🏝️Scope of this chapter. How far is the corporeal technique called 手 (te / ti) in early-modern Ryukyu and modern Okinawa continuous with, and where does it become discontinuous from, the movement called 唐手 / 空手 / 空手道 on the Japanese mainland from the twentieth century onward? We examine continuity and discontinuity across three layers: thought, body, and institution.
1. What Was Te?
From the era of the Ryukyu Kingdom (琉球王国, 1429–1879 — the independent monarchy that ruled the Ryukyu Islands, including present-day Okinawa, before annexation by Japan) through modern Okinawa, it is generally explained that a corporeal technique and unarmed martial art later called 手 (te / ti) was transmitted chiefly among the samuree (サムレー, the Ryukyuan warrior class, roughly equivalent to the Japanese shizoku / former-samurai stratum). One cannot, however, simply assert that te existed widely as a martial art with a single name and a single system.
First, contemporary primary sources on te are scarce. Second, much of the transmission was oral, and organization in the form of school names, society names, and the dojo system became established mainly after the modern period and especially from the Showa era onward. Third, the well-known classification of Shuri-te, Naha-te, and Tomari-te should be treated as a later organization (Kadekaru 2017; Kinjo 2011).
In other words: it is highly likely that an unarmed martial art known collectively as te did exist, but it was not a modern institution equipped, like today’s karate, with schools, kata systems, ranking systems (dan‐i, 段位), and the dojo system.
2. The Disposition of Ryukyu and the Transformation of Te
In 1879, the so-called Ryukyu Shobun (琉球処分, “Disposition of Ryukyu” — the series of administrative measures by which the Meiji government formally dissolved the Ryukyu Kingdom and incorporated its territory into Japan as Okinawa Prefecture) abolished the kingdom and established the prefecture. The samuree lost their former status base and were reorganized within modern Okinawan society. Part of the corporeal technique they had transmitted moved from secret, individual transmission into the contexts of education, physical training, and public demonstration.
Itosu Anko (糸洲安恒, 1831–1915) marks a key turning point: he taught tode in the framework of school physical education at the Shuri Elementary School (首里尋常小学校, Shuri Jinjo Shogakko), the Okinawa Prefectural First Middle School (沖縄県立第一中学校, today’s Shuri High School), and the Okinawa Prefectural Normal School (沖縄県立師範学校, a teacher-training college) (Kinjo 2011). Itosu is said to have rearranged kata (型, prescribed solo forms) for educational use, adapting them for group instruction with schoolchildren. This effort is connected with his creation of the Pinan kata (平安, read Heian in mainland Japanese), the introductory five-form set still practiced in many karate styles today.
📘Glossary: Itosu Anko. Often called “the father of modern karate.” Born into the Okinawan samuree (warrior) class. He contributed to the dissemination of tode as school physical education and is credited with creating the Pinan 1–5 kata. In October 1908 he submitted the so-called Itosu Jikkun (糸洲十訓, “Ten Precepts of Itosu”; also known as Tode Jikkajo, 唐手十箇条) to the Okinawa Prefectural School Affairs Division (沖縄県学務課, Okinawa-ken Gakumu-ka), the prefectural office overseeing school education, advocating the use of tode in schools.
3. Transplantation to the Mainland — the 1920s
The wide circulation of Okinawa’s te / tode on the Japanese mainland began in the 1920s.
- Around 1916, Funakoshi Gichin (船越義珍, 1868–1957; in earlier years he wrote his surname with the Okinawan-style kanji 富名腰, also read Funakoshi) and others are said to have demonstrated tode and Okinawan kobudo (古武道, classical martial arts) at the Butokuden (武徳殿, the central demonstration hall of the Dai Nippon Butokukai, the state-sponsored martial-arts association) in Kyoto. Primary sources for this event are scarce, and some researchers question whether it actually took place as described.
- In 1922, Funakoshi presented tode at the First Movement and Physical Education Exhibition (第一回運動体育展覧会) organized by the Ministry of Education in Tokyo — a major catalyst for mainland diffusion.
- In 1924, the Keio University Karate-kenkyukai (唐手研究会, Tode Research Society) was founded, with Funakoshi as its first instructor — the first university karate club in Japan.
- In 1925, an equivalent society was founded at Tokyo Imperial University (today’s University of Tokyo).
- From the late 1920s through the 1930s, karate spread across the country through the university-club network, including Takushoku University, Waseda University, and others.
