The first martial art?

Are you being sarcastic? Because many of the things you just said are just a google search away from being disproven.

 

Too late to the party for me I'm afraid. I was gonna type something about cavemen but ya beat me to it. Nice anthropology reference there by the way.

 

Hey, that's not the 4 realz ninjutsu! That's that crap from America! The real ninjutsu uses sticks. That's why they migrated to the Iga and Koga provinces later in history. Better sticks there.

 

The history of martial migration:



All this talk of caveman, lineages, and pillaging has me wanting to organize a raid on Bullshido. We could pretend to be a small reclusive group of hardcore cult-MAists and offer comically exaggerated history claims. The potential for entertainment would be high in such hijinx.

 

................... how do people get to the point where they just type stuff like this.

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7ES0Tk9vLE"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7ES0Tk9vLE[/ame]

 

Actually the oldest martial art was probably weapon based. We're talking systemic action here. While apes and the like do engage in both wrestling and pugilism it is in no way systemized. Now our hominid ancestors were smart enough to be able to do the equivalent of beating someone with sticks, rocks, or bare hands.

Now even apes are smart enough to know the difference between contests within the tribe where when one male is victor and another loser they have the opportunity to surrender, and life or death conflict which generally occur with those from outside the tribe. So right away before we likely have systemization of combatives of any sort we have it broken down into what is essentially duelling type combatives and "quick kill" or life threatening combatives.

Now you're going to have to take a bit of anthropology and a bit of a reasonable hypothesis here. Since apes have the ability to teach and share novel information within their community we can already assume there would be some teaching going on, however with limited technology like a club picked up from the ground there's only so much if any an ape with limited brain capacity can teach and learn and again they do not systemize things the way humans do.

What this means is that human brains would have to encephalize to the point both where we have the mental capacity to systematically teach others (in the case of empty handed duelling like pugilism and grappling) and to the point where the technology necessitates systematic teaching for more lethal combatives.

At this point I'm going to go out on a limb and say this was likely a short period after our development of language, which we don't have precisely pinned down, when our technology and brain power had advanced to the point of systematic teaching.

 

Actually that's where I got my information so, plus the Kung fu info I got from a Kung fu teacher from china so....

And your point besides being rude is? Since you offer no actual counter informant I assume you don't have one

Prove me wrong then bro

Old tests ant, David used it, not during his Goliath fight, I think it's more detailed in the Hebrew bible ( idk what it's called)

 

Putting aside how wrong what you posted was and the fact that the bible is not a good source of information we're looking at a much longer timeline... One which predates the written word. We're hypothesizing about the initial development of combative skills and by initial we mean as soon as our hominid (not even homo sapiens necessarily) ancestors developed systematic combative instruction. We're not looking at a 10 000 year timeline. We're looking at minimum probably around 200 000 years around when homo sapiens appear approximately but probably anywhere up to about 2 million years ago with the appearance of homo erectus who likely had large enough brains and tool making abilities to warrant systematic instruction systems at least in a basic form.

 

No, it's not. The best there could be is a reference to combat using the term (Krav Maga essentially means "close-quarters combat", or sometimes translated as "contact combat methods"). Krav Maga the martial art was formally created in 1948, after going through a period of development starting in the 30's.

Then you really need to get better information, and better sources. I mean, you do realize that there is no such art as "Kung Fu", yeah? It's a generic Chinese term referring to effort and hard work, with an implication of reward and benefits gained, and can be used to apply to any Chinese martial system, as well as many, many other aspects of Chinese life. As such, there is no martial art called "Kung Fu", just like there's no martial art called "martial art"... it really is that bad a mistake.

No, I think the point is pretty obvious.... you really don't have much of an idea of what you're talking about.

Well, as there is no actual support for any of your claims, it's not easy to find a source that says you're wrong... but there are plenty of sources that give a far more correct account of things.

So you don't even know what the source you think it might be in is? For the record, you're probably referring to the Torah... and you're still wrong.


But to deal with the question at hand, I think that Sketco is the one on the right track... but there's a few more criteria to look at. Yes, the development of language is required, as is the brain development for the usage of tools/weapons (personally, I think they occurred the other way around, which is supported by the changing development in the skulls of our ancestors... but they were quite close together, so it's almost moot), but I think more had to happen. Looking at the reasons for martial arts, the origins of them would have developed out of hunting skills... but that's not quite enough either. What there needed to be was a reason for learning a systematized form of combat with other human beings... and that wouldn't have happened until the development of a more sophisticated society. There is a possibility that it could have developed with hunting parties looking to invade another groups territory... but, again, I think that's more an extension of hunting skills, rather than truly martial arts. When we started to become agricultural societies, and stopped being nomadic, that's really when society started to develop towards the political entities we understand them to be. And that's the real source of the development of martial arts.

Basically, I think it went like this:

Human society moved from being primarily hunter-gatherers to agricultural settlers. As this happened, the "better" land started to have value (it has far more when you are connected to it, and held in place, rather than a more nomadic approach of simply being able to move onto the next location). "Good" areas would draw more people to it... which would grow them. The more powerful members of the group would rise to a leadership position... and, as time went on, and the societies became more and more locked into the locations, there would occasionally be conflict over utilities and resources... this would lead to raids from one group to another... and would require the second group to be able to fend the invaders off. At the same time, the leaders of the group would often surround themselves with people who could protect them... and would probably prepare the members for raids on other groups. Time went on, and these locations became political entities, what might be referred to as "countries" today, and, in order to protect themselves (as a group), the concept of armed protectors (early armies) would develop. This was an extension, obviously, of earlier tribal warfare... but I personally don't believe that it was a true formalised method of training for combat until the advent of what were essentially armies.

