Southern Song Dynasty for a little longer. So we may assume from this evidence that Hakka fighting arts existed over 800 years ago.

Over the last two thousand years, there have been well documented Hakka migrations - if would be rather odd to assume that their martail arts developed well over half through the migration process. After-all, the Qin Dyansty was Hakka, that was well known for its weaponry and martial arts and that existed 2200 years ago!

Thank you.

[AdrianChanWyles]

Originally posted by Cang Long
Adrian,
Though I don't know them now I will definetely look into their work. Are you currently studying Mantis or have you in the past or would you like to in the future.

Mantis, as I know it - exists WITHIN the outer Structure of our Long Fist style. Southern Hakka Kuen, looks, to me, like th inner structure of our style, but without the Long Fist superstructure.

The Fung Nang (Pheonix Eye) exists as a 'hidden' technique. That is why I think that post 1867 Haka Manits is incomplete.

[Cang Long]

Over the last two thousand years, there have been well documented Hakka migrations - if would be rather odd to assume that their martail arts developed well over half through the migration process. After-all, the Qin Dyansty was Hakka, that was well known for its weaponry and martial arts and that existed 2200 years ago! Adrian,
This begs the question how much did they (Hakka) influence the existing martial arts that they encountered during the migration as well as how much were the Hakka arts influenced by these same arts and how can we decipher between the two now?

[AdrianChanWyles]

Well, there is a school of thought that suggests that 'much' of Chinese martial culture is Hakka in origin - but this does not go down too well amongst other Chinese ethnic groups, or those practicing this or that style. Even Wing Chun is of northern Chinese origin - and is thought to have migrated southward with the Tang people. However, I was recently contacted by someone who suggested that the Fatshan variant of Wing Chun is Hakka in origin?

[Cang Long]

How does that connect to Shao lin if at all? Again interesting

[AdrianChanWyles]

Hakka martial arts, and the Shaolin tradition do intersect quite admirably. How? Well, the idea that a 'foreign' religion could take root in China, happened during the Northern Wei Dynasty (389-535AD). The Hakka are said to be descendents of the Xiong Nu (Fierce-People), a nomadic tribe that raided and invaded China from time to time. Infact, the people who found the Qin Dyansty 210BC-206AD), were sinotised Xiong Nu. The people of the Northern Wei were also sinotised Xiong Nu. Bodhidharma visited the Shaolin Temple of Song Shan in 520AD - during the last years of the Northern Wei. To the Northern Wei, Buddhism, fused with Daoism and Confucianism was perfectly allowable and encouraged, together with the idea that martial arts and spirituality could go hand in hand. Infact, much of what we consider 'Chinese', is of non-Han origin. The Northern Wei, and the other non-Han dynasties of the north of China, help shape what we consider Chinese culture to be today.

Inshort - the people who became known as the 'Hakka', are also known in Chinese history as the 'Xiong Nu'. High stanced, static styles could not have been the original nomadic styles.

[Op108wc]

Hakka - Origin

There has been some debate about the origin of Hakka as a Han derivative. Here is some more evidence that Hakka is the true Han ethnic group.

1. The Great Wall built by Qin Shihuangdi extended to Lin Tiao in Gansu, which is about 100 km west of Long3 Xi1 (the original town for Hakka Lees) By definition, Qin people were true "Chinese" (Chine = Qin).
2. The Great Wall was further extended by Han Wudi to Yu4 Men2 Guan (Jade Gate) and Yang Guan (Sun Gate) which were at the northwestern tip of Gansu Province. This is called the He2 Xi1 Zou3 Lang2 (the corridor west of the River). In 1980s, a Japanese/Chinese expedition went there and made a TV series, shown in both US and Hong Kong.(It is called "Silk Road" for the English edition and "Ba1 Qian1 Li3 Lu4 Yun2 He2 Yue4" (Eight Thousand Miles of Cloud and Moonlight) for the Chinese title).
3. In Tang dynasty, Wang Wei's very famous poem "Yang2 Guan1 San1 Die2" (The three Stanza/Movements of Yang Guan) clearly indicates "There won't be old friends west of Yang Guan". So, east of Yang Guan was under the sovereignty of China during Han and Tang.
4. The Atlas of the People's Republic of China (by CIA. 1971) presents a map of the ethnolinguistic groups in China, dividing them into the following major groups:
A. Sino-Tibetan - includes Han, Hui, Tibeto-Burman, Tai, Miao-Yao. Hakka, Kan(Gan), Xiang, Wu, Min, Mandarin, Cantonese are classified under Han language system.
B. Altaic - Turkic, Mongolian, Korean, Tungusic
C. Indo-European - Tadzhik
D. Austroasiatic - Mon-Khmer
E. Uighur

The Altaic languages are multisyllable languages, clearly distinguished from Hakka, Mandarin and all the Han dialects. Spoken Japanese should be closer to Altaic language in certain ways although kanji was adopted.

#top

History of Migrations

[Revised Feb 10, 1997]

There have been some debate about the origin of Hakka people whether they belong to "Han" people or a minority from "Xiongnu". From most of the evidence gathered, it can be concluded that Hakkas are likely Han people rather than a derivative from the Xiongnu.

Hakka people originated in central China and gradually migrated south to flee from war and famine. There were five major migrations according to the Hakka historian Lo Xiang Lin:

1. East Jin2 (317 -420 A.D.), Sui dynasty (581-618 A.D.) - Due to "Wu Hu Luan Hwa"(5 barbarian intruding Zhong Hua), Hakkas originated from Shanxi moved to Henan, and then towards the Yangtze river, settling in Hubei, south Henan, Anhui, and Jiangxi.
2. Tang dynasty (618-907 A.D.) to North Song/Liao2 (960-1127 A.D.) - Particularly due to Huang Chao rebellion (880 A.D.), Hakkas migrated further south from Henan toward south Anhui, southeast Jiangxi, southwest Fujian and north of Guangdong.
3. South Song and Jin1 (1127-1279 A.D.), Yuan dyanasty (1271-1368 A.D.) to Ming dynasty (1368-1644 A.D.) - Due to Jin1 invasion, Hakka migrated to north and east of Guangdong, establishing a strong influence. Before the Song dynasty, the "Hak" was used in broad definition, for those migrated South. As the migrated groups assimilated with the Xiang group (Hunan, Hubei), Gan group (Jiangxi), Min-Yue group ( most of Fujian), the "Hak" during Song dynasty then was used in narrow definition referring to those migrated South and maintained their independent identity or the Hakkas as we know today.
4. Early Qing dynasty (1644-1866 A.D.) - Manchurians force Hakka to migrate to central Guangdong, the coastline of Guangdong, Sichuan, Guangxi, Hunan, and Taiwan.
5. Late Qing dynasty (after 1867 A.D.) - Resulted from the defeat of Taiping Tian Guo, many Hakkas fled to Hainan Island, Guangxi, Taiwan and overseas. An important event for overseas Hakka was the establishment of a Hakka state, Lan Fang Guo by Lo Fangbo.

Another theory (proposed by Professor Fan Qi of National Central University) traced the earliest Hakka to late Qin dynasty. According to professor Fan, the three periods of migration and the settlements are :

1. Qin - north Pearl River
2. Jin, Wu-Hu-Luan-Hua - Fujian
3. South Song - Nanjing to Hanzhou, Wanzhou, East Pearl River

When Qin ShiHuangDi sent Zhao4 Tuo2 to administer Guangdong. After Qin ShiHuangDi died, Zhao declared himself king of NanYue kingdom, independent from Qin, and set up the capital near Guangzhou. The kingdom included Fujian, Guangdong to Guangxi. Zhou Tuo and about 200,000 of his people (mostly soldiers) were originally from different parts of central China. This sizable population was the earliest settlement of Central Plain Hans in Guangdong. Even now, Guangdong remains as a province with the highest diversity of dialects. The Hakka dialect in the northern part of Guangdong is called "North River Hakka" which is slightly different from the "East River Hakka" from subsequent migrations via Fujian and Jiangxi.

Due to the general belief by Hakka that they are "Han" people, the Hakka people are extremely diligent in keeping clan/family genealogy records in hope that they would go back to their hometown in North China. No other Chinese groups keep an in-depth clan/family genealogy as complete as the Hakkas.

For a sample of representative genealogy of the major Hakka families, please see our Genealogy Page. This will be continuously updated by members who have the records, many of which have been kept for hundreds of years.

#top

Hakka and Xiongnu

There has been some discussion on the origin of Hakka and its relationship with Han and Xiongnu. The following is a collection of information intended to further explore this concept.

