Are the fighting styles of Central and South America 'western'? For example: Luta Livre/ Lucha Libre, Vale Tudo, and Capoeira?
good question! i suppose they should be classified as occidental martial arts since they come from the western hemisphere.
Depends on who you ask and how you classify "western." Capoeira, for instance, is proported to be of African decent though further developed in South America by slaves of equally African decent. Is it western because it really came into its own in South America or is it African because of its supposed African origins? It's all in the definition. Unfortunately tacking down the difference between what is Western and what isn't, can sometimes be difficult. As another example, take Bartitsu (Hi Tony!). Bartitsu was the brain child of an Edwardian gent named Barton-Wright who developed and marketed an eclectic martial art in England. It combined JuJitsu, Savate, Pugilism, and La Canne. Of the first three it seems that JuJitsu was the strongest influence. Barton-Wright studied JuJitsu in Japan and several of his most important instructors and demonstrators were Japanese JuJitsuka who moved to England. Now, since Bartitsu is so heavily JuJitsu influence (it even has a JuJitsu-sounding name) is it a Western art or not? In the end, I'd say that you should draw your own conclusion as to whether or not arts such as Luta Livre/ Lucha Libre, Vale Tudo, and Capoeira are Western and be ready to explain your reasoning to others. If you can articulate why you feel they are (or are not) with reasonable logic you're probably not going to get into too many fights over it even if others dissagree with the conclusions you come to. Peace favor your sword, Kirk Lawson
If you look at it, Vale Tudo follows roughly the same format as the old Pugilists used to until it was banned in Britain, I could be considered Western and then again look at the fact that a lot of it's practitioners are from BJJ, Brazilian Ju Jitsu is not as many beleive Brazilian, It is originally Japanese it is just that a Brazilian Family called Gracie used it to great effect, so is BJJ Brazilian or Japanese?? Is Eastern MA really Eastern, think about it, who brought it to China, and who brought it to the person who brought it to China. If we go back far enough can we really say were any MA comes from. regards pat
or from egypt. There are whatchamacallits, tomb murals depicting a stick fighting and ggrapling in ancient Egyptian things. I cant recall how old. The book that has the info I cant seem to find. And I think it is rather funny and maybe alittle stupid to think all fighting arts came from one place. And using any simularites between arts to prove one was derived fromone ages agao is fiunny also. As the human body only ,oves so many ways. I am failry certain that China and Japan and various parts of the world Old and New, East and West have arts that orginated in that one spot. Simply because one art has more proff behind it saying it older or the Oldest doesnt mean much. Saying the MA came from greece and moved to Indai then to China then to Japan is saying that for the thousands of years that there were peopl in Japan there were no figiting. Is it possible that elemnts from Prancration(sp) could have migrated form Greece to Japan? yeah it is. Now is Vale Tudo a Western Art? well it depnds on how you define "western" if it origniates in the western hemipshere of the globe then it is. But if by "western" it means does it have its orgins from one of the various areas in Europe, well I dunno. What are its origins?
technically speaking, vale tudo is a fighting competition with little rules on it. it is found in brazil. it is not a fighting art per se. it has no system or methodology save that of the precious few rules that it had. in the past, any style or martial art could enter vale tudo to be tested against other arts and practitioners. so it wouldn't be so far fetched to hear of a bjj guy going up against a luta livre guy in the finals. as for bjj. it is the jujitsu practiced and modified by the gracie clan and thier students. it came from judo and jujutsu that master maeda taught carlos gracie. since then it has aquiered a very brazillian flavor to it. luta livre is freefighting. developed in brazil, it has striking and grappling. for many many years it was the chief rival of bjj in vale tudo. lucha libre is the same as luta livre in the sense that it is a free fight. it is heavy on grappling/ wrestling. lucha libre has a "show" type that looks like wwe. capoera may have it's roots in africa like 52 handblocks (as practiced by the african slaves) but it evolved in brazil. it may look african but it is definitely brazilian. so, are they western martial arts? is brazil in the west? it is in south america. south america is to the west of europe or the east of asia. depends where you're looking.
I think to best answer those questions we need to to better define what arts are considered "western" and what parts of the world is the "west" I think what is commonly meant by western martial arts is arts that have their origins in Europe which does leave alarge part of the world out. It would be better to reer to western MAs as European MAs. But I think the problem stem from the fact that European and American civilzation are refered to as Western because they have their roots in Greece which makes no sense if yoy think aobu tit long enough or maybe it does. Butif you look at the defination of what the west is Europe and the countries that were founded on the ideals of Europe, namely the countries in North America. IM not sure how much South America has in commmon with Europe or North America and hence I am not sure if it considerd part of the "west". I guess it all depends on how much influence the invading Conquistadors and the following settleing by the Portugese and Spanish and how much of the indigineous cultures were left. Anyways since it seems that vale tudo isnt a style but a type of competition I dnt see how it can be a western martial art and the arts the are seen in it seem to be MMA and such.
