Ninja were Samurai. All ninja houses were samurai houses in historic Japan. They would not be impersonating a Samurai, as they were in fact Samurai.
The famous Iga and Soga ninja houses were samurai houses, and as such could openly wear the Daisho, when not on uncover missions - pretending not to be samurai, but some other thing for a disguise.
That's not necessarily the whole story my friend. The samurai/ninja clan thing was actually a late development in the story of the ninja. They were originally commoners trying to protect themselves from the samurai, basically sneaky peasant heroes.
I'm not saying that there weren't samurai/ninja clans, but that wasn't how they started, and for most of their active period, ninja were commoners, or the occasional ronin.
|
Remember katanas were designed in a world where the major armor types were made of bamboo.
It's quite interesting. I've never heard/read of that. I thought most of the armors from samurai's ages in Japan were made of metal, wood, leather and cloth. Could you please tell me more about that bamboo armors?
|
|
I saw some mentions in this topic that "samurai were a caste class who served the nobles" and the like.
But, what that "noble(s)" mean??
I understand if you're talking about the pre-Shogunate era samurai in Heian period, when samurai clans had just emerged in the Japanese history and actually served the nobles (kuge and the emperor) as their guards and soldiers...But, samurai in the samurai's ages (i.e. Shogunate eras) served their lords, i.e. the shogun or their feudal lords, or upper rank samurai houses in the fiefdoms, or the chieftains of their clans in the first place, and not the nobles (though they did nominally), IIRC.
Or did those mentions refer to just people from the higher social classes vaguely?
??
Sorry, a bit off the topic of Ninja and katana. :P
|
|
I think one of the hardest things for game developers is striking a balance between flavor and mechanics. Paizo's ninja has to be historically accurate, while also appealing to the romanticized image of Bruce Lee, Naruto, etc. Oh, and their ninja has to be mechanically balanced.
(emphasis mine)
Ick, no. Paizo's ninja would only have to be historically accurate if it assumed players would all be playing in a historically accurate ancient Japan campaign setting. Are the Druid, Cleric, or Monk in any way historically accurate? Not at all. They're classes that took some elements from the historical idea and then made something fun to play with in a fantasy setting.
THAT is what Paizo's ninja has to be.
In that vein, weapon restrictions such as only allowing Samurai to use certain weapons have no place in gameplay rules, as it's pure fluff. If such a ruling is ever made, it should be made in a campaign setting book.
In Golarian, I see no reason to ever believe that any class couldn't use any weapon in the game, provided he has the proficiencies either by class or feat.
It's kinda funny.
I just watched Yojimbo last night. In the movie there is easily 30 swordsmen, most seem to have short katana or wakizashi where as maybe 5 or 6 of them seem to have what looks like a katana to me (the richer more important men) but with all the Katana and wakizashi running around in that film, there is only ONE samurai (actually a ronin) I think that says something to the reality of who carried them?
Might they have been limited by law to samurai? (which i beleive is yes but only in the combo of daisho) maybe, but who was going to enforce that law?
If they be criminals? They do what they like? If they be ninja? who is going to catch them?
Like Gun Laws, you aren't supposed to have certain guns without the right liscenses and checks etc. Does that stop criminals? Revolutionaries? Or ninja?
In Japan both katana and wakizashi are the primary swords in existence. Samurai wore them, but many others wore katana or wakizashi and were not samurai, including physicians, yakuza bosses, ninja, and other professionals as a mark of station (usually meaning they held some level of administrative power.)
Katana was never the exclusive domain of the samurai only, at least not in Japan. The daisho, both swords worn openly is considered for samurai only, but that was only during the Edo Period, 1600 - 1868.les existed about samurai and katana was toward the modern era (after 1600) are more or less anachronistic to the game.
The Age of adventure, samurai as warriors in battle all occurred before 1600, not afterward when samurai became an administrative position only. So the Pathfinder Samurai more or less emulates this earlier period, before 1600.
I don't need to be truly historically accurate in my fantasy game, but I can't accept claims of historic accuracy, when the claim happens to NOT be historically accurate at all.
Whoever believes katana and/or wakizashi are exclusive to samurai just don't know historic Japan at all.
My 2 coppers, history doesn't matter at all because it is a fantasy role playing game I don't want history I want fun. I doubt my group would ever use the two oriental classes in most games but if someone wanted to play one it would be inspired by anime like samurai champloo or a movie like seven samurai not a history book.
So the designers number one goal should be to make a class that is fun to play and balanced with existing classes.
It's to late now since they are going to be full classes but samurai, ninja, and gunslinger all seem to me to be great ideas for themes with alternate class features like what was presented in the advanced players guide. Ninja bards, ninja fighters, ninja rangers, ect.
It's kinda funny.
I just watched Yojimbo last night. In the movie there is easily 30 swordsmen, most seem to have short katana or wakizashi where as maybe 5 or 6 of them seem to have what looks like a katana to me (the richer more important men) but with all the Katana and wakizashi running around in that film, there is only ONE samurai (actually a ronin) I think that says something to the reality of who carried them?
Might they have been limited by law to samurai? (which i beleive is yes but only in the combo of daisho) maybe, but who was going to enforce that law?
If they be criminals? They do what they like? If they be ninja? who is going to catch them?
Like Gun Laws, you aren't supposed to have certain guns without the right liscenses and checks etc. Does that stop criminals? Revolutionaries? Or ninja?
While this is by no means a requirement, the general tendency was to make the wakizashi more of a battle blade. Because of its short length, it was easier to make it durable. Naturally it also served as a backup weapon to any katana, spear, axe, or what-have-you. Hence, the wakizashi was durable and likely to be used during pitched fights. Ideally, the katana had a wicked age, but because of its thinness, flex, and its imagined use a cavalry or dueling weapon which meant a razor age, would sometimes shatter on weapon-to-weapon impacts. Samurai in most era were well-trained as grapplers, and the wakizashi served as well as anthing else to stab people in the throat once you got them on the ground.
While this is by no means a requirement, the general tendency was to make the wakizashi more of a battle blade. Because of its short length, it was easier to make it durable. Naturally it also served as a backup weapon to any katana, spear, axe, or what-have-you. Hence, the wakizashi was durable and likely to be used during pitched fights. Ideally, the katana had a wicked age, but because of its thinness, flex, and its imagined use a cavalry or dueling weapon which meant a razor age, would sometimes shatter on weapon-to-weapon impacts. Samurai in most era were well-trained as grapplers, and the wakizashi served as well as anthing else to stab people in the throat once you got them on the ground.It's kinda funny.
I just watched Yojimbo last night. In the movie there is easily 30 swordsmen, most seem to have short katana or wakizashi where as maybe 5 or 6 of them seem to have what looks like a katana to me (the richer more important men) but with all the Katana and wakizashi running around in that film, there is only ONE samurai (actually a ronin) I think that says something to the reality of who carried them?