The definition of Han should be traced to Han dynasty as a conglomeration of the various tribes Hua µØ , Xia®L , ManÆZ , Yi¦i , Rong¦¥ , Di¨f during the Chunqiu-Zhanguo ¬K ¬î ¾Ô °ê era. Although the unification was actually done in Qin¯³ dynasty, historically Qin has been labeled a negative period in Chinese history. So, even the word "Chinese" was derived from "Chin" (Qin) as it was known to the west at that time, Chinese people rather identify with Han than Qin. To that effect, Han people is in fact an inclusive term of many tribes.

North of Han are a number of nomadic tribes which are more distinct in their language, custom, and physical features: Xiongnu
¦I ¥£ , XianbeiÂA ¨õ , Wuyuan¯Q «® , FuYu¤Ò ¾l ,Wusun¯Q ®] , Dingling¤B ¹s , Jiankun°í ©ø . In the south there were southwest Yi¦è «n¦i , southern Man«n ÆZ , and the Hundred Yues ¦Ê ¶V .

At the end of Han dynasty, there was a major integration of the northern tribes with the Han people. From the 4th century, Xiongnu, xianbei, Jie, Di, Jiang from the north established their kingdoms and moved to central China.

The composition of Xiongnu is no less complicated than Han. During Han dynasty, Xiongnu became a major tribe in the north, covering Xinjiang to northeast China, driving Wuyuan and Xianbei to Liaodong¿ñ ªF , Liaoxi¿ñ ¦è . Wuyuan and Xianbei both helped Han to fight Xiongnu, and some of them adopted Han culture. In the middle of this, there were a lot of mixing between Xiongu, Xianbei and Wuyuan.

Due to an internal dispute of inheritance, Xiongnu split into south Xiongnu and north Xiongnu. 52 BC, South Xiongnu led by HuHanYe©I Áú ¨¸ surrendered his 5000 people and settled in Shanxi¤s ¦è . They guard the border for Han and fought against the north Xiongu. During Han HeDiº~ ©M «Ò period, there were 230,000 south Xiongnu under the sovereignty of Han. They started to intermarry Han.

North Xiongnu finally got defeated by a combined force of Xianbei, Dingling(from Siberia), south Xiongnu and Han. Around 90 AD, 400,000 north Xiongnu surrendered to Han. Han sent back the south Xiongnu to take over the territory of north Xiongnu. Part of north Xiongnu's territory was also occupied by Xinabei. Some of the south and north Xiongnu people did settle down in Han territories. The rest of the defeated north Xiongnu moved westward to Siberia and perhaps Europe. They were probably referred to as the Huns by the Europeans.

There were 19 tribes of Xiongnu settling in Han territories. During WeiÃQ dynasty, the decendents of HuHanYe changed the name to Liu ¼B (that is how it got confused. Liu Bang ¼B ¨¹ of Han dynasty was about 400 years earlier). The total number of Xiongnu was about several hundred thousand.

During Jin®Ê dynasty, the population of all Chinese was 2.45 million while around 280 AD, about 260,000 Xiongnu were allowed to settled in Shanxi region. However, they did not receive equality treatment with Han, and were never recognized as part of the Han group. Liu Yuan ¼B ²W was a Xiongnu who totally adopted the Han culture and used Han language. He later established Han kingdom º~ °ê (304-318 AD, which is NOT to be confused with the Han dyansty). They finally took Henan ªe «n and Shanxi¤s ¦è , and destroyed West Jin ¦è ®Ê . Liu Yuan claimed to be a nephew of the Liu family of Han dynasty and adopted Han emperors as his ancestors. He even held ceremonies twice a year to commemorate the Han emperors. EVEN SO, the Xiongnu Liu did not gain the confidence of the Han people. The Xiongnu noblemen were only treated as peasants and servants by the Han group. Finally the Xiongnu decendent Liu Yao ¼B Â` changed the name of the kingdom to Zhao »¯ («e »¯ ¡^ , and abandoned the Liu Bang "Han" ancestry. The Xiongnu "Han" kingdom was later conquered by Hou Zhao «á »¯ led by Shi Le ¥Û °Ç of a Jie½~ tribe. Hou Zhao divided the Chinese territory with East Jin at Huai River²a ¤ô .

The wars between the xiongnu "Han" kingdom and Jie, and the downfall of West Jin caused the southward migration of the Han tribe. And this was thought to be the first major maigration of Hakka (Lo Hsiang Lin). Jie ½~ tribe have high nose bridge and deep eye sockets, easily recognized. When Shi Le's nephew became the emperor, a Han general Ran Min ¥T ¶{ overthrew Hou Zhao and slaughtered all people with high nose bridge. This indicates an extreme ethnic conflict existed between the Han and non-Han at that time, close to the ethnic cleansing we see today in Bosnia.

It is likely that to avoid genocide, some Xiongnu disguised as Han and move to the south with the Han. Many Han aristocrats also had hundreds to thousands of Xiongnu servants and soldiers. However, Jin dynasty is a period with highly distinct class difference. It is difficult for someone with a clearly distinct physical feature to infiltrate Han even as a civilian unless there was some inter-ethnic marriage or affiliation with the Han aristocrats. It was almost impossible for a xiongnu to become a nobility among Han. The number of Xiongnu who could mingle with Han and fled to the south could not be in great number. Culturally speaking, although Liu Yuan was totally Sinicized (Hanized), most of the Xiongnu inhabitants in central China could not have received the kind of education. It would be quite amazing if the Xiongnu decendents could upbring so many famous names like Han YuÁú ·U , Wang YangMing ¤ý ¶§ ©ú , Zhu Xi¦¶ ¿Q ....

If the Hakka language was really a Xiongnu tongue they maintained, they would not have survived at all in East Jin territory. They would have been all massacred. So Hakka language must be at least the language spoken by Han people during Jin dynasty if not earlier. As indicated by the architecture of Hakka 5-Phoenix Building¤_ »ñ ¼Ó , the residents cannot be just ordinary civilians, as the structure is like a miniaturized Imperial palace. They have to be related to the emperor or key court officials. It is difficult to imagine that under such extreme ethnic hostility and class distinction at that time, that Hakka could be derived from Xiongnu and enjoyed such treatment in Han occupied territories. (How many Bosnians can disguise as Moslims, or Serfs, or vice versa?)

Even if some Hakkas were Xiongnu, their language, behavior must be totally integrated with Han to survive this era. Culturally speaking, if certain Hakka were Xiongnu decendents, they should be totally indistinguishable from the Hans. It is not impossible, but unlikely that 400 years can upgrade the identity and class of Xiongnu to equal the Hans. Even nowadays with all the communication tools and education, African Americans took more than 200 years to gain their current social status.

In conclusion, the theory that Hakkas were derived from Xiongnu needs a lot more substantial support. However, it cannot be excluded that some Hakkas do have blood relationship with Xiongnu. Whatever the situation, Hakka culture should be mainly Han culture and not Xiongnu culture.

#top

Notes:

Clyde Kiang proposes that all Hakkas were "sinicized" Xiongnu(Huns) assimilated with Han. Based on that, he claims Hakkas are not even indigenous Chinese. That is a crucial point of the debate. Unfortunately, there are some very fundamental errors in his book that even a layman would not make in defining Hanº~ . Here are some interesting quotations:

{Kiang : The Hakka Odyssey - p.77
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word han in English is an ancient form of Khan which is the turkish word meaning lord, or prince, but originated in Tartars......Clearly the Chinese character Han derives from the sound of what the rulers called themselves Han (Khan) in their mother tongue. This pictophonetic character is a phonogram for water, representing the Mongolian sound of han. Therefore, the original Han people signifies the people of sinicized Huns or barbarisan Mongols dominant cultural group in China....}

The Mongolian "Khan" (or "Han") is only a sound that happen to be same as the Han people. Khan as in Gingis Khan is written in word as "sweat"¦½ which is only a phonetic translation. It surely means prince or lord, but it is totally way off from what the Chinese "Han" º~ was from. (Liu Bang ¼B¨¹ would be rolling over in his grave if he heard this.) Han people as a Chinese ethnic group is from the identification with Han dynasty created by Liu Bang, who was King of Han º~¤ý , ruling the territory of Sichuan ¥|¤t , southern Shanxi¤s ¦è and Hubei ´ò¥_ .

{Kiang: The Hakka Odessey. p. 79 : ...if he(Liu Bang) came from the Chinese Liu clan, why didn't he use the family name Liu to proclaim the Liu dynasty?}

Here is a list of the dynasties and family names associated:
Dynasty Surname
Qin ¯³ Ying ¾Æ
Han º~ Liu ¼B
Jin ®Ê Sima ¥q °¨
Sui ¶¦ Yang ·¨
Tang _ð Li §õ
Song §º Zhao »¯
Ming ©ú Zhu ¦¶
Qing ²M Aixinjuelo ·R ·s ı ù

In none of the dynasties was the family name used as the dynasty name. Why should Liu Bang be different? There were kingdoms in the Chunqiu/Zhanguo period that when a king was "knighted" (Feng) and given a state, the people also adopt the name of the state as the clan's name, but never for a dynasty!