So what was the first martial art? Honestly, we'll never know. First, you'd need to define what a martial art is (is it just Joe, the village elder and tribal war veteran telling the young ones that, when Fred from the village over the river attacks with an over-head strike with his club, you should move to the side, and hit his knee? I don't think so... I think that's just passing on combative ideas, not really a martial art), then you need to look at when society developed in what areas, and then you need to see if there are any records of established, formal methods of training groups of people for combative encounters, most typically to protect the location they're in. And you'll probably find that happened throughout Europe, Asia, and so on, without any need for any real, or even direct connection to each other. It's also important to note that, even if you do find the very first occasion of a martial art, that doesn't mean there's any connection to anything that exists now, or anything else that has existed anywhere else. It's like asking what the first fruit eaten was... if it was an apple, does that mean that no-one ate a banana until the idea of what an apple was had gotten around?

 

Actually...

Chimps do go to war. Our ancestors certainly did. Stands to reason they used those same hunting spears on each other from time-to-time too.

 

I didnt know the name, forgive me, I am not jewish, my source was the bible, and my brother gave me one other source and reminded me of a second, 1 the history channel, 2 the human weapon episode of KRAV MAGA perhaps look there where they speak to a krav maga instructor who says its older than 2000 years, your source being google or wikipedia leaves you limited.

true kung fu itself means hard work, meanwhile since this here is a martial arts forum i would imagine all of us understand i am using it as an umbrella term much like karate even though when most people say it they could mean a multitude of styles, or not even karate at all.

KUNG-FU, predates shaolin kung fu that most people automatically think of when they hear the term kung fu, it was passed down from farther to son!

and the "kung fu" instructor i mentioned, his entire JOB, in fact his entire college career was the history of martial arts. the lucky ...guy was PAID to learn martial arts, and achieve black belts and learn the histories of all the styles he trained in, which is hun gar, southern kung fu, and shohe-ryu karate. which is where i met him.

pankration information was from a friend who learned wrestling in highschool and studied up on it and judo for 20 years so, i am serious about what i say. I may be wrong or whatever but assumptions and wikipedia aren't good enough sources to convince me.

Despite all this, i RESPECT all styles regardless of age if thats what anyone here has assumed about me.

 

You really need some better sources, then, because your conclusions are incorrect. Hell, going to the Human Weapon episode, it mentions three minutes in that it was originally developed to "fight the Nazi's in Europe"... lot's of Nazi's 2,000 years ago, were there?

Seriously, Krav Maga was developed by Imi Lichtenfeld and formally created in 1948. That's really all there is to it.

Then, again, this being a martial arts forum, you should realise that most Chinese Martial Practitioners will point out that Kung Fu isn't even a martial art... it's typically the unwashed, ill-educated masses who think that Bruce Lee is the greatest warrior that has ever lived because they've seen his movies that think it is. You don't learn "kung fu", you learn Wing Chun, or Choy Lay Fut, or Hung Gar, or Taiji, or Xingyi, or Tong Long etc.

For 7,000 years? Do you have the slightest bit of back up to this claim?

Frankly, that doesn't impress me, nor does it give any form of credibility to the claims you made. I've known more than enough 'full time martial scholars' who don't have a clue about anything... but I'd probably put more weight behind the idea that you misinterpreted what was said, as you seem to have done so with everything else.

Pankration, as found in Ancient Greece, does not exist anymore. All we have, really, is guesswork based on some images and references. No amount of learning wrestling or Judo really has anything to do with it. And no, wrestling and Pankration are not the same thing.

I don't think anyone assumed that. More that you were relying on some very spurious information and leading with some highly inaccurate comments.

 

So i'm supposed to be studying for a test that accounts for 50% of my grade but this misinformation of the post is crazy.

i hope that clears things up

 

By that way of thinking, ANY martial art practiced in North America is an American Indian
martial art, because people have been living here and fighting for hundreds of years.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_martial_arts

That one disproves the Kung fu statement, it says Kung fu is at most four thousand years old, but that's not documented.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krav_Maga

That one talks about how Krav Maga was invented in the 1940s. Jews fighting doesn't mean Krav Maga.

Also, my post was a genuine question, I wasn't sure if you where being sarcastic or just have been given poor information. There is some good info, hope it helps.

 

:jawdrop:

 

While you're right that there would have to be certain social and environmental conditions in place to warrant a kind of basic military instruction I was dealing more with the issue of mental development to we we could systematically instruct one another in certain skills. As you pointed out hunting skills taught to other group members likely formed the first type of instruction method used for combat. I'm viewing this more in terms of combative teaching both in the duelling and lethal sense meaning that any kind of systemized combative instruction (which would probably be refined later for initial military instruction) can be considered a martial art or at least a precursor in the case of the hunting skills.

This I know. Our relatives are great tool builders to an extent and they do go to war. I was dealing with the issue of necessary brain size and the fact language development was likely necessary in order to instruct in the use of technologies created for hunting or warfare.