Might they have been limited by law to samurai? (which i beleive is yes but only in the combo of daisho) maybe, but who was going to enforce that law?
If they be criminals? They do what they like? If they be ninja? who is going to catch them?
Like Gun Laws, you aren't supposed to have certain guns without the right liscenses and checks etc. Does that stop criminals? Revolutionaries? Or ninja?
Where are you getting this information from?
The Wakizashi was intended, essentially for indoor use (close quarters), or for ritual suicide. Aikido was not necessarily a wide spread martial art over the years of the samurais existence, and generally only came into it's own during the last age of peace in the dwindling era of the samurai.
The Wakizashi was intended, essentially for indoor use (close quarters), or for ritual suicide. Aikido was not necessarily a wide spread martial art over the years of the samurais existence, and generally only came into it's own during the last age of peace in the dwindling era of the samurai.
Given Aikido was only developed from the 1920s onwards, no historical samurai would have known it.
Ah... this thread has been great for some laughs. I love how there is this great cross-talk with half the people being serious and the other half joking around. :P
So now I'll be serious- Aikido wasn't mentioned. A Samurai would have been trained in grappling, but that doesn't make it Aikido.
Also, this link is not a replica of a real sword. It's from the movie Zaitoichi. The whole 'shira-saya are swords disguised as walking sticks' is bunk. the shira-saya is a method of mounting a blade when not in it's full fittings, as a katana doesn't have permanently affixed hilt furniture like many swords from around the world usually did.
I stuck my katana in my leg once. It's funny because I was running through a routine I had practiced a million times, and I knew even before I moved, that I was screwing it up. Like moving in slow motion. I remember thinking "Uh-oh" before it hit.
I stepped forward when I should have stepped back, and - thunk! In it went. I stood frozen for a sec, thinking to myself, "Wow! I just stabbed myself in the leg with a sword." Then I pulled it out.
So I went upstairs, where, of course, the bokken I should have been using was sitting in a corner. ("But, honey, if I only ever practice with the bokken, then how will I ever get used to the katana's weight? Because at any moment now, our Bay Area apartment might be swarming with ninja.") I dropped my pants, and there was this big, beautiful, bright red spot spreading across my boxer-briefs.
My wife walked in and started crying.
Anyway, I cleaned it up and next morning went to the doctor to get a tetanus shot (yes, I clean my swords, but just in case). I'm not sure she believed me the first time I told her what had happened. It's not every day a patient comes in and says "I stabbed myself with a sword." She said next time I stab myself that deep, I should come get stitches.
I still have the barest remains of the scar. But at least the muscle doesn't twitch anymore. And it was nice to find out that I could handle the pain. Plus I get to say I was stabbed with a sword.
Note to kids: use the bokken.
I stuck my katana in my leg once. It's funny because I was running through a routine I had practiced a million times, and I knew even before I moved, that I was screwing it up. Like moving in slow motion. I remember thinking "Uh-oh" before it hit.
I stepped forward when I should have stepped back, and - thunk! In it went. I stood frozen for a sec, thinking to myself, "Wow! I just stabbed myself in the leg with a sword." Then I pulled it out.
So I went upstairs, where, of course, the bokken I should have been using was sitting in a corner. ("But, honey, if I only ever practice with the bokken, then how will I ever get used to the katana's weight? Because at any moment now, our Bay Area apartment might be swarming with ninja.") I dropped my pants, and there was this big, beautiful, bright red spot spreading across my boxer-briefs.
My wife walked in and started crying.
Anyway, I cleaned it up and next morning went to the doctor to get a tetanus shot (yes, I clean my swords, but just in case). I'm not sure she believed me the first time I told her what had happened. It's not every day a patient comes in and says "I stabbed myself with a sword." She said next time I stab myself that deep, I should come get stitches.
I still have the barest remains of the scar. But at least the muscle doesn't twitch anymore. And it was nice to find out that I could handle the pain. Plus I get to say I was stabbed with a sword.
Note to kids: use the bokken.
I've heard this sort of story surprisingly frequently- I think everyone who's really into swords has their story of when they really 'learned to respect the sharps'. (Not saying that you didn't, but I'm sure you do even more, now.)
I'll still keep practicing with my sharp, though- even the best practice blades still aren't the same. Plus, when I do my Zwerchauen with my sharp, I can almost hear a faint pop when the blade is at peak speed. I like to imagine that it's the tip breaking the sound barrier, but I'm 99.9% certain it's just the sound of my ego expanding. :P
"bastardly exotic"
Trademark that and put it on t shirts right away!
I've heard and read several stories about "the cane sword" used in the late 1800s and early 1900s in japan to conceal the weapon in public.
whether it's a "fully functioning sword" i cannot say.
I also know there were can sword about in france in a similar time period.
My Mom was a huge cane collector and actually had a cane sword.
It was nifty and all, probably on par with a heavy rapier, it wasn't sharp per se, but would have been nasty on the piercing side of things. I doubt it would have been any use in a fight with anyone who had a real sword, but against so a kid with a knife or unarmed opponents, yea it was probably worth something.
Likely more of a fashion statement than a 'real' weapon. But then the same can be said of early 'hold out' pistols which were barely functional and had a reputation for blowing up rather than shooting (didn't have good metallurgy then, or maybe the smiths didnt have a good understanding of chamber pressures, or the end user was using a too powerful load)
But the fact of the matter is, the darn things existed. It is quite possible that they were merely just some "feel good" prop, as to those who were accustomed to being armed, could well, feel armed.
As to whether those modern reproductions work? I dunno.
probably wall hangers, but you could maybe even stick your self in the leg with those too (the are a long pointed metal object, just not sharpened)
As for Aikido, I assumed that is what you were referring to, I have never seen anything anywhere else, that has eluded to 'samurai grappling techniques'. Anyone who has had close combat experience probably has picked up some (self taught) grappling. But I have read or found nothing talking about any early martial art or unarmed training per se.
Just because they were oriental didn't mean every one knows martial arts.
although it is certainly possible individuals learned it from somewhere.
As for sticking one's self with a real sword Holy COW! o.0
You could have hit the femoral artery! I hit myself in the back of the dead once with nunchucks once, not the foam practice ones but an actual pair. I thought at the time I had actually cracked my skull.
It made me wonder about those movies where *everyone* gets knocked out if someone hits them on the back of the head with a wine bottle, vase, or something else. Either I would be immune to that, or there is zero basis in reality to that ever working, I lean toward that never working.
Ninja were Samurai. All ninja houses were samurai houses in historic Japan. They would not be impersonating a Samurai, as they were in fact Samurai.
The famous Iga and Soga ninja houses were samurai houses, and as such could openly wear the Daisho, when not on uncover missions - pretending not to be samurai, but some other thing for a disguise.