These statements cast a heavy shadow on the credibility of the book.

S. L. Lee
September 14, 1996


About Hakka, Huns and Xiongnu (Hsiongnu)

The Huns were traced to a nomadic tribe in Central Europe (the Steppes near the Black Sea). It is still uncertain whether the Huns in Europe were the same as Xiongnu (which sometimes are also called Huns) [see Encyc. Britannica].

Huns in Europe appeared around 370 AD, while the presence of Xiongnu was felt in China during Qin dynasty (221 BC). The result of conflict between Han dyasty and Xiongnu was a division of Xiongnu. Part of the Xiongnu tribe was "sinicized" (Hanized?), as recorded in history about Wang2 Zhao1 Jun1 and Han Wudi. The others were driven away. It is not surprising that after several hundred years, they actually showed up in Europe.

Hungary, which obviously is derived from the word "Hun", has a language of Uralic origin. It is quite certain that Hungary had heavy influence by the Huns. Interestingly, a Hungarian friend told me that Hungarians put their family first when they address people, which is distinctly different from other European culture, but similar to Chinese culture. Whether this is the influence of the original Huns or the Mongolian occupation later in 1200 AD is uncertain.

Huns are significantly different from Hakka in their cultural behavior. Although both Huns and Hakkas are migratory, Huns never settled in one place. They kept moving, conquering and moving. Huns mainly made their living by snatching from the conquered while Hakkas are agriculturally based and self-sufficient. Huns were illiterate and had no idea about civilization and knowledge preservation, while Hakkas have a tradition of strong emphasis on education and intellectualism. These two cultures are totally dissimilar and incompatible. Huns finally disappaered and was integrated with Europeans without a trace of their original "culture". Xiongnu in China also intermarried Han people. During the downfall of West Jin dynasty, the Han people cross the yangtze River and settled in southern China, bringing with them some Xiongnu soldiers and servants. While Xiongnu descendents established "Han" Kingdom in the north, gradually became sinicized. Han Kingdom was destroyed by Zhao kingdom (Jie2 ethnic group), which was in turn destroyed by Han people again.

If Hakka were actually sinicized "non-Han", then Hakka migration from north to south would not be "fleeing" the "northern foreign invasion" to "preserve" their own culture. Intead, Hakkas would have to be the actual "invaders" from the north trying to spread their own culture to the south. However, how a non-Han minority could preserve the Han culture better than the true Han people would be very difficult to explain. And it would be even more difficult to explain why the poems in Shijing (The Book of Poems) popular in the Chunqiu-Zhanguo period (pre-Qin) rhymes better with Hakka than Mandarin. Xiongnu although had attempted invasion of the northern kingdoms during the Chunqiu-Zhanguo period, they could hardly have had major settlement in "China" prior to Han dynasty.

The "theory" on Hun origin of Hakka was based on very fragmentary blood typing and DNA analysis done by Japanese and Russian researchers.

According to DNA typing by Hideo Matsumoto (1966) who gathered blood from China, Korea, Rusia, Taiwan, and Southeast Asia countries and found the folloiwng: [extracted from Kiang's book]
¡@

GM genes
¡@ AG AxG ABST AFBB
North Mongoloids (Koreans, Japanese, Hakka) 45% 15% 25% 15%
Malaysian, Polynesian, Southern Chinese

10%
5% 85%
Burma, Assam, Tibetan, Nepal, Malayo-Polynesian ~0% ~100%

The author thus concludes that Hakkas like Koreans and Japanese were from Baikal Lake as a subgroup of the Altaic people.

Similarity in bloodtype between Japanese, Hakka and Koreans, however, should not be the only way to classify Hakkas. In fact, using blood-type is not a good way to define a culture. Undoubtedly, the original Hakkas migrated under the pressure of the northern intruders. During this cultural conflict, there could be a small portion of the population derived from voluntary or involuntary marriages causing the inclusion of non-Han factors. However, blood-typing does not explain the deeply rooted Han culture of Hakka people. Xiongnu as an ethnic group "foreign" to Han culture and just starting to occupy northern China during Jin period. Never in history before was class distinction more obvious than Jin dynasty. The Royal Jin families and other Han aristocrats might have brought some surrendered Xiongnu soldiers and servants to the south. The number cannot be larger than Han. It was estimated 60% of the Han in the north crossed the Yangtze River. It is also doubtful that under such social discrimination, sinicized Xiongnu could received the proper education to evolve a large number of poets and other literati such as Han Yu, Du Mu in Tang dynasty, which is the dynasty immediately following the short-lived Jin dynasty.

After hundreds of years of migration and settlement in the south, Hakka people likely carry all kinds of genotypes. And there is no distinction any more on Man, Yi, Yong, Di, which are all Han people. Whether Hakkas were blood-related to Xiongnu is beside the point. Hakka culture should be basically Han culture and not Xiongnu culture. More discussion on this topic is available in the following section on Hakka and Xiongnu.

Last updated September 20,1996.

#top

Hakka and She people in Fujian

The following may clarify some confusion about Hakka and "She" ethnic group (in GB font):

http://www.unn.com.cn/BIG5/channel2567/2660/2668/2673/200112/10/136109.html

畬族，自稱山哈或山達，意為居住在山里的客人. 但文獻記載中稱畬族為畬人，意思指在山里搭棚而住的人. 現有630378人，主要居住在福建, 浙江兩省的廣大山區，其余分布在江西, 廣東和安徽省境內. 其聚居點多為數十戶人家組成的自然村寨，因而形成典型的散居與雜居特點.

She people reside in a different area. Their housing structure is less sophisticated.

She group has her own tongue but no language. 99% of the She people communicate in Hakka.

畬族有自已的語言但無自已的文字. 百分之九十九的畬族使用漢語客家方言，通用漢文.

That is how Hakka was mistaken to be She.

歷史
對畬族來源說法不一. 有畬, 瑤同源于漢晉時代長沙武陵蠻說, 南蠻后裔說和古越人后裔說. 公元7世紀，就已居住在閩, 粵, 贛三省交界的山區，被稱為蠻, 蠻僚等. 南宋末年，14世紀起，部分遷到閩東, 浙南等山區. 明, 清時期大量出現在閩東, 浙南等地山區.

She people are found in east Fujian and south Zhejiang, which is different from Hakka in west Fujian, east Guangdong and south Jiangxi. This also led to the confusion of Hakka as Yao. Their time of migration to Fujian is almost identical with that of Hakka.


Hakka and Japanese Culture

Hakka culture might be a key component of Japanese culture.

It is hard not to notice that spoken Hakka dialect/language and Japanese language are closer than Mandarin and Japanese. Certain Japanese also resemble Shandong Chinese, distinct from the Ainu features of Hokkaido. Some Japanese friends point out that Hakkas look like Japanese. In fact the strong adherance to tradition and stubbornness are very characteristic of both Hakka and Japanese. The following is an account that could provide some support to the link between Hakka and Japanese culture.
Qin dynasty, Xu Fu, Yamoto, and Yayoi culture

The earliest record of Chinese travelling to Japan was in Qin dynasty when Qin Shihuangdi sent Xu Fu with a company of 3000 boys and girls to obtain longevity medicine. They started out from Shandong and reached what they called Peng Lai (Ying Zhou) which is Kyushu today. In Kyushu, there are significant traces of Xu Fu and his company including Xu Fu's tomb. Xu Fu's landing place should be around Fukuoka (The Hill of Fu), which was named in memory of him.

To be entrusted by Qin Shihuangdi with such an enormous task at that time, Xu Fu at 36 years of age was obviously a very capable person who was also higher up in the official rank. One theory is that he actually used this proposal to leave Qin. He brought a whole fleet of ships fully loaded with all kinds of supplies. It is also clear that Xu Fu had travelled back to China more than once to gather supplies. So, likely he brought more people over for the long trip. The crew he brought over stayed in Japan and became the Yamato clan. That is why some Japanese look like Shandong people, which should be Han/Hakka in genetic trait.

The history of Japan is very vague as to how the empire started. Only legends exist. Japanese culture has two major components: The Jomon culture and the Yayoi culture. The native Jomon culture was based on hunting and fishing, dating back to 10,000 years ago.

