My daughter asked me a question I have no answer for!

Quozl posted

A very good question but actully although cannon and firearms were use they probably were not as effective as the bow and arrow, or indeed the crossbow. In fact in the battle of Northampton in 1460 the cannon could not be used because it had been raining.

I dont think its really till the English Civil War in 1642 when we get out first standing army that the firearm really comes in to play in any real capacity.

Early firearms were as dangerous to the shooter as to the person being shot at, as metallurgy was not as good as later days. And they were very slow having to be ignited with a fuse.

So in reality our adoption of firearms somewhat matches that in say Japan, and lets not forget that gunpowder was invented in China so its likely that the East knew about explosives before us in the west.

AZeiteing posted

Try looking at Jigaro Kanos kodokan Judo book where at higher level one would practice other methods such as joint locks and defence against knives etc.

Koyo posted...

Thankyou Koyo that will save me looking it up.

Garth

 

I'm pretty sure that, with the exception of some katas that aren't really practiced anymore, some minor striking and perhaps a few joint locks, that the bulk of Judo is the same. Judo WAS different from traditional jiujutsu in a lot of important ways, the methods of practice and the specific techniques chosen being the two most important.

That's not the part I was asking about. I was asking where you heard that he payed "top-level" people to come in to make his school look good in the competition.

I don't know why you're so hung up on that one throw, though, as if that's entirely what made judo good and it's somehow totally different from any modern judo throw--it's not, in either respect.

And, it was ONE guy who won his matches with this throw, everyone in nearly all the matches, as you indicated before.

 

Actually randori was a method of training in some koryu bujutsu, its just that judo did it better and more often then anyone else, this lead to many martial arts experts joining the kodokan in order to further there own training.

secondary source here:
(extract)
http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/view.php?pg=article_importance_paper

''The Importance of Paper
by Ellis Amdur

First of all, the claim that koryu never had free-style practice is not true. There are many records of jujutsu schools practicing randori in-house or between schools. Essentially, Jigoro Kano formalized competition rules so that various schools could compete in relatively safety. Initially, it must have been quite exciting to view a match between Takenouchi-ryu, Yoshin-ryu, and Kiraku-ryu - all those different approaches on one mat! After a point, however, judo and its rules "took over" as a kind of homogenized system. This same thing has happened in the so-called No Holds Barred world. A decade ago, the excitement was seeing somebody from Brazilian Jujutsu fight a sambo player or a kick boxer - now, as Frank Shamrock said, "There are no secrets." Everybody trains pretty much the same way.

Thus, in the early decades of the 20TH century, a Japanese martial artist's name-card might read, X-ryu menkyo kaiden, Kodokan judo 4th dan. The Kodokan rank was, in a sense, certification that he'd been tested in free-style competition, and was not merely a master of kata practiced in the safe confines of his own dojo.

I believe that WWII is one of the major reasons that we so rarely see such Japanese jujutsu instructors today - the jujutsu schools were relatively small, and many of their top people were killed in the war or abandoned practice upon their return.

This, plus the ever-increasing trend towards sportive Budo, led to judo achieving almost complete primacy over the traditional ryu.

There was also some level of "sparring" in weapons arts - either in controlled fashion with wooden weapons, free-style in many ryu with shinai (bamboo practice swords) and body armor, or through taryu shiai (fights between men of various schools - anything from official matches before feudal officials, vendettas, dojo breaking, to street fights). It's a fair assumption that the vast majority of koryu practitioners today are not nearly of the level of many of those from generations past - because many of the latter had either fought or sparred, or at least were training with the intensity which comes when you really are preparing for such an event.

Even today, some koryu teachers are incredible, but many of them have skills that are a mere shadow of those of generations past. But even in the latter case, if a martial tradition has maintained an authentic compendium of kata and technique, one has a living tradition that can be revivified by one's own intensity and will. ..................
''

 

Those are some interesting points you made. Martial arts experts joining the kodokan because they felt that it tought such an effective system, however, is far different from Kano hiring a bunch of ringers to make his school look good in a competition, as garth seemed to be suggesting.