That's not necessarily the whole story my friend. The samurai/ninja clan thing was actually a late development in the story of the ninja. They were originally commoners trying to protect themselves from the samurai, basically sneaky peasant heroes.
I'm not saying that there weren't samurai/ninja clans, but that wasn't how they started, and for most of their active period, ninja were commoners, or the occasional ronin.
Actually the samurai-ninja connection is about 1100 AD, with almost nothing mentioned in the historic record before this. All military prior to 1200 AD was a military caste, which were never commoners. Ninja are a military adjunct to the samurai caste and as far as historical shows, they were never commoners. Prior to 1100 AD, the military was the noble class families themselves who weren't primarily kuge courtier houses.
As far as 30 years research on these subjects - I can't find any other story, or at least no other story that can be backed by evidence.
So, I'm pretty sure you're wrong.
GP
"sneaky peasant hero" genre of ninja was invented by 1st edition AD&D oriental adventures.
As far as I have read, ninja start out as "commando" units under the Daimyo.
They don't want to 'waste' armies fighting so they use the special units to assassinate lords (daimyo/shogun) once the Samurai of the opposing lord were 'lordless' well heck they needed a job, and the daimyo with the ninja inherits the armies and the land and so forth.
so basically they served the same purpose as our special forces.
The ninja had the same 'honor' code as samurai because many of them WERE samurai (kept their day job). Later on it seems 'troops' specialized in 'ninja'.
The whole denying they ever existed thing, was really the lord denying the fact that he had ninja, which was convenient that his ninja were samurai, because no one could ask him "hey what do those dudes over there do for you".
Eventually there are some 'ninja clan', families schools or rogue ninja that have no tie to lords, but that likely started out along the same line as ronin.
It's really hard to track down your missing ninja... wait! I had 12 yesterday, 5 are missing...hey someone find those ninja!
but there is no historical basis to the 'peasant hero' ninja, although I did come across a story (maybe the guys name was hideyori?) who was a ninja who settled in a defended peasant towns from corrupt government officials and such.
I cant remember precisely but i swear the picture (painting) I saw of that guy we was wielding a katana, humorously enough.. ninja? ronin? both? most likely both... he certainly wasnt wearing a black suit and a mask.
IS the ninja 'suit' made up by american pop culture??
I've heard and read several stories about "the cane sword" used in the late 1800s and early 1900s in japan to conceal the weapon in public.
whether it's a "fully functioning sword" i cannot say.
I also know there were can sword about in france in a similar time period.
My Mom was a huge cane collector and actually had a cane sword.It was nifty and all, probably on par with a heavy rapier, it wasn't sharp per se, but would have been nasty on the piercing side of things. I doubt it would have been any use in a fight with anyone who had a real sword, but against so a kid with a knife or unarmed opponents, yea it was probably worth something.
Likely more of a fashion statement than a 'real' weapon. But then the same can be said of early 'hold out' pistols which were barely functional and had a reputation for blowing up rather than shooting (didn't have good metallurgy then, or maybe the smiths didnt have a good understanding of chamber pressures, or the end user was using a too powerful load)
But the fact of the matter is, the darn things existed. It is quite possible that they were merely just some "feel good" prop, as to those who were accustomed to being armed, could well, feel armed.
As to whether those modern reproductions work? I dunno.
probably wall hangers, but you could maybe even stick your self in the leg with those too (the are a long pointed metal object, just not sharpened)As for Aikido, I assumed that is what you were referring to, I have never seen anything anywhere else, that has eluded to 'samurai grappling techniques'. Anyone who has had close combat experience probably has picked up some (self taught) grappling. But I have read or found nothing talking about any early martial art or unarmed training per se.
Just because they were oriental didn't mean every one knows martial arts.
although it is certainly possible individuals learned it from somewhere.As for sticking one's self with a real sword Holy COW! o.0
You could have hit the femoral artery! I hit myself in...
Yes, sword canes were a real thing. In Japan it is called a shikomizue, and from everything I can tell, they weren't full katana. It's a popular myth that the shira-saya mounting was used as a sword cane, so I was debunking that. The European sword cane is more comparable to a smallsword.
As for Samurai knowing martial arts- of course they did! It's called ken-jutsu. From what I've been told, jiu-jitsu is a direct descendant of the Samurai's grappling arts. It seems silly to think they wouldn't know them. Knowledge of grappling skills was very common in the past- Knights had their Ringen, the hoplites had pankration, even the Vikings supposedly practiced wrestling techniques. I prefer to give the Samurai their due and assume they were smart enough to figure it out.
IS the ninja 'suit' made up by american pop culture??
That was invented by 15th century Japanese 'pop culture'. The black suits are actually derived from Stage Handler costumes worn during Kabuki theater. The black suit and mask made the stage handlers more invisible as they moved sets and props used in a kabuki play. Although they could still be seen, the audience recognized them to be stage handlers so for all intents and purposes were invisible, as you only needed to pay attention to the very colorful dressed and made up actors.
In the first Kabuki play where a ninja was introduced in the storyline, the actor playing the ninja was wearing a stage-handlers suit, and at the proper moment pulled off his maske and 'slew the actor hero'. This came with shock value for the audience using the stage-handlers suit, as nobody expected that.
Since that time, ninja are always associated with the black stage handlers outfit, but this was an invention of Japanese media. In performing arts its difficult to come across with certain concepts like ninja or ghost to an audience member - without some convention to indicate "this is a ghost" or "this is a ninja" the audience gets confused. So Kabuki is very structured, all the makeup worn by actors are known. One type equals young samurai, another makeup means old fool - visual triggers so the audience knows who is who.
So forever since then, ninja are associated with the black suits as they are visual cues letting the audience know who is the ninja...
Its just most Americans don't know the actual Kabuki connection, so they assume the suits were really worn by ninja - they were never worn by real ninja, only kabuki ninja.
GP
I wonder if any enterprising real ninjas ever tried infiltrating some lord's estate by becoming a member of a travelling Kabuki troop?
Guard A: That guy looks suspicious. Should we alert anyone?
Guard B: Nah, he only looks like a ninja.
Guard A: So if he was a real ninja he wouldn't look like a ninja?
Guard B: Yup. Black suit, black head covering, black mask. Definitely fake ninja.
[Cue rambling discussion with Monty Python-esque overtones about real ninjas, fake ninjas, whether ninjas weigh as much as small stones and the carrying capacity of swallows]
Guard A: Thank goodness for that. So I guess those poisoned shurikens he just threw at Lord Takeda are also fake.....
[Guards A and B exit stage left as fast as possible]
As for Samurai knowing martial arts- of course they did! It's called ken-jutsu. From what I've been told, jiu-jitsu is a direct descendant of the Samurai's grappling arts. It seems silly to think they wouldn't know them. Knowledge of grappling skills was very common in the past- Knights had their Ringen, the hoplites had pankration, even the Vikings supposedly practiced wrestling techniques. I prefer to give the Samurai their due and assume they were smart enough to figure it out.