The Yayoi culture, which suddenly emerged around 250 BC - 250 AD as a very advanced culture, bears all the marks of Qin/Han culture including paddy rice cultivation, bronze mirror, coins, bronze weapons, bells, etc. The three major symbols of the Japanese Kingdom : bronze mirror, sword, and the royal seal stone are exactly the same as the Qin symbols. With no archaeological precedent of a gradual evolution, Yayoi culture has to be introduced from outside, and the most probable source was China. The Yayoi culture spread northeastward towards the Kanto plain and eventually became the mainstream of the Japanese culture.

Japan's celebration of the "birthyear" of Shen Wu Tian Huang (Ten-no) was held every 50 years (last held 1930 and 1980) as a very sacred ceremony simultaneously in a memorial celebration of Xu Fu. The beginning of Shen Wu Tian Huang was in the same time period of Xu Fu's landing in 219 BC. So these two are too coincidental not to be related. Shen Wu Tian Huang is supposed to be the Father of the Japanese kingdom. The celebration actually could be for the birthyear of the Empire rather than a person.
Did Xu Fu start out from Shandong or Guangdong?

There is also a hypothesis that Xu Fu started out from Guangdong because the spoken Japanese sounds like Guangdong dialect more than Mandarin. However, Qin Shihuangdi's active area was in the north. It would be hard to trust someone so far from the south. The climbing of Taishan (Shandong) by Qin Shihuangdi was well documented by Li Si's stone engravings on Taishan. So, Shandong is a place frequented by QSHD. It is natural that he might want to watch the ships set sail to fetch the longevity medicine too. As pointed out by a netter friend, Shandong dialect actually has some similarities to Hakka (see language page). If Hakka was indeed the official language commonly used in Qin-Tang dynasties, then that was the language Xu Fu and his crew spoke. So, it would be natural for the Japanese spoken language to bear some resemblance of Hakka.

For detailed evidence of Xu Fu's excursion to Japan, please consult a book by Yu Jin Hong : "Xu2 Fu2 Dong1 Du4 Zhi1 Mi2 Xin1 Tan4" (A New Study on the Riddle of the East Expedition by Xu Fu), Jiangsu People's Press. 1990.
Buddhism, Wei - Tang period

Buddhism was spread to Japan during Wei-Jin and Tang period. There were more and more interactions between the two countries. In Wei Zhi (history of Wei) the word "Wo" (Japanese "Wa", Mandarin "He") first appeared to represent the Japanese kingdom.

Hakka language was highly likely the official language in Tang dynasty (see language section about Tang poems). In Japan, much of the government bureaucratic system, including the names of bureaus still use the system developed from Qin-Han to Tang period.
Examples of ancient Han/Hakka culture and Japanese culture

Japanese culture retains many of the ancient Chinese custom including deep bowing, seating on tatami with low table (only after Song did high chairs become popular in China), the women's dress and headdress, the way pipa ( a pluck string musical instrument, Japanese call it biwa) is held at an angle rather than upright. These can be easily verified in the murals of Dun Huang, which were done from Wei-Jin to Tang. In terms of calligraphy, the early Japanese masters favored Wang Xi-Zhi (Jin) while the contemporaries follow Yan Zhen-qing (Tang).

Please see a copy of Wang Xi-Zhi's "Lanting Prologue" in my own calligraphy (142K), or a a section of larger size (67K). I have also translated Lan Ting Xu (Prologue for the the Gathering at Orchid Pavillion") into English.

Because Xu Fu went to Japan prior to the purge of Confucianism by Qin Shihuangdi, in some ways the earlier Han/Hakka culture was preserved in the original form more so in Japan.

So, Hakka has significant influence on Japanese culture.

The following is a letter from a Japanese friend supporting the similarity of Hakka and Japanese characteristics.

From inamura@po.infosphere.or.jpTue Feb 13 09:41:21 1996
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 20:12:37 +0900
From: Kobo Inamura
To: "'sllee@infinet.com'"
Subject: Hakka culture and Japan

Dear Sir,

I read your article on the Hakka Home page with enthusiasm.

It is true that the characteristics of the independent, but probably the
most conservative minded or stubbornness to preserve one's culture are held
much in common by Hakka people and Japanese.

I met several students in Japan, who happened to come from Mainland China,
but their behavior seems to be different from ideology indoctrinated
students from Beijing.

The architecture of the round big house tradition still remains in this
country, even though fading out quickly.

I wish your study of the relations between Hakka and Japan further develop
into the future.

At least I have never heard of Hakka persons who did not feel comfortable to
stay in Japan and vice versa.

Probably one more thing in common is that they(Hakka and Japanese) are the
most enthusiastic book readers. Do you know any country where so much number
of books and titles are published? Japanese are reading books even in the
crowded trains.

Sincerely yours,

Kobo Inamura


First posted December 5, 1995.
All rights reserved. S. L. Lee. 1995.

#top

About the discovery of bronze mirrors as gifts to Himiko Empress by Wei Emporer.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 14:23:54 +0900
From: Mark Hudson <mjhudson@cc.okayama-u.ac.jp>
To: sllee@asiawind.com
Subject: Mirrors in tombs at Nara]

Dear Dr. Lee, The following comments from the East Asian Arch list may be
of interest:

This news may interest some of the eaan subscribers.
Japanese archaeologists are very excited by the discovery of
33 bronze mirrors from Kurotsuka Kofun which is situated in
Tenri-city, Nara prefecture. 32 of the morrors are "sankakuen-
shinju-kyo, whose rim froms a triangle in cross-section and
decorated with deities and animals. This type of mirrors are
considered to be ones Queen Himiko received from the Wei
Emperor in AD239. All the sankakuen-shinju-kyo are put around
outside the coffin and only one mirror which belongs to another
type is situated inside the coffin. The Kurotsuka kofun has a
keyhole-shaped mound which is 130m in length. It is almost a
miracle that such a big tumulus has not been disturbed yet.
The excavation is conducted by Kashihara Archaeological Institute.
This discovery, which has just been reported on January 10th, surely
stimulated the "Yamataikoku" debate again not only in academics but
also among many Japanese archaeology and/or ancient history fans.

Naoko Matsumoto
Dept. of Archaeology
Kyushu University
Japan

>Dear Naoko Matsumoto,

>Thanks for your description of the exciting discovery of early bronze
>mirrors. For those of us who are not specialists in Japanese archaeology,
>would you please take a few minutes to discuss the meanings and implications
>of the "'Yamataikoku' debate"? I, for one, would appreciate it. A few
>sentences would help put the discovery into perspective.. Thank you.

>Regards,

>Jim Martin
>Richmond, VA
>804 740 0170
>hatch@richmond.infi.net

In response to Jim Martin's query, let me say -- as one who is very
interested in this issue -- that putting it into a few sentences is a bit
difficult, as the debate is complex and has a long history. I recently
examined its postwar archaeological development in the following:

Walter Edwards, "In Pursuit of Himiko: Postwar Archaeology and the
Location of Yamatai," MONUMENTA NIPPONICA 51(1): 53-79, 1996.

For a quick perspective on what is at stake, let me introduce the first
paragraph of the above, and then comment briefly on the significance of
mirrors.

"A stubborn yet engaging problem in the history of ancient
Japan is provided by an early Chinese text, the WEI CHIH or the
History of the Kingdom of Wei, compiled in the latter part of the
third century AD and chronicling the period from the founding of
the Wei kingdom in 220 AD until its end in 265. Considered one
of the most reliable of the Chinese dynastic histories, the WEI CHIH
includes, among descriptions of various peoples living to the east
of the kingdom, a passage known in Japanese as the Wajinden or the
account of the people of 'Wa' -- the name for Japan used by the
Chinese until the T'ang dynasty. The text of the Wajinden is short,
consisting of just under 2,000 Chinese characters, but its
descriptions are vivid enough to offer a convincing portrait of its
subject matter, the Japanese islands and their inhabitants, as they
were probably observed by Wei envoys in the middle of the century.
The Wajinden portrays third-century Japan as comprising more than
thirty countries, headed by one called 'Yamatai' and ruled by a
Queen Himiko; the image is that of a complex society with distinct
differences between persons of high and low status, and central
regulation over the distribution of goods. Although portions of
the text are believed to be drawn directly from the reports of
envoys who journeyed to Japan, the directions given for reaching
Yamatai cannot be read literally. Accordingly, the question of
Yamatai's location remains a mystery."

The WEI CHIH's most accurate portions are records of the diplomatic
exchanges held with Yamatai, beginning with the visit by envoys from
Himiko in 238 AD. They were sent back the following year with many
gifts for the Queen, including "100 bronze mirrors."