Also, I want to point out that I never claimed that Kano invented randori, or anything new for that matter--only that he took what he believed to be the most effective techniques and training methods and incorporated them into his new system, and that in fact, this approach lead to the creation of a much improved system. So, I would expect just about everything in Judo to have come from somewhere else.

 

Ive seen plenty of wrist locks in Royce's self defence books, and here is a video of Helio teaching a standing armlock in a self defence situation:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMAC5XDMeAE&feature=related"]YouTube - Gracie Self Defense Lesson part 3[/ame]

 

Of course you can find some techniques like that taught from time to time. If you study Brazilian jiujutsu, you might get tought a few of those, or you might not, but either way, that is not representative of the system at all. In fact, it's incredibly misleading to post a video like that and then claim that because you might get a few self defense lessons where you train like that, that it's representative of BJJ.

My point was that Judo may have contained a few of those at one time, which I freely admitted, BJJ may sometimes contain a few of those, which I will also admit. However actually training BJJ is a LOT more like training modern judo than it is like training the type of locks you see in that video, not only in technique but in training methodology. That is not representative of a typical practice, nor of the bulk of the techniques taught.

Edit: Ok, my internet connection here is really bad, so I hadn't been able to load very much of the video when I posted this reply. I'm still only about half way through it, but it doesn't look like it's full of wrist locks and all kinds of stuff like that. The first thing he does is a standing joint lock, but then it looks like he's going on to more standard throws. A lot of my comments still stand, and the ones that don't apply to this particular video can be applied to the books/pictures you're referring to.

 

Art of the Wristlock Trailer

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr3tKE2a3rA"]YouTube - Art of the Wristlock Trailer[/ame]

 

ok so point made, Im not arguing against judo or Jits, There both great arts that I train in, just pointing out that BJJ is a very different thing from Koryu, because its aim is different. Then again a some Jujutsu schools may of become overly inflated and over fixate on impractical techniques due to the long spells of peace in the Edo period.

You gotta admit roy dean has got slick jits though.

 

Gah, I hate the complete misinformation about western martial arts.

Western martial arts are extremely detailed and complex. They include locks, throws, strikes and kicks. In fact they include everything found in eastern martial arts. The problem is that nobody bothered to research them until very recently. So it's just down to publicity.

The earliest western treatise we have is I.33 from 1290. Next is the Longsword of Johannes Leitchenauer 1390. From then on in we have alot more information. If you look up the groups in the British Federation of Historical Swordsmanship. You'll find practically every western martial art research that is underway.

Europe was in a state of perpetual war since the end of the Roman empire. The arts that formed are possibly the most tested anywhere in the world.

The Bear.

 

Azeitune posted

Oh sorry, maybe I didnt make myself very clear when i said hired. i didnt necesarily mean in the payment sense although that may have actually happened, I meant to use the services of

http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f12/japanese-jiu-jitsu-900285/index8.html

http://www.zenbudokai.com/twentiethjj.html

But i'm quite happy to change the word hired to recruited, if it makes more sense.



Garth

 

Theres an excellent discussion on yama arashi and Saigo Shiro (aka: Shida Shiro) on ebudo here:

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=751&highlight=yama+arashi

There was nothing conclusive but the consensus was:

1) Yama Arashi wasnt a direct Daito Ryu waza,
2) Saigo Shiro wasnt a Daito ryu 'Master'
3) Saigo Shiro's Yama arashi was still included in some kodokan books, but fell from use.

and this is my own point:

4) A lot of people have a vested interest in what they want to belive, and could do with a more subjective mindset.

 

Hi Bear, thanks for this. Just Googled "British Federation of Historical Swordsmanship" and couldn't find it, but did find the "British Federation of Historical Swordplay". Is this the organisation you referred to, or is it different? I ask because the later of the two does seem to have a lot of research into sword work and quarterstaff in some places as well. Seems like a good source for European weapons arts.