So jujitsu (the japanese form, jiu is brazil) is thought to have derived from chineese origins in the later part of the 17th century, but wasn't really wide spread until the 1800s.
Like most open hand martial arts, the forms were closely guarded secrets, and many many forms of kung fu died with the ending of a family line.
The Problem with martial arts is A) hitting someone with fists and wrestling as as old as cain hitting able with a rock, and B)Modern assumptions have clouded their true origins.
To be a "martial art", it technically has to be a trained, recorded system that one person can learn in an organized fashion from another person to the point where the moves are exactly the same.
"learning to fight" or "being good with ones fists" doesn't mean you are "trained in the martial arts".
I once heard an account of a biker named "chuck" knocking out Jean Claude Van Damme in a Bar in New York City.
Chuck was interviewed on the radio, and asked about the fight, he said he didn't remember much because he was so dang drunk. Accounts of the incident mainly came from other people who were there.
Chuck was never trained in the martial arts, but one can assume as a leading member of the hells angels the guy can fight.
Hoplite's, Centurions, Samurai, anyone who has served in a military fashion in war and survived hand to hand combat has some form of hand to hand fighting skill. Doesn't mean his 'technique' is the same as his buddies techniques.
There are so many 'martial arts', in reality, because every 'house', '
school', family or clan, developed their own.
We in the US tend to think of martial arts in absolutes like "karate" and "kung fu".
In reality, it is very unlikely that jujitsu or any other formal martial art was actually taught to samurai as a caste.
There was a Samurai 'adoption' process from older to younger samurai (which i cant remember the name of. This was not a father son thing.
this is likely how fighting techniques were passed.
All shaolin monks were taught choy li fut en masse, samurai training didn't have that kind of lineage. Later in the 1800s there were samurai schools, but this was in an attempt to preserve a dying caste, as "modern" japan was trying to make them obsolete.
It's possible, by this time, things like jujitsu etc, were more formalized.
Saying all hoplite knew pankration is likely very, very exaggerated. The Hoplite for example, lived and trained in teams of 6. They gathered en masse for times of war, but they did not train as an 'army'. So it's unlikely one team fought exactly like another team.
certain things were common, but just like chineese martial arts they varied greatly by family.
Saying warriors of old could punch, kick and wrestle?
Sure like I said, Cain got able with 'rock-fu-do"
So jujitsu (the japanese form, jiu is brazil) is thought to have derived from chineese origins in the later part of the 17th century, but wasn't really wide spread until the 1800s.
That is only one of several theories- I am inclined to believe it is wrong. Google 'nihon koryu jujutsu' and you will find many articles relating to the grappling methods of the Samurai, including claims that the systematization of Samurai arts started as early as the Heian period (others say Muromachi). Those early arts are thought to have included grappling. I find it hard to believe that the Samurai had their own grappling arts for over 600 years but then chose to 're-format' based on a Chinese tradition.
Apologies if I misspoke by using the Brazilian name rather than the Japanese, but as the Brazilian is a descendant of the Japanese I would only be wrong in saying 'direct'.
To be a "martial art", it technically has to be a trained, recorded system that one person can learn in an organized fashion from another person to the point where the moves are exactly the same.
I think this definition is far too narrow, and I believe many other martial artists would as well. It certainly doesn't need to be recorded, and moves being exactly the same- rather uncommon. Everyone personalizes their style to a small degree.
I would define martial arts as a systematic approach to combat. Many would also say it should be a codified system, but I would say that if it is systematic enough to be a martial art, then it is at least implicitly codified. I base my definition on the origins of the term- i.e. the Ars Martialis.
"learning to fight" or "being good with ones fists" doesn't mean you are "trained in the martial arts".
Quite true- but it's the 'training' that's key. Once you can systematize it to the point that it can be trained effectively, it is a martial art. Boxing is a martial art as well- albeit a very narrow and specific one.
Hoplite's, Centurions, Samurai, anyone who has served in a military fashion in war and survived hand to hand combat has some form of hand to hand fighting skill. Doesn't mean his 'technique' is the same as his buddies techniques.
See my response above to your definition of a martial art. I wouldn't expect their technique to be 'exactly' the same, but simply training together will tend to end up with noticeable similarities.
Saying all hoplite knew pankration is likely very, very exaggerated. The Hoplite for example, lived and trained in teams of 6. They gathered en masse for times of war, but they did not train as an 'army'. So it's unlikely one team fought exactly like another team.
certain things were common, but just like chineese martial arts they varied greatly by family.
I never said they all knew it- I merely stated that it was available for them to learn. I can understand how that may have seem implied, though. I accept that there were some who might not know it, just as not all knights necessarily knew Ringen.
Really though- why must training in small groups or varying by family necessitate that they not know pankration? Pankration was an Olympic event for centuries with competitors from all over Greece. I find it far harder to believe that it wouldn't have been known by many soldiers, at least. I seems sensible to expect that there would be a certain degree of standards for training, otherwise fighting as a large cohesive unit could have proved rather difficult.
There can be many schools of a single art across time and area- for instance: every master of Kunst des Fechtens had his own style, with changes noticeable across its roughly 300 years of popularity, but it was also still recognizable as one art in essence.
EDIT: forgot part- oops!
Why?
I saw this movie once, right? And this guy touched this other guy's katana, and the first guy's hand EXPLODED.
That's how badass katanas are.
Shadryl:
You are relying on google and wiki for your information, which are both heavily driven by pop culture ideas of 'reality', and contain so many outside 'opinions' with holes and poor sources in them.
Google can give you generic information and give you a basic idea of something. It can also give you something a 12 year old wrote on his book report. The internet is a dangerous place to get information because the filters on it are very poor for those not experienced in it's use (and I mean very experienced)
You can say jujitsu and Jiu-Jutsu are related, but you will change your opinion when you see one or the other or especially both together in the same demonstration or display.
It is a common misconception that the Japanese like to portray they had their 'own' martial arts without anything coming from china. There is a problem with that. There is nothing pre-dating their military domination of china, referencing any open hand combat that cannot draw it's lineage directly from china. Pretty much in the same way Americans cannot claim their own martial art that doesn't draw it's lineage from somewhere else.
Karate is watered down kung fu. The idea that the samurai all knew jujutsu isn't supported by older writing that one can read by picking up a book, or taking classes in universities. No one taught in 1950 or 1930 that jujutsu was a samurai tradition and widespread in the hienan period. Why? because no one had invented google yet?
Likewise things like pankration and other less known martial arts have tried to 'invent' ancient lineage to their martial arts styles to 'legitimize' them. Creating articles on the internet where you can freely publish any drivel you want to come up with that someone will read. They look back a little and say "this is sorta like that" and that punching and wrestling is sort of like my martial art so Achilles is the father of savate! See! Look how old my martial art is.