Given the ambiguity of the text regarding the precise location of
Yamatai within Japan, many Japanese scholars have attempted to approach
the issue arcaheologically. The two strongest candidates are the
regions of northern Kyushu, where the largest concentration of Late Han
period mirrors has been unearthed, and the region centering on Nara,
home of the ancient Japanese state of Yamato, which emerged by the 4th
century AD. A type of mirror, called "sankakubuchi (also read
'sankakuen') shinju_kyo_," which in a few examples bears Wei dates
of 238 and 239, has been found distributed widely over Japan, with the
greatest concentration in Nara and the surrounding region. It seems
beyond doubt that the distribution itself is related to the network of
political alliances that supported the early Yamato state, and it
is argued that distribution of mirrors by the central polity was a
key element in alliance building.

Of the 33 mirrors recently discovered at the Kurozuka mound here in
Tenri, at the heart of Yamato in Nara, 32 are of the sankakubuchi type,
thus lending strength to the arguments of those who support Yamato as
Yamatai, and see continuity between the foreign diplomatic exchanges
of the mid third century and the process of alliance formation within
Japan which led to widespread unification by the early fourth. There
is considerable controversy, however, on the status of the sankakubuchi
mirrors themselves, as to whether or not they were actually of Chinese
manufacture.

For further discussion, please see the above article. I also plan to
report on the recent discovery in an academic journal in the future.

Walter Edwards
Professor and Chair
Department of Japanese Studies
Tenri University
Tenri, Nara 632 Japan

e-mail: ggb03107@niftyserve.or.jp

Lan Fang Republic

(summary from the book Hakka people - Jews of the Orient by Kao Chung Xi. Summary digest compiled by Jonathan Teoh. Some spelling were revised according to Josef Widjaja, Oct 26, 1996)

Towards the end of the 18th century, Kwangtung Hakkas established a republic in Western Kalimantan which lasted 107 years and had 10 presidents.

The first president is Low Lan Pak. He was born in Kwangtung, Mei Hsien, Shih Pik Pao on the third year of Ching dynasty Chien Long emperor. He married a girl and had a son. But Hakka's custom usually do not take wife along for overseas trip. He left for Western Kalimantan alone to join the gold rush at that time.

He travelled along Han Jiang to Shantao, along Vietnam coastline, and finally landed in Western Kalimantan.

The sultan at that time, Panembahan believing that Chinese workers are hard working, brought in 20 Chinese from Brunei. The sultan Omar in Singkawang, also heard about Chinese diligence and use the lease land system to encourage Chinese to explore in his territory.

When Low Fan Pak reached Western Kalimantan, the Holland has not yet aggressively moved to Kalimantan. Along the coastal area, a lot of Java people and oceania's Bugis people settled down. Also, the Sultan's power were confined to the coastal area, the inland power belongs to the Dayak. The territories among Sultans were not well defined as well.

In the beginning of 1740, the Chinese numbered only a few tens. By 1770, the Chinese has grown to 20,000 strong. By blood clan or by the area they are from, the Chinese established Kongsi(company) to protect themselves.

In 1776, 14 kongsi banded together to form a He Soon 14 Kongsi in order to break the bottleneck of being grouped by area or by blood.

At that time Low Lan Pak established his own Lang Fan kongsi. He then united all the Hakkas in the San-Sin lake area and build a Mem-Tau-Er township and made it the headquarter of his united company.

At that time, Kun Tian(Pontianak) which located in the lower stream of Kapuas River was an important commerce area and was controlled by Sultan Abdul Laman. The upper stream of the river is controlled by the Dayaks. Kun Tian neighboring state Mempawah's Sultan tried to build a palace in the upper stream which led to the fighting between the 2 Sultans.

The Kun Tian Sultan asked Low Lan Pak for help. Since the palace is being built near the Lan Fang company territory, Low Lan Pak decided to help Kun Tian Sultan and defeated the Mempawah's Sultan.

The defeated Mempawah's Sultan then joined forces with the Dayaks and launched a counter-attack. Low Lan Pak again defeated Mempawah Sultan and this time marched North all the way to Singkawang. Singkawang Sultan and Mempawah Sultan signed a peace treaty with Low Lan Pak and Low Lan Pak's popularity increased dramatically. He was 57 then.

After that, Chinese and locals, turned to Low Lan Pak to seek protection, and when Kun Tian Sultan realized that he can not challenged Low Lan Pak, The sultan himself seek protection from Low Lan Pak.

Thus, Low Lan Pak established a government, using his company name, changing kongsi(company) to republic, and formed Lan Fang Republic in 1777, 10 years earlier than USA(1787). At that time people wanted Low Lan Pak to be Sultan, but he declined and take the post of governorship, similar to the president post.

From Qing dynasty's sea nation annals, it recorded that it is a place where Ka Yin people (Mei Hsien area) do mining, build road, establish its own nation, every year has ships reached ng Zhou and Chao Zhou area, doing commerce. >From its own Lan Fang Company annals, it indicated that every year it pays tribute to Qing dynasty like Annan (Vietnam).

The capital was in Che Wan Li. The Ta Tang Chon Chang(president) is elected by election. Both the president position and the vice president position has to be of Hakka from Ka Yin or Ta Pu area. The flag is a rectangle yellow flag with the word Lan Fang Ta Tong Chi. The president flag is a triangular yellow flag with the word Chuao (General). The high ranking officials dress in Chinese style while lower ranking officials dress western style clothing.

Low Lan Pak passed away on the second year of the republic. He has been in Borneo for 20 years. he 47th year of the republic during the reign of the fifth president Liew Tai Er, Dutch began its active expansion in Indonesia and occupied the South East region of Borneo. Lan Fang lose its autonomy and became a protected state of Dutch.

Then Dutch opened a colonial office in Kun Tian and intervened republic's affair. In 1884, Singkawang refused to be ruled by Dutch, and was attacked by the Dutch. The Dutch occupied Lan Fang Kongsi. Lan Fang Kongsi fought for 4 years but eventually was defeated, and its people fled to Sumatra. Fearful of strong reaction from Ching government, Dutch never declared that it occupied Lan Fang and let one of the descendent be a figure head. It was not until the formation of Republic of China in 1912 that Dutch formally declared its formal control of the area.

Those that fled to Sumatra regrouped in Medan. From there, some moved to Kuala Lumpur and Singapore. One of the descendent from these people is Lee Kuan Yew. While Hakkas are the minority in Singapore, it is the Hakkas that played an important part to establish the second Lan Fang company - Singapore.

http://www.asiawind.com/hakka/people.htm

[AdrianChanWyles]

Thank you for your viewpoints - it does indeed show how historical dates can be merged into a subjective view of history and presented as 'fact' beyond debate - this procedure does tend to infer that all is 'known' and has been decided. Thank goodness that debate does exist outside of closed and controlled systems of thought!

I find what you say interesting and worthy of further study - thank you very much for your contribution.

On a different note, I attended 'Seni 06' Combat Sports Show in Birminghan (UK) this weekend - and amongst some very interestng finds (which included a copy of the 'Skills of the Vagabonds'), I purchased a book by James Wong about the history of Tang Lang - written in English, but referencing the Chnese sources - I shall let you know his conclusions as to the origins of Bei Tang Lang shortly, just as soon as I have read it!

The show was in the NEC (National Exhibition Centre), which is huge. It was like walking into a giant martial arts supermarket. There were people from all over the UK and the world. There was some Bagua and Taiji, but on the whole there was not much genuine Chinese Gongfu. - but there was some very interesting Sikh martial arts - very impressive.

The problem for traditional arts is the relative commercialism of such an event - very few traditional Sifu would or have ever taken part, because traditional arts are practiced in a very different psycho-physical environment. The Hakkas of ocurse, have been reknowned for three things;

1) Confucian study.
2) Gongfu practice.
3) Farming.

Someone asked how a traditional Hakka martial art could be used to entertain a crowd for up to 30 minutes? I am not sure it can. Although the Sikhs did very well by simply repeating large segments of their routines. In the UK we say 'Swings and roundabouts', or it is good and bad in equal measure!

A friend of mine is a traditional Gohu Ryu Karate expert, and he had 10 minutes or so at the show, and left rather deflated by the experience. I think that as long as a perspective is maintained, any situation can be used to one's advantage. After-all, Hakka historical forces have help mould a character of resilliance and steafastness in the face of hardship.

And as can be seen by anyone taking a look at 'Hakka-ology', there are many and compting theories for Hakka origins - the Asiawind forum (run by Dr SL Lee) would have us believe that Hakkas are simply a sub-group of Han. Whereas, both Professor Kiang and Mr Lee M Lock are of the opinion that the Hakka are either fully ro partly non-Han in origin. Whatever the case, Hakka martial arts DID NOT suddenly and dramatically develop AFTER the Hakkas had fought wars for centuries - the problem with presented meta-narratives, is that sometimes a good story has to ignore uncomfortable micro-facts, that is details of everyday life and tradition - to make itself work.

