Hi Ran, A good point on steel. However, I think the Spanish had many more advantages than just steel armour. Naval power, artillery, firearms, effective Cavalry and Christian ideology to name a few contributed to the Aztecs defeat. However, the point I was making was that as martial artists the native americans were as effective as any other and because they lost doesn't invalidate them. China got defeated by Japan, Japan in turn got defeated by the Allies but we don't discount Chinese or Japanese martial arts. Many Chinese martial styles have only been kept alive by transmitting the teachings through a particular family much the way martial arts would have be taught in native american cultures. The point I was making with the repeating rifles was that it signalled the mechanization of warfare. Which radically changed nature of armed conflict but I admitt it was a pretty obtuse one. Perhaps we should start a separate thread on what constitutes a martial art? That would be heated. Dave
"Guys, does the U.S. even have its own martial arts. It seems to me that mostly only the eastern countries have martial arts, why is this so? Forgive me for my ignorance." Do remember that the USA is a very, very young country in comparisson to the eastern countries where many martial arts were developed. Also, western Europe (from which most Americans originate) was the first part of the world to develop technologies (e.g mechnisation) and skills (e.g gunsmithing) that made Martial Arts obsolete.
well, supposedly, native americans had martial arts with spears, bows, etc. someone claims to teach it, and ninjutsu, so i'm not sure about it's validity. it kinda just looks like he's playing the "exotic MAs" card.
native american ninja , sounds like a cheesey movie with lou diamond philips. Can see him with an all black feather headress and a stealth tomahawk.
This sites claim be about Native American MAs, but looks a bit suspect to me - http://www.adrianroman.com/what_is_red_warrior.htm http://www.adrianroman.com/tushkahoma.htm http://www.adrianroman.com/american_indian_warrior_council.htm Shoots himself in the foot with advertising a "Red Warrior" BB in less than a year by distance learning. May be his motives are legit but when you couple those with his distance learning money making scams they loose credibility.
I think all martial arts in the US have originated from some other part of the world (except perhaps Chris Clugston), but the Americans have made it their own. But then, isn't this true of any country?
Martial arts were never made obsolete otherwise we wouldn't be still teaching them to the military. There's a time for blasting each other with Apaches, and a time for in-close streetfighting.
I'm afraid Martial Arts are now effectively obsolete in modern warefare. Although taught they are very rarely used. Lets be honest gun beats fist anyday. Of the soldiers I know, only the specialists took a real interest in martial arts for battlefield use and they all practiced outside the regiment for martial arts. Dave.
Dave I am afraid that you are very mistaken. In addition to being an ARMA member, SFC Matt Larsen (Ranger) is also the NCOIC of all unarmed combat training for the U.S. Army, he trains the trainers. What is being taught in the U.S. Army is a mix of different techniques from both Eastern and Western martial arts. The pictures below are from ARMA's International Gathering in 2003 (http://www.thearma.org/photos/Gathering03/G03.htm) at which SFC Larsen gave a talk on the basic ground fighting that is current taught to US soldiers. As you can see, a lot of the ground fighting is based upon Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (per those Gracie boys). In hand-to-hand combat in Iraq and Afghanistan two of the most used techniques are the Americana arm lock and the rear naked (Mata Leao) choke. The Front collar choke and the thrusting choke have not been effective over there because the clothes of the bad guys are very thin and often tear before the chokes work. Of course, Matt does teach the soldiers that the one who wins in hand-to-hand is most likely the one who has a buddy nearby. :woo: http://www.thearma.org/photos/Gathering03/Classes/classes32.jpg http://www.thearma.org/photos/Gathering03/Classes/classes30.jpg http://www.thearma.org/photos/Gathering03/Classes/classes34.jpg Ran Pleasant ARMA DFW
Ran, I did say that they were taught in my post but rarely used. Talk to any soldier and find out the last time they used hand-to-hand fighting (I'm not talking about restraining captives) in a combat situation. You will find that the answer is probably never. This is what I mean't by effectively obselete. Hand-to-Hand combat has not been militarily decisive for a very long time. Hand-To-Hand is considered a specialists job or last resort. Dave.