All currently existing major martial arts draw their lineage through masters, like families can track their genealogy.
Example, I am a practitioner of Wing Chun Kung Fu. My Sifu was Jose Calasanz of Dominican decent, his sifu was the son of Yip Man, Yip Man is the father of Modern Wing chun, who through him all wing chun outside china can be tracked to. Yip Mans Kung Fu lineage is well documented and can be traced back to the styles progenitor, Ving Tsun (or Wing Chun) herself, the woman who invented the style, and was originally a shao lin monk. Wing Chun came about because she was too old and weak to perform the style she trained in as a young monk, and the form was long and complicated, and would take too long for her to teach a student at her advanced age, so she created a new style (based on the original) that could be passed down and more easily trained.
All Wing Chun is like other Wing Chun to the point simply by watching it, you can recognize it.
Judo, jiu-jutsu, etc are all like this, and all have recognizable technique and form that label them.
Balling up ones fist and making hit someone isn't boxing and putting a ful nelson on someone isnt pankration.
Unless you can draw the lineage of a martial art through a documentable living person, it's origin can only be guessed at, at best.
That is similar to saying "I have ancestors from Norway, so my family tree includes vikings" which is a pretty big stretch to say the least.
Modern pop culture likes to have everyone have a martial art with all these complicated moves. Really? who invented it? who did they teach? where did the modern guy learn it from?
Don't have any of that? nonsense.
Not everyone knew 'martial arts'
If you google pankration for an example, you get it drawing it's lineage back to Hercules and characters in homers writing. Silliness, this is fiction.
Homer didn't write about martial arts, so how do we know these warriors were practioners of pankration? If they were why wasn't it written about in Homers books? Even if they were fiction, they were based on things of the time and what he saw around him, just like the armor and weapons and shields and such.
Because writings of that very era exist and non of them mention pankration, it's a pretty poor indicator that it was invented or existed at the time.
The same goes for jujutsu being a common form taught to all samurai, there it simply isnt mentioned in period pieces, but it all talks about things like noh, and calligraphy and all their education. All these things in detail, why would the period writings have over looked the inclusion of jujutsu unless it didn't exist?
Maybe some Samurai knew the formalized martial art? That's quite likely, just like some soldiers today know martial arts and many do not.
However, specific grappling, like grabbing ones wrist to prevent the attached hand from swinging a sword? Oh, I'm pretty sure they came up with that one in a jiffy!
Something like that may even be taught inside kenjutsu, but I'm not sure since I know next to nothing about that form, except what little I have seen demonstrated.
In most cases, armed forms are superior to unarmed forms, and the unarmed forms can draw their history to a point where a government outlawed the use of weapons outside the military. This behavior has always, throughout history, resulted in a boom of 'martial arts' and black market weapons sales.
The Samurai had swords, and were entitled to swords and armor as part of the law and culture, the need for formal open hand combat training simply didnt exist. Later, when the swords became outlawed, things like jujutsu and aikido became much more common, because the need to know them existed. Once this happened, you can also find writings in period pieces mentioning this, and the forms by name; as such a very good indicator that this is when the forms first started to be practiced on a widespread scale.
What you want to call martial arts, and your own definition of such, is going to be very different, than what the formal martial arts community has defined.
I could teach you what I call "No-Fu-do" (a combined from of karate, kung fu, Krav Maga and Sambo) because it is 'formless' and as such is not a form or style. But it is not recognized as a 'martial art' by any licensing body. I have over my life, been a student of all four forms (but spent , much more time in kung fu than any other), but doesn't mean what I cooked up is a legitmate martial art.
IF (big if) I were to start a school and somehow magic up students (more than my wife and a few people I have taught) and say graduated a few students to teacher status and it survived and spread and lasted, I don't know maybe it would be recognized someday as a martial art.
Right now it is simply how "pendagast fights" and there are a few people who "fight like pendagast" because they learned how to fight by being taught by pendagast. If that never leaves my little group of "hoplites" we can't say that the hoplites all knew 'no-fu-do' but maybe X hero and his little band of merry men and a special way of fighting whose techniques and name have been lost to time.
|
But I have read or found nothing talking about any early martial art or unarmed training per se.
Just because they were oriental didn't mean every one knows martial arts.
Sorry, you've just hit a pet peeve of mine. 'Martial art' does not mean "East Asian fighting style". It means "fighting style". Samurai were warriors, they knew a martial art. Likewise, European knights knew martial arts. Just because they didn't make Bruce Lee animal noises doesn't make their martial arts inferior.
Sorry, you've just hit a pet peeve of mine. 'Martial art' does not mean "East Asian fighting style". It means "fighting style". Samurai were warriors, they knew a martial art. Likewise, European knights knew martial arts. Just because they didn't make Bruce Lee animal noises doesn't make their martial arts inferior.But I have read or found nothing talking about any early martial art or unarmed training per se.
Just because they were oriental didn't mean every one knows martial arts.
Japanese ARE oriental.
Japan has tons of different martial arts. In fact. it's arguable the Japanese ones that the American West knew about first.
Knowing "how to fight" is not the same as knowing "martial arts".
Does the U.S. Military have a "martial art".... ummm hmmm wait, NO.
Does that mean their soldiers are untrained? No.
The definition of martial art is quite clear, as doesn't include simply knowing how to fight. It is a formalized system of something that can be recognized from student to student and from school to school (albeit some schools are varying techniques which overtime develop into their own form).
Almost all martial arts carry with them a philosophy or spiritual aspect that is also taught and is thereby more than "punch guy in face".
While in the US Armed forces, as part of regimental training, One of the Graci Brothers came by and trained us in Brazil Jiu-jutsu (it wasn't Hoyce it was another one I forget his name).
But that was weeks, not enough to make jiu-jutsu a form we were trained in, nor was it 'army wide'.
Likewise, the European Knights did not have a "martial art".
Savate is a martial art, no animal noises, not east asian. Systema, Russian in origin, is a martial art, which some argue is old enough to have influenced some of the chineese forms (although not a proven fact).
Krav Maga a martial art, Middle East, Israel.
I don't recall the Indian Martial Art forms but I know they exist.
Capeoria (did i spell that right) is a form from the carribean, also a martial art.
What I was referring to is a modern world misnomer that "all orientals know/knew 'martial arts'" which is categorically untrue.
Because many of the eastern forms spiritual/philosophical values intermingle with, or had influence on the creation of, several of the forms; and the fact that many of the forms are practiced just for simple 'exercise' it could be said that oriental martial arts are far more common 'per capita' and that gives rise to the american misconception that 'all orientals know martial arts'.