Thanks.

[Op108wc]

Ethnic groups in Chinese history

The Xiongnu (Chinese: 匈奴; Hanyu Pinyin: Xiōngnú; Wade-Giles: Hsiung-nu) were a nomadic (and probably Hunnic/proto-Turkic) people of Central Asia, generally based in present day Mongolia. From the 3rd century BC they controlled a vast steppe empire extending west as far as the Caucasus. They were active in the areas of southern Siberia, western Manchuria and the modern Chinese provinces of Inner Mongolia, Gansu and Xinjiang. Very ancient (perhaps legendary) historic records say that the Xiongnu descended from the founders of China's first dynasty, the Xia Dynasty, the remnants of which were believed by the Chinese of the Spring and Autumn Period to be the people of the state of Qǐ (杞). However, due to internal differences and strife, the Xiongnu fled north and north-west.
Relations between the Chinese and the Xiongnu were complicated and included military conflict, exchanges in tribute and trade, as well as marriage treaties.
The overwhelming amount of information on the Xiongnu comes from Chinese sources. There is no way of reconstructing any substantial part of the Xiongnu language. What little we know of their titles and names come from Chinese transliterations. The Chinese terms for the people - "Xiōngnú" - or its leaders - "chanyu" (單于) - presumably reflects the sound of the foreign tongue.

The Xianbei (Simplified Chinese: 鲜卑; Traditional Chinese: 鮮卑; Pinyin: Xiānbēi; Wade-Giles: Hsien-pei) were a significant nomadic people residing in modern Manchuria and eastern Mongolia, or Xianbei Shan, a historic term for Greater Khingan, before migrating into areas of the modern Chinese provinces of Shanxi, Shaanxi, Gansu, Qinghai, Hebei, Inner Mongolia, and Liaoning. Possibly some tribes of these people living too in ancient Eastern Heilongjiang or Hulun Manchu Imperial province, actual Khabarovsk or Amur land in actual Russian Far East .
The Xianbei people actually consisted of a federation of sizeable non-Han groups of which the most important was the Tuoba (拓跋). They first become a significant part of Chinese culture during the Han period, where they occupied the steppes in Mongolia, Hebei and Liaodong. After the fall of the Han dynasty, the Xianbei formed a number of empires of their own, including the Yan Dynasty, Western Qin, Southern Liang and most significantly, the Northern Wei (see Sixteen Kingdoms). By the time of the Tang dynasty they had largely merged with Han populace by adopting Chinese customs, administration and language. Both the emperors of the Sui dynasty, Yang Guang, and of the Tang dynasty, Li Yuan, were born of Tuoba princesses, and were thus, by definition, half-Xianbei in ethnicity.

[Cang Long]

El and Adrian both thanks for the indepth post. I am currently rereading and trying to get a better grasp on someof the more finer points to what I have read so far. Thanks again.

[AdrianChanWyles]

James Wong: The Tang Lang Praying Mantis Martial System
http://www.plumpub.com/sales/kungfu/collbk_Mantis1.htm

This book started out as a university thesis. Within it, Wong skillfully and carefully demonstrates his understanding of both northern and southern praying mantis styles. He talks about the Hakka being from the north, and of thier need to literally fight their way down through China. However, despite the differences in physical structure and apparent history - Wong chooses to concentrate on those aaspects of both arts that are either the same, or that overlap. He says;

'Regardless of philosophical and stylistic differences of various tang lang schools, the praying mantis weapon of the Tiao Shou is common throughout the complete system.' (Page 17)

Wong goes on to assess the 'complete' system - whilst the second half of the book deals with two northern mantis forms.

Thanks.

[AdrianChanWyles]

Originally posted by Cang Long
El and Adrian both thanks for the indepth post. I am currently rereading and trying to get a better grasp on someof the more finer points to what I have read so far. Thanks again.

Thanks Cang!

Quite often the presentation of Hakka history is often involved in the conveying of a ideology - that has more to do with 'nationalism', rather than living history. Hakka culture at its base i.e. Hakka families and communities, with their living traditions, views and attitudes - ideology serves to brush this micro-knowledge aside - and imposes a psuedo-history from the outside, upon a people who are often unaware, or simply not interested in a view of history that does not reflect their everyday attitudes.


If you ever have the time, Mr Lee M Lock's work can be found at;

Hakka Story
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Harbor/6896/

If you feel like emailing him, just say you know me and he will be willing to reply to you. Give it time, as he is often away in China on field trips, researching Hakka history.

Thanks

[AdrianChanWyles]

Originally posted by Op108wc
Ethnic groups in Chinese history

The Xiongnu (Chinese: 匈奴; Hanyu Pinyin: Xiōngnú; Wade-Giles: Hsiung-nu) were a nomadic (and probably Hunnic/proto-Turkic) people of Central Asia, generally based in present day Mongolia. From the 3rd century BC they controlled a vast steppe empire extending west as far as the Caucasus. They were active in the areas of southern Siberia, western Manchuria and the modern Chinese provinces of Inner Mongolia, Gansu and Xinjiang. Very ancient (perhaps legendary) historic records say that the Xiongnu descended from the founders of China's first dynasty, the Xia Dynasty, the remnants of which were believed by the Chinese of the Spring and Autumn Period to be the people of the state of Qǐ (杞). However, due to internal differences and strife, the Xiongnu fled north and north-west.
Relations between the Chinese and the Xiongnu were complicated and included military conflict, exchanges in tribute and trade, as well as marriage treaties.
The overwhelming amount of information on the Xiongnu comes from Chinese sources. There is no way of reconstructing any substantial part of the Xiongnu language. What little we know of their titles and names come from Chinese transliterations. The Chinese terms for the people - "Xiōngnú" - or its leaders - "chanyu" (單于) - presumably reflects the sound of the foreign tongue.

The Xianbei (Simplified Chinese: 鲜卑; Traditional Chinese: 鮮卑; Pinyin: Xiānbēi; Wade-Giles: Hsien-pei) were a significant nomadic people residing in modern Manchuria and eastern Mongolia, or Xianbei Shan, a historic term for Greater Khingan, before migrating into areas of the modern Chinese provinces of Shanxi, Shaanxi, Gansu, Qinghai, Hebei, Inner Mongolia, and Liaoning. Possibly some tribes of these people living too in ancient Eastern Heilongjiang or Hulun Manchu Imperial province, actual Khabarovsk or Amur land in actual Russian Far East .
The Xianbei people actually consisted of a federation of sizeable non-Han groups of which the most important was the Tuoba (拓跋). They first become a significant part of Chinese culture during the Han period, where they occupied the steppes in Mongolia, Hebei and Liaodong. After the fall of the Han dynasty, the Xianbei formed a number of empires of their own, including the Yan Dynasty, Western Qin, Southern Liang and most significantly, the Northern Wei (see Sixteen Kingdoms). By the time of the Tang dynasty they had largely merged with Han populace by adopting Chinese customs, administration and language. Both the emperors of the Sui dynasty, Yang Guang, and of the Tang dynasty, Li Yuan, were born of Tuoba princesses, and were thus, by definition, half-Xianbei in ethnicity.

Thank you for your post. Very interesting. I often find that the various juk bow are a good start to Hakka research.

Thanks

[Cang Long]

If you feel like emailing him, just say you know me and he will be willing to reply to you. Give it time, as he is often away in China on field trips, researching Hakka history. Adrian,
Thanks again for all the valuable information and insight.

I am left wondering how many other tribes, clan or kingdoms besides the Hakka are now in danger of being lost through quick assimilation of war or slow migration from their place of origin? With the different kingdoms before the unification it would appear that this loss of identity and knowledge could be a problem for more than just the Hakka clan?

[AdrianChanWyles]

Yes - indeed. Not only the forces you mention, but the lurch toward the right of the political spectrum is causing much damage also. Mainland China, for instance, practices a 'Han-nisation' of its over one billion population. The flag of the Mainland represents the Han ethnicity with the big star, and four other, lessor ethnicities with the other four, smaller stars. Five ethnic groups are on the flag, and yet, currently in the Mainland, there are 56 recognised ethnic groups - the Hakka are not amongst them, as they were forbidden for applying for distinct ethnic status after the Communist Revolution of 1949. This is odd, as many Communist generals were Hakka, as was Mao Zedong and later, Deng Xiao Ping. It is believed that by officially recognising the Hakka as 'Han', then perhaps the racism and prejudice aimed at them would disappear. It is estimated that about 40 million Hakka still live int he Mainland, and despite having no recognised ethnic identity, the Mei Zhou area of northern Guangdong is a thriving Hakka area, even with a Hakka university! Hakkas live throughout the Guangdong, Guangxi and Sichuan areas.