How did you come to this conclusion? The only reason the Europeans were successful in their invasion is due to the spread of smallpox. Before the invasion, there were an estimated 30 to 50 million in what is now Mexico. After, there were less than 2 million. 1 in 3 who came in conctact with smallpox died. The others became very sick. Steel, gunpowder, cannons & guns are all Chinese inventions. They did not win because of steel or guns. They won because they were so disease infested the Aztecs couldn't even come into contact with them without becoming extremely ill. During this time, Europeans did not bathe, lived in unsanitary conditions, and ate rotten meat & food on a regular basis. This made Europe a breeding ground for disease. The indigenous populations "curiously, bathed daily," according to a Spanish invader. The Mexica and Spanish RARELY engaged in hand-to-hand combat. They left that to the other indigenous tribes who sided with the Spanish. When they did, the Spanish were greatly outmatched. Mexica were said to "kill two Spaniards at a time" in hand-to-hand combat. On one occasion when the Mexica surprised the Spanish and forced them into hand-to-hand combat, 70 Spaniards were killed and the Mexica went almost untouched. And what is this about stone-age? The Mexica were more advanced than the Spanish in every way, with the exception of weaponry, which by the way was all stolen from the Chinese. (Chinese invented steel in the 2nd century BC, Gunpowder, Guns in the 1200's, and the Cannon in the 1100's.) If the Spaniards didn't unleash smallpox and then hide behind other indigenous groups, they still would've been defeated, with their Chinese steel, Chinese guns, Chinese cannons, and Chinese gunpowder. I suggest you study a little deeper into this "stone age" culture and discover how much greater they were than their European oppressors.
Steel was invented in Britain in 1856 by Henry Bessemer, what you are talking about is cast iron which was invented in China. However, even though the chinese invented these arms it was the europeans who developed and refined the process to make them militarily decisive, hence the european empires. The Bear.
If it was invented in 1856, how did the Spanish wear it when they invaded in the 1500s? Steel has been around for thousands of years. I suggest you study a little deeper, too, and don't believe everything these liars tell you. The Chinese invented the gun hundreds of years before Europeans began to use them. Firearms are just another invention from another culture that Europeans are taking credit for. The invasion was not successful because of steel or guns; it was highly-evolved European disease.
Off topic: The single most imprtant factor that made it relaitvely easy for spain to conquer an entire continent was ...desease. Add a little alcohol to it and woala; dead indians! I don't have the exact numbers, but my girlfriend studies history, and she have said that it is estimated that over 60% of the indians died from deseases that europeans brought from the old world and that they'd developed imunity towards. I don't write this to disrespect the professional, battlehardened and experienced spanish mercenaries and freeboters that killed hundreds of Aztecs each, merely to point out how relatively small groups of resisters (Vietnam vs. USA/Tsjetsjenia vs Russia) can hold out for decades, while the huge Aztec nation collapsed relatively fast. It's said earlier that it was the difference in technology that was the decisive factor; terrorism and geurilla tactics of today sould be a reminder that it is rarely so. To break a nation you break it's spirit; either by friendly methods or by anihilation. Deseace made that all but happen in south america. As for USA'an martial arts: I'd say that any style invented/developed within USA's borders could be described as USA'an martial arts. All martial arts are inspired by older arts, so those insisting on calling systems inspired by ema/wma/both with their "original" heritage could just as well state that there is no such thing as the WMA /EMAcalled wresteling/aikido, as there's pictures in egyptian graves that pictures the techniques in aikido/weastern wresteling
Bessemer invented an industrial process for mass-producing steel, not steel itself. Many iron-working cultures also invented steel: European, China, Japan, India for example.
