DRJJ, DRAJJ and Judo, to BJJ Evolution of a belief.

[TSDTexan]

Originally, a few things I had read, by credentialed individuals, in addition to observations had lead to the position that the Jujutsu that later came to be called Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu was the same Jujutsu line that would be part of what Dr. Kano would learn and include into Kodakan Judo's curriculum.

It wasn't until Chris strongly challenged this position, that I had thought to dig deeply into the subject.
His arguments, although weak, were substantial enough to move me to a neutral position.

After a costly (both financially and time wise investment) investigation I have come to the end of my research.

While I cannot absolutely prove this, as everything is based on oral and written testimony, and measured presumption that the very hard to obtain materials I have combed through represent the full curriculum of several systems.

The assumption is that there are no closed door, inner sanctum, (10th Gen [this is not the english word generation]) teachings hidden away is a given.

After an exhaustive technique by technique review comparing Judo against several strands of Aikibujutsu, Ajijujutsu and Aikido, I cannot any longer hold the position that BJJ descended from the Art that became known as DRAJJ.

That is all, please carry on.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Kudos for being willing to re-examine your position, do the research, change your mind, and admit you were wrong. Too few people are willing to go through that process.

For what it's worth, Chris is pretty solid on martial arts history in general and Japanese martial arts history specifically. I'm not saying you should accept everything he says uncritically, but if he tells you something about martial arts history the odds are excellent that further research will back him up.

 

[TSDTexan]

Chris could have just nailed me with a challenge:
"If what you say is true... tell me which specific BJJ techiques came from the Jujutsu line that became DRAJJ."

This is the challenge. I cannot over come it.

 

[Chris Parker]

Are you sure this is the way you want to express things here? Cause, I mean… I could take offence to a number of comments…

Originally, a few things I had read, by credentialed individuals, in addition to observations had lead to the position that the Jujutsu that later came to be called Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu was the same Jujutsu line that would be part of what Dr. Kano would learn and include into Kodakan Judo's curriculum.

Let's clear something up entirely here. The supporting commentaries you supplied were in no way from "credentialed individuals". One was a Western "Soke" (and if you think that there can be any credibility there, you really should examine what the claim implies) with their modern, Western, unrelated to any of the arts mentioned, invented system… the other was a guy whose lack of credibility is rife throughout the net… he claims a 6th Dan in Judo, and to have received kuden from the Kodokan… except no-one at the Kodokan has ever heard of him, and the only record of his Judo ranking is a Shodan in the US. He bought his way onto a number of boards and into associations, using them to bolster his image of credibility (of course, anyone who knows anything about these groups know that it's got nothing to do with that, and indicates nothing other than him applying and sending in a check), who also claims to teach systems that don't have any verifiable existence outside of his claims (using the name of a very famous system, but having nothing at all to do with the genuine system).

So no, you read things by people who have no legitimate credentials at all. As far as your observations… well… I have no idea what you could have seen that would have lead you to any such conclusion.

It wasn't until Chris strongly challenged this position, that I had thought to dig deeply into the subject.
His arguments, although weak, were substantial enough to move me to a neutral position.

Yeah… this is the part I have a real issue with… are you really, really sure you want to call my arguments "weak"? The arguments that pulled apart every sentence that you copy and pasted, showed the historical inconsistencies, the issues with the authors, the lack of any real connection between anything listed, and so on? Those were "weak"?

Dude.

After a costly (both financially and time wise investment) investigation I have come to the end of my research.

It really shouldn't have cost anything… really. The idea was so far out of whack with reality that the sheer lack of support for it should have been your first clue. Honestly, I have no idea what you would have done to have it cost you financially…

While I cannot absolutely prove this, as everything is based on oral and written testimony, and measured presumption that the very hard to obtain materials I have combed through represent the full curriculum of several systems.

Er… what?

Look, the sentence structure there, with little concrete subject matter being referred to, makes it hard to follow… but I'll simply ask this. What is this "very hard to obtain material" that you combed through?

The assumption is that there are no closed door, inner sanctum, (10th Gen [this is not the english word generation]) teachings hidden away is a given.

Yeah…again, no idea what you're going on about there…

After an exhaustive technique by technique review comparing Judo against several strands of Aikibujutsu, Ajijujutsu and Aikido, I cannot any longer hold the position that BJJ descended from the Art that became known as DRAJJ.

That is all, please carry on.

And again, it really didn't need anything like that… nor did it honestly need anything like this pseudo-intellectual explanation of the fact that you were wrong, you were corrected, and you're now coming to terms with that.