Hakkas who left China now live throughout the world. Many families and communities maintain ancient traditions - despite the wars they have had to survive throughout recent Chinese history. Hakka identity is felt very strongly, and perhaps that expains why it is that other ethnic groups have simply 'integrated' into mainstream 'Han-ness' and lost their own culture. By and large, Hakkas have not.

Thanks.

[Cang Long]

Hakka identity is felt very strongly, and perhaps that expains why it is that other ethnic groups have simply 'integrated' into mainstream 'Han-ness' and lost their own culture. By and large, Hakkas have not. Interesting, I would think it would have to be to withstand as much adversity as I have read so far.

[AdrianChanWyles]

It must also be stressed at this juncture - that al ethnic groups are equally valuable - the Hakka are one amongst many. Many others have suffered persecution - the Uighars still do today, etc. But hopefully, with more enlightened attitudes, things will get better.

Now a question;
James Wong says that Guangxi is the birthplace of Juk Lum Praying Mantis - but on the Hakkadiaspora site, a Hakka Kuen practitioner said that this is a mistake and that Juk Lum was founded in Jiangxi Province - possibly in a Daoist Temple? Any ideas on this?

Thanks.

[Cynikal Mantis]

Adrian I too have a cory of James Wongs `T`ang L`ang`.. What did you think of it?

[Op108wc]

Hakka identity

Hello there


Originally posted by AdrianChanWyles
Yes - indeed. Not only the forces you mention, but the lurch toward the right of the political spectrum is causing much damage also. Mainland China, for instance, practices a 'Han-nisation' of its over one billion population. The flag of the Mainland represents the Han ethnicity with the big star, and four other, lessor ethnicities with the other four, smaller stars. Five ethnic groups are on the flag, and yet, currently in the Mainland, there are 56 recognised ethnic groups - the Hakka are not amongst them, as they were forbidden for applying for distinct ethnic status after the Communist Revolution of 1949. This is odd, as many Communist generals were Hakka, as was Mao Zedong and later, Deng Xiao Ping. It is believed that by officially recognising the Hakka as 'Han', then perhaps the racism and prejudice aimed at them would disappear. It is estimated that about 40 million Hakka still live int he Mainland, and despite having no recognised ethnic identity, the Mei Zhou area of northern Guangdong is a thriving Hakka area, even with a Hakka university! Hakkas live throughout the Guangdong, Guangxi and Sichuan areas.

Hakkas who left China now live throughout the world. Many families and communities maintain ancient traditions - despite the wars they have had to survive throughout recent Chinese history. Hakka identity is felt very strongly, and perhaps that expains why it is that other ethnic groups have simply 'integrated' into mainstream 'Han-ness' and lost their own culture. By and large, Hakkas have not.

Thanks.


Some famous Hakka ancestor registry
Zhu Xi 朱熹


http://www.asiawind.com/hakka/people.htm

http://www.hungfayiireland.com/17html.htm

[AdrianChanWyles]

Originally posted by Cynikal Mantis
Adrian I too have a cory of James Wongs `T`ang L`ang`.. What did you think of it?

Well, I only acquired a copy this Sunday - but I found it very appealing to my sense of exploration and academic researching. I have volume one, and am not sure if there is a volume two - if there is, I am unawre of what is in it.

I think Wong writes very well, probably from personal experience (I do not know if he is Hakka or not - there are some Hakkas with the surname 'Wong') - but does start from the idea that the two styles share many common elements, and although he does not specifically say that he thinks both styles are directly related, he does imply it throughout his book. Or, at least that is the impression one is left with, if one reads between the lines!

Of course, I must admit to a bias, as I feel that the similarities out-weigh the differences. Put it this way, there are less differences between southern praying mantis and northern praying mantis - than between Bak Hok Gongfu, and the later development from it - Goju Ryu, found in Okinawa.

Wong also points out that the link with the Henan Shaolin Temple is spurious to say the least. I liked the book.

What do you think of it?

[Cang Long]

Some famous Hakka ancestor registry
Zhu Xi 朱熹 Elton,
Thank you for the links, I see Gary has added some on his site as well.

[Cang Long]

Adrian I too have a cory of James Wongs `T`ang L`ang`.. What did you think of it? Cynikal Mantis,
What did you think of the book?

[Cang Long]

Some famous Hakka ancestor registry
Zhu Xi 朱熹 Adrian,
Are you familiar with Zhu Xi and his work?

http://www.hungfakwoon.com/ZhuXi.htm

[Cynikal Mantis]

This is a reprint and compilation of a series of books that came out in the early 80's by Koinonia Press in association with Leo Fong (well known Choy Li Fut stylist)

Wong talks about the connection between shaolin and praying mantis,he states only 1 text written in english associates PM to a shaolin monastry,There are few written refrencesconnecting the two but a practicioners oral history may state otherwise. Wang then does an overview of the five animals of shaolin which is nice to know but has nothing realy to do with PM.He then talks about the origin of PM and is realy talking about Northen Mantis and how Wang Lang observed a mantis fighting a cicada, captured the mantis and studied its fighting techniques, developed hand and elbow techniques and adding the footwork from monkey.Wang next talks about the cicada and mantis in China which I found very intresting explaining their life cycles, size diffrences, and different species.Then he talks about the different schools North and South and gives you a bit of history,next about differences and hand techniques. The next 50 pages are instuctional pictures on 2 northern forms.To me I was disapointed in the lack of written information although what was written was quite detailed this is a book more aimed a Northen Mantis practioneers although touching upon Southern it was written in 1979 and I dont think there is a second volume.
I did enjoy this book and would recomend it to any one intrested in gung fu.
;)

[AdrianChanWyles]

Originally posted by Cang Long
Adrian,
Are you familiar with Zhu Xi and his work?

http://www.hungfakwoon.com/ZhuXi.htm

You have a teacher from a very esteemed ancestor lineage indeed! One question - what dialect is it that pronounces the surname 'Chu' as 'Gee'? I ask, as I am fascinated by names and how there pronounciation varies from one dialect to another. Chan can be Tan Chin and even Van!

Thanks.

[Cang Long]

You have a teacher from a very esteemed ancestor lineage indeed! One question - what dialect is it that pronounces the surname 'Chu' as 'Gee'? I ask, as I am fascinated by names and how there pronounciation varies from one dialect to another. Chan can be Tan Chin and even Van! Adrian,
Yes you are quite correct I can easily say in my experience I have seen Grandmaster Gee explain not only martial arts but many different aspects of life in a manner in which only he appears to be qualified to do so. As to your question I will have to see if I can not find out the answer to that one and get back to you on it.

[Cang Long]

Cynikal Mantis,
Thank you for the review of the book, sounds rather interesting will have to look for a copy and give it a read myself.

[Op108wc]

Hello there


Originally posted by AdrianChanWyles
You have a teacher from a very esteemed ancestor lineage indeed! One question - what dialect is it that pronounces the surname 'Chu' as 'Gee'? I ask, as I am fascinated by names and how there pronounciation varies from one dialect to another. Chan can be Tan Chin and even Van!

Thanks.


Zhu (Mandarian)
Chu (Cantonese)
Gee or Chi (Toisan)


Chen (Mandarian)
Chan (Cantonese)
Chin (Toisan)
Tran (Vietnamese)


Chang (Mandarian)
Cheung (Cantonese)


Li (Mandarian)
Lee (Cantonese)


El

[AdrianChanWyles]

That is interesting. I am involved in an adhoc research group - and one subject we have been discussing is whether Toisan people are Hakka or not? Kevin Lee, who runs a major Toisan website says 'no' - and that the 'sayyap' dialect Toisan people speak is not Hakka. Others say that some Toisan people people are of Hakka origin. I have a friend who is a Yin (written as a scholar's hat), her ancestral village is in xinhui - she thinks she might be Hakka.

Thanks

[Cang Long]

That is interesting. I am involved in an adhoc research group - and one subject we have been discussing is whether Toisan people are Hakka or not? Kevin Lee, who runs a major Toisan website says 'no' - and that the 'sayyap' dialect Toisan people speak is not Hakka. Others say that some Toisan people people are of Hakka origin. I have a friend who is a Yin (written as a scholar's hat), her ancestral village is in xinhui - she thinks she might be Hakka. Adrian,
Just curious if you had a link to Mr. Lee's website and possibly any links to counter his arguments as well. This is all fascinating reading so the more information I can get my hands on the better it is I am able to follow the theme of these pages. Thank you.

[AdrianChanWyles]

Hi There!

The link I gave you above is for his main work;

Hakka Story
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Harbor/6896/

Scroll to the bottom and there are sub-sections, etc. His ongoing work is accessible on the hakkaDiaspora site. As for opposing his ideas - you have the Asiawind website and the Chinese Mainland government! Have fun.

