Just looking at some Jujutsu vids, and came across this 'history' of Jujutsu. http://www.waregachijujitsukai.co.uk/history.shtml According to this Daito Ryu was formed in 880AD - I'm no expert on Daito, but wasn't it created more around the 1800's?
I'd take everything presented on that site with a large pinch of salt, and an unhealthy amount of eye-rolling. Edit: Also having ruined about 5 minutes of my life I'll never recover looking at the gallery, what I see are people learning how to get themselves killed with the inclusion of such techniques against firearms.
In GBK we do when training Jujutsu or some Ryu, Tanemura sensei himself does too. It's a bit more subtle though, black obi over black hakama, rather than the stripes.
Just noticed this club got some stick on Bullshido some time back, something about claiming Judo grades that couldn't be verified, and the organistion where they supposedly came from had never heard of the head instructor. It was a different site then though, must have closed it and repoened this one, no mention of a Judo grade anymore though? Funny that!!
Sorry that wasn't a criticism, just saying that I think it can be done without being so in your face, as in the video
Back on topic guys, what are your thoughts on the history presented there? I didn't think there were any 'aiki' arts back in 880AD?
How many cans of worms do you want opened? Seriously? Daito Ryu claims, as you said, a history back to the 9th Century, however there is some considerable doubt over it's existance prior to Sokaku Takeda. This is supported by there being no record of the art prior to Takeda, early documents and licences from Takeda using different naming forms (Jujutsu, Aikijutsu, Aikijujutsu), which is currently distinguished as different levels of training in the art. I'm not getting into whether it is or isn't, it really, in many ways, comes down to the fact that if you are a part of a Ryu, part of that includes supporting the history as that school gives it (such as Katori Shinto Ryu's origin dates and founder living to 102 years of age, Shinto Muso Ryu's founders successful competitive duel with Musashi, Kashima Shinryu dating back to the 9th Century as well, and so on). There is no doubting the importance of the art, or its' veracity, though.
As I understand it, there was a school called Daito in medieval Japan, and modern Daito-ryu purports to be its heir, but there is very little evidence connecting the modern style popularized by Takeda to the Daito school of medieval Japan.
From what I understand, Takeda Sokaku's system was never even called Daito Ryu until around 1910 when Yoshida Kotaro (one of his students) pointed out to him that the kanji he was using for "Yamato" Ryu were more properly read as Daito Ryu. Daito Ryu itself, is in all likelihood a creation of Takeda and not something that existed as a formal school. For a fantastic read on the subject of Takeda, Ueshiba, and aiki, check out Ellis Amdur's book, Hidden in Plain Sight: Tracing the Roots of Ueshiba Morihei's Power - http://www.ellisamdur.com/buy-books-on-martial-arts.html
From what Ive read up on Daito Ryu, as well as speaking with people.. Daito Ryu, is a combination of Takeda family martial arts, and something called Oshikiuchi..which some say is a self defense art taught within certain Takeda Family members..Ive heard folks say that Oshikiuchi is simply a teaching of conduct/behavior.. I may be off on a few points, but its an interesting topic to read on anyway.
There are some really great books available on the history and development of DAITO-RYU, but as has been pointed out, one needs to be very careful what is being discussed. I noticed where the ancient art of the AIZU clan is often romantized as DAIDO-RYU to distinguish it from the more modern DAITO-RYU of TAKEDA Sokaku. Revisionists have been working overtime trying to connect the modern practice with its age-old distant, distant cousin. AFAIK, noone has made a sound connection and the resources I have come across generally agree that whatever in-house practices that may have been followed by the AIZU clan probably were lost when the clan was abolished in the 19th Century following the 1877 Rebellion. If any family members managed to preserve anything---IMHO thats a pretty big "if"---- it would not have been a cohesive, structured art, but a loose collection of techniques. For me, the idea of trying to make a connection between the modern Aiki-jutsu practices and some old traditions is a bit like the recent efforts of Korean nationalists who try to identify Japanese practices, exported to Korea during the Occupation, as simply Korean materials "coming home" after a long hiatus in Japan. FWIW. Best Wishes, Bruce
:topic: Just CURIOUS Bruce but why DO you always CAPITALISE words the way you DO? It's not NORMAL to DO SO. IF You'RE looking to EMPHASISE a certain WORD or TO show that IT's from a NON-ENGLISH language, italics are more the norm as they ARE less ABRASIVE in the FLOW of the COMMUNICATION. CAPITALISATION indicates shouting and THIS makes it quite a STRUGGLE to absorb your POINT at TIMES.
Perhaps apologies are in order, then. Of course, you are very right about capitalizing non-English and that has usually been satisfactory in most written communications up until the INTERNET. The problem, as I see it, is how to provide as many cues as possible so as to lend intent and context. For instance---- in the case of you and I --- I think its fair to say that if we were writing letters back and forth we would have established a sense of what each of us is about, what our motives and values are and patterns for expressing ourselves. Here on the INTERNET, we may meet folks in no other way than through our keyboards and screens. Motives and suspicions, intentions and agendas are much less than obvious. Add to this that not all folks who use these forums use English as a primary language. Also idioms can change from location to location, not just from country to country. And then there are just those times when people are having a "good day" or a "bad day". Here are some of the things I use these days to increase the chances of what I write being taken as I intended and not as its interpreted. a.) If I use an idiom, I work to put it in quotes so that, say, an ESL person may understand that when I write about "looking a gift-horse in the mouth" I am not actually examining equine dentition. b.) As you mentioned, if I am using a non-English noun, especially a proper noun I capitalize the entire term. c.) I understand that some people use capitals for emphasis---as you say, "shouting". I find that italics for emphasis are better suited. Probably the only bit that I didn't address was the matter of "normalcy". I know you didn't ask, but I thought I would share that for a few decades now, I have routinely been cajoled about the importance of being "normal" and being "accepted". A couple of years back--one Fall--- I learned why it is that these "sticks" are wielded with such effect. People fear being abnormal and not being accepted because of the implicit threat of being marginalized or disenfranchised. The implied promise of being "normal" and "accepted" is that one need never be marginalized or disenfranchised. As always, however, "the Promise is always greater than the Reality". One can live their entire life striving to be "normal" or "accepted" and, in the end, still find themselves on the outside....just because thats the way things are. Again, I'm sorry if you take issue with the way I express myself, but honestly, I'm 60 years old....and I really, really don't care. Best Wishes, Bruce