I was first told that oriental wasn't so much a location but rather an appearance. Just as caucasion meant to be an appearance. I used to be into researching the history and development of martial arts about twenty years ago, before other things took priority. I once spoke to a savate master who told me that his art developed independantly of the orient, however, it was primerily developed in the port areas of france so sailors may have been influenced during their journeys. I have seen wood cut prints (one of the earlier forms of reproduction) of european noblemen 16/17th century swordsmen applying armlocks and wrist locks as a defence. What blew my mind was that one of these locks was the spitting image of an aiki technique called yonkyo. A very painful technique if properly applied. I like to think that there is only so much you can do with the human body and some techniques may have developed independently.
I've seen this idea before. It's particularly popular on the [Ijala] yahoo groups list. This list is dedicated to "Afrikan Martial Arts" and the participants of this list tend to be, well, racist to put it bluntly. But anyway the tomb paintings *do* appear to show stick fighting and standing grappling techniques. However, it's not much to go on and isn't much more then speculation to say that they are documentation or evidence of a systematic training method, enumerated art(s), or specific details. Many believe that they represent nothing more then depictions of games or contests which may or may not have been skilled. As a parallel example, there are lots and lots of Tiumph and Tomb art depicting Roman Legionary combat. However, other historical records seem to indicate that most of the Legionaries recieved very limited H2H training (with noted exceptions for some officers, etc.). Pell work, a few drills here and there, and *possibly* some partner drills. Well, somewhat similar to WWII era U.S. Basic Training on Bayonette. Peace favor your sword, Kirk
Yes, most likely it did develope independantly of the Orient. There's a lot of evidence surfacing in recent times that Savate developed all over the country, particularly in rural areas and not specifically in sea ports. However, the idea that Savate was developed from or heaviliy influenced by Kung Fu or sometimes pre-Brazillian Capoeria is popular with adherants of each of those arts. If you want to rile up the Kung Fu guys, point out that Wing Chun doesn't seem to have any real documentable history prior to interaction with the West and that WC basic stance has a remarkable similarity to Bare Knuckle Pugilists of the same era. If you want to rile up the "Afrikan Arts" guys suggesting an African link to Savatte, ask them for real documentation of the existance of Caporeria or Ijalla or any of the other arts they support as coming from Africa. Then ask them why on earth Sailors would specifically select a heavily kicking art, emphasizing high kicks, wide sweeping kicks, arial techniques, and toe kicks from reinforced shoes seeing as how ships were small, cramped, restricted, didn't offer particularly stable bases, and sailors were often bare-foot. Sure, there are nearly plausible explanations for each but they're not the easiest or most plausible answer. And besides you're just trying to wind them up. Yes indeed! I'm not sure which document you're talking about specifically, maybe Talhoffer, Codex Wallenstien, or Fiore dei Liberi but there are several others. Many of the manuscripts have locking and throwing techniques that are recognizable to practicioners of eastern arts, Shui Ciao, Judo, Eagle Claw, Aikido, JuiJitsu, etc. Have you taken a look at Peter's Wrestling? I think this is the most logical conclusion, personally. Everyone, understandably, wants to believe that their favorite art is somehow older, better, or source material for everyone else. But that's just not really a reasonable conclusion. It fails the Occam's Razor test. Peace favor your sword, Kirk Lawson
Please correct me if I'm wrong on this, and I may run on for a bit. My thoughts on what makes a "western art" western is how they are taught, not what. Every culture has infleunced other cultures that have influenced more, so on and so on. Striking is striking and grappling is grappling, you may have some different theory, modified rules or whatever. The roads may be different but they lead to the same place. The main differnce I have noticed is how "western arts" are taught. In western arts we don't try to change someone or try to lead them some place, we allow them to have the freedom to be who they are. In alot of asian (I'm not trying to slam anybody) it seems that they try to teach you how to be a "better person". I find that attitude to be very condisending. When I hear that, I first think that they feel they are better than me, or they are saying that I am not a good enough person. It feels like I am here to train when I do western arts, not pump up someones ego by bowing to them, thier flag and a picture on the wall, or having to turn around to straighten my clothes. It doesn't matter where the art originated for me, I will blend it into my own culture and keep what I want. I have learned asian arts, Filipino, Brazilian and european. For me it's all in the how, how it's taught, we use english, we don't bow, and no special titles for instructors (escept maybe coach), the only flag hanging is for the country we are in. So for me Vale Tudo could be "western", I hope so, I do train that way.