[AdrianChanWyles]

Hi Cang Long!

Mr Lee sent me this email today;

'Thanks, Adrian, for this note.
No, I am afraid I don't know the story behind Wong Tai Sin. Perhaps if I know the Chinese words for this,perhaps I could help you to check up the story for you later.
In about an hour,I will leave for the airport to go to Shangdong Province for an 8-day tour, returning on the 12th. Main aim: to check on the story line I have formed in my head that the people up and down the Yellow River are basically the same, particularly in terms of their physical features and their speech.And also to know how varied is their speech among the cities I will travel and sightsee, and how close or different each is from Halkka.One word I have already noted that seems to be similar is the word "we' or "us"= 'ngho men' . There should be many others.....If so,it points to the same racial or dialectal origin of some, if not all, of the Shangdong people in Shaanxi in days far beyond the present, dating perhaps even to the Spring and Autumn period, when Confucious was alive and was said to bave been born in Chifu.I know people always regard him as of Shangdong origin, but for reasons of my own, I have always regarded him as having his roots in Shaanxi,If not him and his immediate family,then certainly his ancestors!
Until next mail.
Cheerio!
Max'

All of the email exchanges between Mr Lee and myself (as well as one or two other people) are placed on the Hakkadiaspora site - in 'The Work O f Lee M Lock' section. Mr Lee argeed to this practice, as his research is ongoing. The above link is just his basic ideas - or his theory in a nutshell.

Chinese ethnicity is problematic from an academic perspective. Initially, the Communist government of 1949, tried to stamp-out Han prejudice - or the idea that people from the Han majority are superior to other ethnic groups. This is why the Hakka were denied ethnic status, and were told that they were 'Han'. In an attempt to defuse ethnic tensions and strife within the Mainland. However, Hakka appearance, culture and language is very different from what might be described as 'Han' culture and language. Patricia Lim, in her book 'Walks in Hong Kong', (herself Hakka and a Cambridge graduate), is of the opinion that the original Hakka language merged with local dialects to form 'Guanyu', or traditional Manderin - the modified version being 'Putonghua', ot 'The Language of the Common People'. She is in agreement with Prof. Clyde Kiang, that Han culture was basically an adoption and adaption of Hakka culture by non-Hakka people, who then turned viciously upon the people, whose culture they usurped, when they came to rule over China. Mr Lee is of the opinion that the Qin Dynasty was Hakka - and that the following dynasties simply maintained the socio-cultural-economic framework setup by the Qin/Hakka. A Qin general founded the following Han Dynasty - and Kiang feels that this dynasty was also Hakka. And this is where Kiang's work gets very interesting. Where does the name 'Han' come from? Kiang suggests that the names 'Han', 'Hon' and 'Hun' are all exactly the same, and that these names were applied to the incoming Hakka/Xiongnu. These people were considered multiracial in origin, as they were a confederation of nomadic tribes. Amongst their number however, were a large contingent of Caucasoid peoples - now these people should not be confused with 'Europeans', they definitely were not (although the Hun did invade Europe - and a group of Picts are said to have fought with them). No, these people were probably descendents of original Caucasians who migrated into Europe and into India. Whatever the case, many Hakka people today, share certain Caucasoid traits that other Chinese ethnic groups do not possess. Unusual height, build, double eyelids, strands of blond hair, hidden amongst the jet-black hair and of course a language that did not originate in China. Now, ethnic Chinese family members of mine, still possess some of these traits, and in their history, there has never been any European relatives - so where did these triats come from? And besides, the odd non-Chinese relative would not leave their genetic mark to any great extent. No, for genetic traits to be maintained system wide, there must have been a substantial population sharing those traits to begin with. The ethnic differences also explains why the Hakka were persecuted throughout their history in China. And why they also fought to create their own homeland, etc. Today of course, the Mainland has a policy of making all ethnicities 'Han', that is the prevailing 'official' culture in China, decided by the government. All ethnic children are taught to speak Manderin and not their own languages/dialects - and old traditions are viewed as superstitious and encouraged to be forgotten. The traditions allowed, are those created for tourists to watch, etc.

Studies in other ethnic influences would be a very good idea - and Mr Lee's work does not exclude the idea of this.

I hope this helps!

Thanks.

[Cang Long]

Hello Adrian!
And this is where Kiang's work gets very interesting. Where does the name 'Han' come from? Kiang suggests that the names 'Han', 'Hon' and 'Hun' are all exactly the same, and that these names were applied to the incoming Hakka/Xiongnu. These people were considered multiracial in origin, as they were a confederation of nomadic tribes. What are your views pertaining to this particular subject. I agree this is very interesting because of all the complexities involved in undertaking the study of this topic. I am learning a lot quickly and greatful for your willingness to discuss and share so much of your own work as well as others.

Mr. Lee will hopefully have a lot more to say when he completes this latest expedition. I look forward to learning about what he has to say upon his return.

[AdrianChanWyles]

There is an interesting quote from an historical document From ancient China, it reads;

'...At that time also there was the Sranana of the Western Lands (i.e. India), Bodhidharma, who was basically a Hon of the Kingdom of Po-sseur (Persia). Before the marvels of the temple he said he was 150 years old, that he had traversed in all directions many kingdoms and there was not equal of this temple for beauty.'

Yang Hsuan-chih: Lo-yang chia-lan-chi (Record of the Monasteries in Lo-yang - written 547AD.
(Quoted from; The Way of the Warrior - 1984 - Page 27)

Apparently, the author is describing a meeting between himself and Bodhidharma outside of the Yung Ning Temple, also present at the meeting is the Prefect of Lo-yang city. Of course, as a Buddhist, I am well aware of Buddhist texts concerning meditation attributed to Bodhidharma, and the qicong text books kept at the Shaolin Temple. The above quote is viewed as 'objective' and outside the realms of Buddhist politics. However, Bodhidharma is quite plainly referred to as a 'Hon', as if it were quite natural. Bodhidharma is often described as being of ugly appearance, blue-eyed, wild, dark, curling hair, etc. Inshort - he apparently personifies everything in the Chinese psyche that would usually apply to a 'Barbarian' (i.e. 'Yi' - one who hunts with a bow and arrow). So from this, we can reasonably assume that the term 'Hon' is synomonous with 'Barbarian', or 'Foreigner', that is 'non-Chinese'.

'...the Hakkas, in evidence, are descendants of the people broadly categorised as Huns (Hsiongnu, Hiong-nu, or HAN) from Central Asia. The Huns, a member of a savage Asiatic people, are a nomadic, Mongolian race from North-central Asia. In China they are generally identifued with the Hsiongnu, whom Chinese sources described as originally living in the southern part of the Gobi and what is now Kansu province.

Organised into hordes, they were indomitable horsemen living off the countries they ravaged.'

Kiang, Clyde. The Hakka Search For A Homeland. Allegheny Press - 1991 - Page 14.

He goes on to say that Hakka people, (i.e. those who speak the original language that evolved into what became known as 'Hakgarhua'), still live throughout northern China, but do not recognise the southern Cantonese term 'Hakka', as it was never applied to those living in the north.

This is what he has to say about the term 'Han';

'According to the Oxford English dictionary, the word Han in English is an ancient form of Khan which is the Turkish word meaning lord, or prince, but originated in Tartars (Mongolian people or Russian Turks). One of the most frequently used methods in Chinese character building involves the combination of a pictorial part with a sound element. Clearly the Chinese character Han derives from the sound of what the rulers (Huns, or Hsiongnu) called themselves Han (Khan) in their mother tongue. This picturesque character is a phonogram for water, representing the Mongolian sound of Han. Therefore, the original Han people signifies the people of sinotised Huns or Hsiungnu without constituting an overwhelming majority of the population and the dominant cultural group in China. Like the Mongol and Manchu dynasties, the ethnic non-Chinese Han Minority established their power to rule the Chinese majority. Since the Han Dynasty ruled China for 427 years, Han-jin (Men of Han), or Han-tzu (Sons of Han) are still the names which Chinese are known today...

Accordingly the definition of Han people was transformed from that of an ethnic Han minority to the majority to include the native Chinese and other groups under the Han empire.'

Kiang, Clyde. The Hakka Search For A Homeland. Allegheny Press - 1991 - Page 50.

Mr Lee and Prof. Kiang are at variants when it comes to their assessments of what was and was not a Hakka dynasty; the former presents evidence the for Qin Dynasty, whilst the latter presents evidence for the Han.

[Cang Long]

hello Adrian,
How goes all the research I am sure you are very busy hope you can find the time to reply. Best of health always.