Therefor, by extension it cannot be assumed that because the Samurai were Japanese, that they had a formalized, systematic , unarmed fighting style that was common to all Samurai.
Sure they all knew and had training in their weapons, but even that was not taught at formal "school" and was descended from one 'Senior' Samurai to a younger 'adopted' one, and so there for what "Joe" taught to "Tom" might not have been the same thing that "Horo" taught to "Hami"
Kenjutsu/Kendo is a generic term for "fighting with a sword". In modern days that is a formalized martial art, but has only been organized as such int he modern era.
The star wars Jedi relationship of "master and padawan" was adopted directly from the samurai tradition, I do not know the name of this, but Im sure gamer-printer does. It had a name or title that meant something similar to 'love', but was referring specifically to the amount of attention and time and effort and dedication a master gave to his student to teach him what he knew. (it did not mean that some old guy was in love with some young guy)
The thought process being that, if the older samurai had lived long enough to teach a student, that what he had to pass on must be pretty good.
Did some of the middle era samurai know jujutsu and pass it on to his student, very likely. Is there evidence of widespread samurai knowledge or jujutsu? No.
|
|
Does the U.S. Military have a "martial art".... ummm hmmm wait, NO.
O RLY?
USA
Marine Corps LINE Combat System
Marine Corps Martial Arts Program
Modern Army Combatives
S.C.A.R.S. (military)
Just for fun, let's add German, Russia, and Israel into the mix:
German school of fencing (Medieval & Renaissance)
Spetsnaz GRU hand-to-hand combat style
Krav Maga
SCARs was invented by a Navy Seal, with some help with a few of his Seal Buddies. It is not taught unilaterally taught in the Navy or SEALS. Not every sailor or SEAL knows 'SCARS'. The SEAL that invented it did not invent it as an employee of the US NAVY, he happened to BE a SEAL, but it wasn't developed as a military project or adopted by them.
I'm sure the guy wants to make it so, it would be a great financial boon to him. But it is not so.
MCMAP is not a 'martial art' in it's own right, its a system of basic training hand to hand that everyone gets and is an evolution of basic hand to hand all soldiers received. It's a combination of simple tricks, some judo, etc.
I remember practicing the 'slap block' in boot. It's has been officially recognized as of 2001 as something 'special' but its not, they can do PR on it all the want. But it's the same stuff ALL marines/soliders got taught in basic/boot. Maybe if they refine it for years and actually have all marines train and advance and make it part of rank advancement, regular PT, training etc, to the point you have to be better at this combat form in order to advance in rank, then maybe. But right now its not more than a PR pet project to make basic training hand to hand combat something 'bigger' than it really is. It is the by product of the modern 'mixed martial art' craze and the concept that the marines are better trained than certain other military branches.
But like I said, maybe the will get some where with that.
"Modern Army Combatives" FM 3-25.150 (Combatives)?? Seriosuly? Please do your home work!
In the army we have all sorts of access to FMs (Field Manuals) the army slang for toilet paper, by the way IS "FM"
Every so often these FMs are updated and become the basis (basis not exact) for what is taught to recruits in basic training.
During Squad level training (which is essentially down time but the officers say you have to train) Inexperienced NCOs (new guys, newly promoted) will rifle through the company library and find an FM to teach out of.
There are SO many FMs on various subjects you could never train regularly to the point of proficiency in most of them, and several that are so common that they are "every day life" for a soldier.
The FM on combatives is not one of them.
It, like the marine version is just a bunch of stolen judo tricks and such, but it not part of everyday training and practice for a soldier.
I particularly remember several moves that required one to be wearing a 'Gi' or loose blouse (like the old army BDU top, which they do not wear anymore) which is so judo it's silly.
Now do Marines, Rangers, etc know how to fight and do it often? for the most part heck yea. But it really boils down to brawling. Some are better at it then others and all of them would seriously injure or kill untrained civilans.
But there is no US Military wide "martial art". I've been there, done that.
We even had a few guys that went to martial arts classes on their own. I remember one guy was quite good at judo, Why would he pay for Judo classes, do you think, if the Army taught, maintained, and regularly had us practice "modern army combatives" and they were viable?
Why did we not have rings, and open competitions featuring these moves and forms? (we darn right should have I think, but we didnt) what we DID have was BOXING matches.
I participated in one once, it was silly, Id never had gloves on to fight before and I got 7 weeks of training with a Corporal in the company who had been a boxer, I couldn't get used to these huge gloves on my hands or not using my feet (being trained in kung fu).
But no, there was never an official adoption of this FM Manual as "ARMY Wide martial arts".
Krav Maga I mentioned above, and I actually spent time and money of my own learning (while employed by the US Army)
There is no such thing as Spetznaz GRU hand to hand style.
The GRU is a government group similar to the CIA the KGB was like the FBI.
Spetznaz have two things they study, Systema (which means system) and Sambo which is more like Judo/jujutusu.
Funny that I mentioned all this already above your post.
Sambo is more of the "Russian National Sport" they use Sambo like we have boxing, combined with the popularity of baseball.
Systema however is where Marine/Army hand to hand FMs SHOULD be.
Systema was originally developed for military bodyguards, it was then taught to ALL spetznaz. It's quite rough and brutal, there is no "sparring version" of this, no kid gloves. It is possible to die, training in systema. Experience in systema is earned with broken bones, cracked ribs and basically everyone else who already knows it pounding on you.
Almost all spetznaz know sambo before joining spetznaz, due to it's civilian popularity.
I learned Sambo from a former spetznaz who had joined the East German Paratroop corps after the fall of the Wall.
IT was called "combat Sambo" and I suspect it had some systema in it.
The Russian government spent quite a bit of time and money (as did the Israelis with Krav Maga) developing systema. It first began (like Krav maga) only being known and trained in by very few specialists and then moved into unit wide training. The US Army has of yet not made that kind of effort or expenditure on that kind of training, only little spurts of it here and there, or the 'junior' version they have now, they have a long way to go before they are claiming proficiency levels like systema or krav maga)
These days Krav Maga is very prevalent, and is even taught outside the country, most noteably here in the Us and France. But its roots began in the early 50s.
Every male and female in Israel is drafted, and must serve in the IDF (males 3 years, females 2 years) and as such every current generation of Israeli citizen knows and has been trained at least some, in Krav Maga.
They are however a special case.
Although the US does not have anything along the lines of Krav Maga or systema; if there were going to I would highly suggest SCARs which I've toyed with a bit for a few weeks when I had the opportunity to get some training, rather than trying to fall back on FM 3-25.150 (Combatives), which is laughable.
"what makes the grass grow green? Blood, Blood! Blood makes the grass grow green!"
I remember that training.
For the record, I spent a decade in US Army Special Operations Airborne units. So if there was this "Army Wide Martial Arts" system, I certainly would have spent the money going to kung fu classes.