Send for the Time Team! It's interesting to note that one of Europe's oldest races from the French & Spanish region, the Basques, have a jumping/kicking art that has been preserved in traditional dance. It's probably just as valid to suggest that savate developed from a traditional European folk-art rather than from an African folk-art and that dare I suggest, Savate influenced Capioera??? Who influenced who....it's impossible to prove/disprove so we will never know either way!!! :bang: Louie
Kirk, So, what exactly are these "historical records" which supposedly "indicate that most of the Legionaries recieved very limited H2H training"? I ask this because most of the evidence actually points to the opposite--i.e., Roman legionaries were very skilled indeed (they were primarily swordsmen, after all). You claim that they "possibly" did "partner drills", and yet it's clear from Flavius Renatus Vegetius' Epitoma Rei Militaris that a "mock battle", referred to as the armatura, was considered a crucial part of the legionaries' training. Roman Army expert Peter Connolly stated in Greece and Rome at War that this exercise was conducted with real swords, with the blades covered to "avoid serious accidents". Emphasis was clearly on realism, as indicated by Flavius Josephus (aka Joseph Ben-Matthias) when he stated about the legionaries: "Their drills are like bloodless battles, and their battles are like bloody drills". Legionary training was based on gladiatorial methods, as mentioned Peter Connolly in Swords and Hilt Weapons. Weapon skills were taught to new recruits by a doctor armorum. Concentration was on sword-and-shield skills, with work at the palum (the "pell" you mentioned) and the armatura. However, Vegetius also indicates that legionaries were also given basic training in archery, slinging, and horsemanship--so their knowledge was in fact broader than is generally realized. And of course, wrestling was a popular pastime, which sometimes had actual military application, as mentioned by Cassius Dio: Cassius Dio 71.7: "The Iazyges were conquered by the Romans on land at this time and later on the river. By this I do not mean that any naval battle took place, but that the Romans pursued them as they fled over the frozen Ister and fought there as on dry land. The Iazyges, perceiving that they were being pursued, awaited their opponents' onset, expecting to overcome them easily, as the others were not accustomed to the ice. Accordingly, some of the barbarians dashed straight at them, while others rode round to attack their flanks, as their horses had been trained to run safely even over a surface of this kind. The Romans upon observing this were not alarmed, but formed in a compact body, facing all their foes at once, and most of them laid down their shields and rested one foot upon them, so that they might not slip so much; and thus they received the enemy's charge. Some seized the bridles, others the shields and spearshafts of their assailants, and drew the men toward them; and thus, becoming involved in close conflict, they knocked down both men and horses, since the barbarians by reason of their momentum could no longer keep from slipping. The Romans, to be sure, also slipped; but in case one of them fell on his back, he would drag his adversary down on top of him and then with his feet would hurl him backwards, as in a wrestling match, and so would get on top of him; and if one fell on his face, he would actually seize with his teeth his antagonist, who had fallen first. For the barbarians, being unused to a contest of this sort, and having lighter equipment, were unable to resist, so that but few escaped out of a large force." So the Romans even knew tomo-nage, and were able to apply it to battlefield conditions. We also know from period accounts that the Romans took a considerable amount of pride in their skilled swordplay--they even made use of the infamous hamstring cut more normally associated with Renaissance European fencing. The Celts, on the other hand, were often ridiculed for things like "crosswise blows aimed at no target" (from a description by Dionysius of Halicarnassus). In the final analysis, to compare the Roman legionaries' training to "WWII era U.S. Basic Training on Bayonette" sounds pretty ludicrous. Modern soldiers fight with their rifles, whereas ancient ones fought with a variety of melee and missile weapons. The Roman legionary was a heavy infantryman (though some--the antesignani--also fought as light infantry on occasion), and so focus was on the use of his gladius and scutum (his melee weapons), and on throwing his pila (his missile weapons). But hey, if you have "historical records" that indicate otherwise, please post them. Peace, E
More specifically, BJJ consists of a base of old-style judo/jujutsu (the ne-waza was supposedly derived from the Fusen-ryu), with elements of Western catch-as-catch-can thrown in (specifically the English form of catch, otherwise referred to as Lancashire wrestling). Maeda was not only an exponent of judo/jujutsu, he was also a CACC champion, and competed regularly in England. There's even an old photo of Maeda in wrestling tights, applying a half-Nelson/hammerlock combo on his opponent.