What happened here is a shift in context, from a regional practice to a university-club practice. The te that had been rooted in Okinawan samuree culture began to live a different life as the bodily practice of a new social stratum: mainland university students.
4. Three Layers of Continuity and Discontinuity
The continuity / discontinuity between Ryukyuan te and mainland karate can be assessed across three layers: thought, body, and institution.
| Layer | Where continuity holds | Where discontinuity appears |
|---|---|---|
| Thought | The basic notion of “an unarmed combat technique” | In Okinawa, tied to samuree (warrior-class) culture; on the mainland, attached to student culture and modern budo (武道, “martial way”) thought |
| Body | Basic elements such as tsuki (突き, thrust), keri (蹴り, kick), and kata (型, prescribed form) | Differences across schools in the depth of stances, breathing methods, and sense of distance (maai); modifications for school physical education and group practice |
| Institution | The general form of master-to-disciple transmission | In Okinawa: household- and locality-based transmission. On the mainland: shifted to universities, dojo (道場, training halls), and dan-i (段位, graded ranking) systems |
5. Is the Bundling under “Karate” Possible?
We return to this chapter’s central question. Can nineteenth-century Ryukyuan te and twentieth-century mainland karate be bundled under the single word “karate”?
Answering “yes” or “no” outright is contrary to this series’s policy: we adopt no side. We present, instead, the grounds and motivations of those who say it can be bundled, and of those who say it cannot.
5.1 Reasoning for “It Can Be Bundled”
- Continuity of the basic elements of bodily movement (tsuki, keri, kata).
- Genealogically, most mainland karateka were taught by Okinawan masters.
- The transmission from Okinawa to the mainland is historically real; the chain of transmission has not been broken.
5.2 Reasoning for “It Cannot Be Bundled”
- Ryukyuan te did not have the school, ranking, and dojo systems that today’s karate has.
- During the school-gymnasticization and mainland transplantation, the content was systematically rewritten.
- Today’s Okinawan karate and today’s mainland karate also define themselves, in part, as separate movements.
6. The Politics of Bundling
Choosing whether to bundle, or not to bundle, is not merely an academic judgment; it is a political one too.
Those involved in Okinawan karate often emphasize that Okinawa is the birthplace of karate. This is a counter-narrative that recovers the historical agency of Okinawa, made less visible in the course of modern mainland-ification and internationalization. On the other side, mainland and international-competition narratives often present karate as a Japanese budo, alongside* judo and kendo*.
Both narratives have legitimacy. This series treats both as objects of analysis rather than choosing between them.
7. In Closing
Ryukyuan te and mainland karate are both continuous and discontinuous. The layers of continuity and the layers of discontinuity do not overlap perfectly. Whether to stress continuity or discontinuity is a function of where the speaker stands.
This chapter takes neither side. Its aim is to present the structure of the narratives, providing the reader a foothold from which to recognize which layer one is speaking on.
📝For readers new to karate. This debate has the same structure as the question “how is okonomiyaki (a Japanese savory pancake) different in Kansai and Hiroshima?” Both regional dishes are called okonomiyaki, but the way they are made and eaten differs significantly. Whether it is meaningful to call them by the same name, or more accurate to give them different names, is not a question of flavor but a question of social agreement. The “bundling” debate around karate has fundamentally the same structure.
Principal References
- Kadekaru, Toru (2017) Okinawa Karate no Sozo to Tenkai (沖縄空手の創造と展開, “The Creation and Development of Okinawan Karate”). Doctoral dissertation, Waseda University.
- Kinjo, Hiroshi (2011) Tode kara Karate e (唐手から空手へ, “From Tode to Karate”). Tokyo: Nippon Budokan.
- Funakoshi, Gichin (then written 富名腰義珍, Tominakoshi / Funakoshi Gichin) (1922) Ryukyu Kempo: Karate (琉球拳法 唐手, “Ryukyuan Fist-Method: Tode”). Tokyo: Bukyosha.
- Funakoshi, Gichin (then still written 富名腰義珍) (1935) Karate-do Kyohan (空手道教範, “Master Text of the Way of Karate”). Tokyo: Okura Kobundo.
- Okinawa Prefectural Board of Education, Okinawa Prefectural Edition: Karate-do Instruction Guide for School Physical Education (沖縄県版 学校体育における空手道指導書).
- Tan, K. S. Y. (2004) “Constructing a Martial Tradition: Rethinking a Popular History of Karate-Dou.” Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 28(2), 169–192.