Google and wiki are your enemies, they don't usually portray anything close to the truth, especially when you don't have anything to compare them to, that is reality or at least based on it.
I learned what I learned by being there, and doing that. The Rest by going to Actual School and Learning it, followed closely by reading books on the subject. Not Some google search engine blog.
Pendagast-
You are relying on a twisted definition of martial arts. The formal martial arts community of today does not have the authority over all time and space. That's pure arrogance. You're the one who's letting his perception be 'clouded by modern assumptions'.
Once again, I did not say all warriors of the past knew martial arts. I do maintain however that they did have real fighting systems that are in fact martial arts, and they were known by many people. I agree that the old styles were kept secret and only taught to a few- if everyone knew them they wouldn't do that. In Renaissance Europe, masters would even tell their students to make sure that peasants weren't allowed to learn these secret arts. As I said before, the term martial arts itself comes from the Ars Martialis- a term used in period to describe fighting systems of the day.
And now you're saying pankration didn't actually exist in the past? Then why do we have historical documents that say otherwise? Who cares if they liked to claim Hercules invented it? That just makes them a bit silly, it doesn't invalidate pankration.
Knights did most definitely have a martial art- many of them in fact. There is tons of evidence for this, and MARE (martial arts of Renaissance Europe) have been inducted into the World Martial Arts Union. You seem to think that having a sword means you don't have to know what to do if you drop it, or if you don't have it drawn yet. Our ancestors weren't fools- they knew these situations were a real threat, and trained for them. Ringen is a real system of grappling that was taught in schools all across Europe, for use with or without weapons. There is direct historical evidence for it's existence- denying it is only willful ignorance.
As for using wiki and google- of course I use them, but they aren't my sole source of knowledge. They are, however, excellent ways to quickly find info- especially google. I am, in fact, capable of reading critically and checking sources.
MCMAP is not a 'martial art' in it's own right, its a system of basic training hand to hand that everyone gets and is an evolution of basic hand to hand all soldiers received. It's a combination of simple tricks, some judo, etc.LAWL NO TRUE SCOTSMAN
what does that mean.
shadrayl:
Pankrations claim is that its older than every martial art but they can't trace its lineage or teachings back any where near that far. Old things written in that time DO NOT mention Pankration.
Because greeks practiced punching and kicking or wrestling does not mean it was pankration any more than they knew karate because that means "open or empty hand"
You are trying to call everything that is fighting in someway a martial art, and only in the last 20 years have some of this stuff come out of the wood work because everyone else wants to call everything a martial art too and jump on the big martial art band wagon.
There is no records of knight orders practicing formal hand to hand techniques or calling them anything.
You can't write something in 2001, print it on the internet and say it was so back then, as evidence of it being so.
I don't see the American Natives jumping up and down that the fact when europeans got here they fought by kicking and wrestling holds that "white" people considered 'savage' fighting and 'cheating' and that it was some kind of martial art.
It doesn't take some old guy with a funny pony tail who talks in riddles for someone to figure out their leg muscle is bigger than their bicep and therefor is going to do more damage, nor does it make it a 'martial art'. Its a modern label to anything "fighting".
As far as the MARE thing goes, there was literally a thousand or more sword fighting forms (which in the Princess bride they make a little paradoy of that) but that is more akin to different types and styles of of Kenjutsu (which is now a conglomerate of all of the known ones)
Back in the day one must travel to learn the different styles of a master and so only the most traveled where well schooled. I'm sure experienced samurai were the same.
Basic fencing techniques were of course the foundation of all of them
Savate, itself grew out of a time when the sword and dueling were outlawed, but has many fencing moves in it using a cane.
Savate has molded now into more boxing than fencing, but it's origins are very similar to aikido and jujutsu because the government didnt allow you to cut commoners down in the streets anymore, imagine that?
not that this isn't educational and all but I'm not sure where this thread is supposed to be going with this
shadrayl:
Pankrations claim is that its older than every martial art but they can't trace its lineage or teachings back any where near that far. Old things written in that time DO NOT mention Pankration.Because greeks practiced punching and kicking or wrestling does not mean it was pankration any more than they knew karate because that means "open or empty hand"
You are trying to call everything that is fighting in someway a martial art, and only in the last 20 years have some of this stuff come out of the wood work because everyone else wants to call everything a martial art too and jump on the big martial art band wagon.
There is no records of knight orders practicing formal hand to hand techniques or calling them anything.
You can't write something in 2001, print it on the internet and say it was so back then, as evidence of it being so.
I don't see the American Natives jumping up and down that the fact when europeans got here they fought by kicking and wrestling holds that "white" people considered 'savage' fighting and 'cheating' and that it was some kind of martial art.
It doesn't take some old guy with a funny pony tail who talks in riddles for someone to figure out their leg muscle is bigger than their bicep and therefor is going to do more damage, nor does it make it a 'martial art'. Its a modern label to anything "fighting".
As far as the MARE thing goes, there was literally a thousand or more sword fighting forms (which in the Princess bride they make a little paradoy of that) but that is more akin to different types and styles of of Kenjutsu (which is now a conglomerate of all of the known ones)
Back in the day one must travel to learn the different styles of a master and so only the most traveled where well schooled. I'm sure experienced samurai were the same.
Basic fencing techniques were of course the foundation of all of them
Savate, itself grew out of a time when the sword and dueling were outlawed, but has many fencing moves in it using a cane.
Savate has molded now...
Wow... just wow. Your willful ignorance is astounding.
If what you're trying to say is that today's pankration is not the pankration of the ancient Greeks, fine. That's true. It died off and anything people are doing today is just a reconstruction. But saying it didn't exist IS ignorance, and you are quite stubborn in it. We do in fact have writings of the past that mention pankration. It was a freakin' Olympic event. We know times when they competed, and who won. Do you think they didn't have rules? If they did have rules, how did they practice for it- just random beating on each other?
Also, thank you for trying to tell me things about MARE I already know. And also for ignoring most of what I say about it. The knights of Germany DID have an unarmed style- it is called Ringen. It is mostly grappling, with some minor use of strikes. It is from HUNDREDS of years ago- we have the books from that time period that teach it. They weren't 'written on the internet in 2001.'
90% of my knowledge of martial arts is from personal study and conversation with other students. Some is from the internet, and some is from books. Pro tip: Anything can be a lie- just because you read it from a book,or your sifu told you, doesn't make it true. There is no one source of truth for martial arts, so think critically, and actually research.
Wow... just wow. Your willful ignorance is astounding.
+1
Any systemised fighting style can be called a martial art, whether it be a simple tribal wrestling method or a highly developed kung fu style or one of many variants of a German sword fighting system.
If you are going to go and accuse other people of inaccuracies in their statements, you really need to put a lot more effort into getting your own statements correct.
A few examples:
The GRU is a government group similar to the CIA the KGB was like the FBI.