I also agree that the Europeans have been killing eachother wiht scientific art for 1,000s of years, and quite effectively as well for all of that. And I quess that the reason why oriental martial arts are deemed "better" than occidental arts is probably down to publicity as you say.

However, two things some to mind that I am now wondering about.

Do Western Martial arts (and I hate to use the phrase "traditional martial arts", but I am trying to look at those martial arts that predate the idea of the "Marquis of Queensbury" and the sportification, if I may use that phrase, of martial arts in the West) especially unarmed combat, also include the joint locking and pressure point emphasis of the Easter Arts?

The second question is, why did Western Martial Arts go out of fashion. There is still fencing, boxing and wrestling, but the practice of say quarterstaff, or halberd, or falchion, or beq de corbine, etc, etc, etc, could really be said to be the research of historic re-enacters rather than "Martial Artists".

Can this be attributed to the fact that (as I alluded to earlier) hand guns became more available and more widespread in the West than in the East? I do apprecaite as somebody said ealier that the Chinese invented gunpowder, but it seems that although the Chinese invented it and used it for military purposes quite early on, the application of this gunpowder (and then later explosives) was seriously taken on board by the Europeans, who then seem to have taken great delight in using it to kill each other for at least 600 years, and perfected its use so to do. Did this reliance on gunpowder and other such weapons detract from the oter martial arts and therefore render them less widely practiced?

 

The original poster's points about variations in attitude and expression of martial technique could have been made about the preparation and serving of tea, or the difference between penmanship and calligraphy. How very zen.

Ultimately tea is tea and a sword cut is a sword cut, but the internal processes leading to the same result may be very different.

 

Quozl posted

Take a look at Talhoffer. From my own study in Ninjutsu I can see locks in that book that mirror our own eg Mushadori, Musodori etc.

The line between martial artists and historical reenactors is a very fine one. One could say that people who study Koryu are in fact doing nothing more than historical reenactment, in fact some of the X Kans in Ninjutsu have been claimed by others to be doing nothing more than historical reenactment, which is I am told how it is viewed in Japan. On the other hand one could also say that some of the historical arts for example Greco Roman wrestling are more like real martial arts than say many others that we have no problem accepting as martial arts.

Posibly but it really wasnt until the Napoleonic wars that the handgun came into its own. In fact gun smiths of the Napoleonic period had to have proofing houses to test each barrel because it was still often safer to be in front of the gun than behind it.

Well it was by the chinese as well, in fact the Chinese had rocket propelled artillery.

Well that would take us back to the 14th/15th century and like I said earlier firearms of this period played a very small part. Cannon was used but could not be fired when it was raining. Sir John Smythe in the 16th century talked about how useless firearms were especially in the wet and the Italian Jacopo dPorcia remarked that if it was bad weather a commander would engage firearms, and this was in the 1520s.

So although the firearm may have had the advantage of the long bow over armour penetration many opted for the cross bow instead.

Lets also not forget rate of fire, One could shoot 14-15 arrows a minute, yet it took a musketeer 1 minute to load and fire a musket.

Martial arts move on. Lets face it the only REAL martial art practiced today is that of the modern soldier. What many of us practice is in fact methods of unarmed combat, sports, spiritual systems and systems practicing a historical method.

Garth

 

''Martial arts move on. Lets face it the only REAL martial art practiced today is that of the modern soldier.''

Does that make Kali, MCMAP, and Sambo the only true martial arts then?

So Garth about the Judo vs Yoshin Ryu compitition, would you now admit that on the day, in those circumstances, the Kodokan training method was superior for the task in hand?

 

Kusa posted

No

Martial arts today in reality are fought by tanksm jet aircraft and soldiers. In reality the word martial art (Art of war) is actually a bit of a misnomer in this respect.

Think about it, we had western martial arts ie the arts of partizan, hand and a half sword, glaive etc. This gave way to the aquebus and pike, to the musket and to the rifle. this gave way to the assault rifle. In the American civil war the hot air ballon gave way to the zeppelin, the zeppelin to the bi plane, the biplane to the monoplane and then to the jet fighter.