- GRU was the foreign intelligence collection arm of Soviet military intelligence, now of the Russian Armed Forces. CIA is civilian.
- likewise the KGB was analogous to both the CIA and the FBI. Though now the FSB has the internal role and the SVR the external.
I learned Sambo from a former spetznaz who had joined the East German Paratroop corps after the fall of the Wall.
Given that after the Wall fell there were no East Germany army, how could he have joined the East German "paratroop corps". The idea that a former Spetznaz could join the German Army is laughable.
The Hoplite for example, lived and trained in teams of 6. They gathered en masse for times of war, but they did not train as an 'army'
Another huge sweeping statement. Different Greek city states had differing military organisations over the years. The basic unit (or file) could have been 6 or 8 or more. Some were more "professional", for want of a better term, than others - Spartans, Theban Sacred Band among others. Some city states had armies that were essentially militias (and the reason they invariably got hammered when they went up against armies like the Spartans). But to say none trained as an 'army' is ridiculous.
Any military that does not train beyond squad/section level - as you claim the "Greeks" did - is not a military that is going to achieve much. Especially given that the Greek phalanxes relied on the cohesion of multiple files to manoeuvre on the battlefield. Do you really think that a phalanx made up of 24, 36 or more files of 6-12 hoplites would be able to do anything on the battlefield if they hadn't done any training at the sub-unit, unit and formation level.
In your military training did you not train at the platoon, company or higher level? Sure squad/section training is the basis for operating in larger formations, but to not go beyond that - in any military in any era - is a recipe for disaster.
+1
Any systemised fighting style can be called a martial art, whether it be a simple tribal wrestling method or a highly developed kung fu style or one of many variants of a German sword fighting system.
If you are going to go and accuse other people of inaccuracies in their statements, you really need to put a lot more effort into getting your own statements correct.
not that your the only offender, but WHAT IS YOUR POINT?? I am sure there is a place to open a thread for this but the samurai playtest isn't it.
This has no relevance to the class, whether or not they could fight (just like every martial class) they aren't getting IUS cause fighters and barbarians don't get it either and all are just as well trained. So if this isn't the point your trying to get at I don't see where this thread is going.
CIA is Far from Civilian.
Hoplites were a very specific type of soldier.
Germany did not solidify the moment the wall fell.
The discussion began, if you were following the thread, about the existence of samurai unarmed combat techniques, and that just because one samurai knew one thing didn't mean that they all did.
Katanas and wakizashi is hardly about play testing either.
CIA is Far from Civilian.
Hoplites were a very specific type of soldier.
Germany did not solidify the moment the wall fell.The discussion began, if you were following the thread, about the existence of samurai unarmed combat techniques, and that just because one samurai knew one thing didn't mean that they all did.
Katanas and wakizashi is hardly about play testing either.
I have been following, and your right, neither topic is very relevant, I thought this thread would die but someone had to be right obviously.
Ok your right. Pankration draws its lineage from a real life hercules, son of zeus, and the school yard bully practices a martial art handed down from a long line of school yard bully grand fathers.
Discussion ended.
Oh one more thing, all samurai must have know jujutsu, that is quite clear.
The end.
"The military does not have a martial art."
"What about MCMAP?"
"That's not a martial art."
i stilld ont get "no true scotsman"
CIA is Far from Civilian.
Hoplites were a very specific type of soldier.
Germany did not solidify the moment the wall fell.The discussion began, if you were following the thread, about the existence of samurai unarmed combat techniques, and that just because one samurai knew one thing didn't mean that they all did.
Katanas and wakizashi is hardly about play testing either.
Feel free to throw around random insults about whether I have been following the thread :) The point I am making, as have others, is that your comments about what is a martial art and what isn't are wrong or inaccurate or sometimes both. Which is pretty much a consistent theme in many of your postings on various threads.
When you throw out inaccurate or irrelevant examples to support a particular point of view it undermines the entire validity of your comments as they pertain to the primary matter under discussion.
fwiw.....
- CIA is a civilian agency even if it has a paramilitary function. But my point was that that GRU is part of the armed forces, the CIA isn't. Feel free to continue to selectively (and inaccurately) offer rebuttals.
- Hoplites certainly are a specific type of Greek soldier. But that is not the point - it is your incorrect statement about them not training at levels higher than the 6 (or 8 or 12) man section. Do you mean hoplites were only from certain Greek city states?
- Berlin Wall fell 9 November 1989, monetary, economic and social union 1 July 1990 and German reunification completed 3 October. That doesn't negate the fact that your statement about a Spetznaz joining the East German Army is plain bizarre.
see a pattern here?
I am sure there is a place to open a thread for this but the samurai playtest isn't it.
Well we could start a thread or two titled "Examples of [insert forum name here]'s incorrect historical statements, cherry-picking of facts and selective quoting", but then some rotter would probably come along and derail us onto some unrelated point such as whether certain weapons should be solely for the use of certain classes ;-)
I am sure there is a place to open a thread for this but the samurai playtest isn't it.
Well we could start a thread or two titled "Examples of [insert forum name here]'s incorrect historical statements, cherry-picking of facts and selective quoting", but then some rotter would probably come along and derail us onto some unrelated point such as whether certain weapons should be solely for the use of certain classes ;-)
Well when I started this thread the goal was to straighten out some misconceptions regarding Ninja being of the samurai caste, and what weapons and accoutrements pertained to ninja and samurai, by pointing out inaccuracies using a link to a samurai site to verify what was true and what was not.
There's a gross amount of inaccuracies in other Samurai/Ninja threads on what is true. So I created this thread. When the thread went down the katana vs. the falcata, I tried to bring it back into focus, but failed. The thread has a life of its own.
I can verify that the samurai were indeed trained in martial arts, or at least trained to deal with a loss of weapon in combat, something akin to jujutsu. But anyone trying to compare modern 20th century martial arts to anything of an earlier time period - there is no comparison. Martial arts today, while still martial is more physical and philosophic training, not the art of killing as it had originally been.
When Japan moved to the 20th century, they converted all their existing martial arts training from 'jutsu' to 'do'. Martial arts with 'do' as a suffix means training for philosophy, not killing. So any martial art like 'kendo', 'aikido', 'judo' is a watered down remnant of a once true martial art intended to disable and kill your foe, something formerly called suffixed with 'jutsu', like kenjutsu, aikijutsu, and jujutsu. Japan wanted to maintain its heritage in these martial arts, but turn them away from the art of killing, as an effort to modernize and pacify what came before.
So to hear a martial arts afficionado trying to say what is a martial art and what is not is using 20th century concepts and trying to apply it medieval fighting arts. Its not the same thing, it has no comparison and making such statements based on modern martial arts is wrong and misconceived.
I wanted to stay out of that argument, because I am not a martial arts afficionado... but I digress.
GP