This is the evolution of martial arts (The arts of war)

What many of us study by definition is actually a snap shot in time, ie possible how it was a martial art many hundreds of years ago, or a sport, or a cultural pastime. But it is not warfare. It is singular combat if anything, but NOT warfare.

And certianly not anything like the martial art of the battlefield today.

Did I mention anything about Yoshin Ryu?

And it seems probable that the throw used "Yama arashi" was NOT a throw used in Judo.

http://www.usjujitsu.net/articles/JuJitsuP3.htm

So although Kodokan Judo organisation may have beaten Yoshin Ryu they did not do it with a judo technique.

Garth

 

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=751&highlight=yama+arashi&page=4


''The theory that Yama Arashi is more like the style of fighting of Saigo is not just unlikely. But untrue. Yama Arashi was a part of Kodokan Judo.
I asked my university Judo Sensei how would be a Yama Arashi.
He said he was not expert in doing it, but show me what it would be like. (and appeard to be a verry strong throw in my opinion, but I am mudansha)
So he gave me a copy of one very interesting book owritten by Conde Koma (Mitsuyo Maeda) in 1935 that included Yama Arashi in the list of Kodo-Kwan Judo (in that time portugese had no standartization of translation and stuff to japanese) as some other techniques that do not exist in kodokan Judo of today.
So even if Saigo was the only one to use it in competition (shiai or whatever) it do not means that they didn´t trained it. and reagardless the origin, it reached Kodokan Judo and become for a time one of It´s thecniques''

 

''Does that make Kali, MCMAP, and Sambo the only true martial arts then?

No''

Here is a report of a us solider using MCMAP training, in a war zone, against what is termed the enemy to end his life.

http://news.soc.mil/releases/News Archive/2008/September/080927-01.html

''After stripping the terrorist of the weapon, the terrorist gripped Gibson’s rifle. Without the ability to use a firearm, Gibson engaged the enemy with his hands.

“Then he ripped off my helmet and all my (night vision) optics, so I couldn’t see all that well,” recalled Gibson.

The terrorist then began to reach for something hiding in his clothing.

“I stopped him ‘cause I thought maybe he was grabbing a knife to attack me with,” said Gibson.

The terrorist was reaching for the detonator to his suicide vest. The terrorist screamed “bomb!” in English.

“I thought at that moment that I was probably going to die,” explained Gibson.

As Gibson worked to stop the terrorist from detonating his vest, the terrorist had maneuvered into a position that was cutting off Gibson’s circulation.

Gibson, in an effort to save himself, began to hit the terrorist as hard as he could. His blows rendered the terrorist unconscious.

“I got my weapon into his stomach and fired,” said Gibson. “And he came back to conscious after that, I knew I got him. I stood up and neutralized him.” ''


I would very much like to know how you dont define that as martial arts?

 

That's them. I've met most of the Groups.

Yeah looks at the EMA arts that really took off. It was usually through Western marketing strategies.

Yes, if you look at manuals of Talhoffer and Ringeck you see alot of locks and strikes to vulnerable areas. These are from the 1400s older than most EMA manuals.

You have to remember until the last 60 years, europe was in a state of perpetual war. Winning was all so any art that wasn't immediately applicable to self-defence, duelling or battlefield was simply discarded. There was no sentimentality you see in EMA. Martial Arts were a day to day practical affair.

No Guns had no relevance per se. Many martial arts styles and weapons appear and just as quickly disappear due to the rapidly changing technology and tactics of the European battle field. Guns are just a very successful tool that have inturn been improved and older versions rendered obselete.

Innovation is really the key to European warefare. Where Japan had a few very well designed swords over the centuries. Europe had two designs before breakfast and had discarded them by dinner time.

The Bear.

 

Kusa posted

Funny that because in the book by Daigo Toshiro 10th dan it says

So in essence there might be a Yama Arashi in Judo, BUT is it the same as performed by Shiro Saigo? As it says...

http://www.kodokan.org/e_waza/yamaarashi.html

It continues

And on this website in realation to Saigo it says this...

http://www.bestjudo.com/article15.shtml

Garth