Chris could have just nailed me with a challenge:
"If what you say is true... tell me which specific BJJ techiques came from the Jujutsu line that became DRAJJ."

This is the challenge. I cannot over come it.

You know what, that's exactly what I asked you in the first place. And came back to a number of times. But, just for real fun… that's got nothing to do with how you'd back up such a claim. I mean… can you tell me which techniques in Yagyu Shinkage Ryu come specifically from Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu? No? That's because none of them do… but Shinto Ryu is a source school for Shinkage Ryu…

 

[Chrisoro]

I agree with threadstarters conclusion. I have trained both Hapkido, Judo, Aikido and BJJ, and my personal conclusion after getting a "feel" of the techniques, principles and focus of each art, is that Aikido and Hapkido, which are both (despite having a different mentality than the other, making them look quite different) more or less direct descendant arts of Daito Ryu Aiki-Jujutsu , and therefore share a lot of techniques and principles, is from a distinctly separate branch of the martial arts family three than Judo and its decendant art, BJJ.

While it is true that most Hapkido systems have some techniques (some arm locks and throws) that are identical to identifiable judo techniques, these was not introduced into Hapkido by way of Daito Ryu Aiki-jujutsu, but trough Seo Bok-Seob, a Korean judo black belt that trained with Hapkido founder Choi Yong-sool.

 

[Chris Parker]

Well, yeah… I mean… the OP's original claim was that Daito Ryu was a direct ancestor of BJJ, via Takenouchi Ryu to Judo. Of course, that was completely incorrect, which I went to pains to point out. This thread is just him saying that he was wrong… not that he's giving any information that's earth shattering, or some new revelation (other than perhaps for him). The idea that BJJ came from Daito Ryu is not one that anyone (other than him) seriously believed.

 

[lklawson]

Let's clear something up entirely here. The supporting commentaries you supplied were in no way from "credentialed individuals".

Sure they were. Just because the credentials lack legitimacy doesn't mean they're not credentials. The confusion that this creates is a direct result of the whole point behind credentials. Credentials are given out so that other people don't have to go through the laborious and time consuming process of trying to figure out if the credentialed individual actually has any skill in what the credential accredits. That's why Universities award Degrees and Doctorates and it's why Microsoft, Red Hat, and CompTIA award certificates. The problem arises when someone doesn't know that the credentialing body has no legitimacy. It's not as if the bogus credentialing agencies are titled, "Billy-Bob's pseudo-Martial Arts rank-by-mail and Lard Rendering Factory." It's not always any easier to vette a credentialing organization than it is to vette a person's skills and lineage independent of credentials. This is why people get fake credentials or claim credentials which they didn't earn or do not actually exist; so that they can gather an "aire of legitimacy" by capitalizing on the confusion and convolution of what organizations, arts, lineages, and titles are actually "legitimate."

It really shouldn't have cost anything… really. The idea was so far out of whack with reality that the sheer lack of support for it should have been your first clue. Honestly, I have no idea what you would have done to have it cost you financially…

Do most hombu/home-offices do detailed instructor-student lineage searches for free? I honestly don't know, never having tried to get one done. I assume that they wouldn't. I know I wouldn't.

Er… what?

Yeah, this one threw me a bit too. What more than "oral and written history" can you ask for? Video Cam footage maybe?

Yeah…again, no idea what you're going on about there…

I think he's saying that there wasn't any "closed door" or "secret" techniques taught, which is not true. Harrison wrote that when he studies Judo, circa 1911, that only Yudansha were taught Kappo/Katsu and only in private, closed door, lessons at the Sensei's home. He wrote that it was practiced by the new Shodans being choked out and then revived by the students being instructed.

I will caveat to say that it is nearly impossible to have secrete and closed door techniques now, in today's modern environment.

You know what, that's exactly what I asked you in the first place. And came back to a number of times. But, just for real fun… that's got nothing to do with how you'd back up such a claim. I mean… can you tell me which techniques in Yagyu Shinkage Ryu come specifically from Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu? No? That's because none of them do… but Shinto Ryu is a source school for Shinkage Ryu…

Hey, it's all Juijitsu anyway, right? <ducking>

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Sure they were. Just because the credentials lack legitimacy doesn't mean they're not credentials. The confusion that this creates is a direct result of the whole point behind credentials. Credentials are given out so that other people don't have to go through the laborious and time consuming process of trying to figure out if the credentialed individual actually has any skill in what the credential accredits. That's why Universities award Degrees and Doctorates and it's why Microsoft, Red Hat, and CompTIA award certificates. The problem arises when someone doesn't know that the credentialing body has no legitimacy. It's not as if the bogus credentialing agencies are titled, "Billy-Bob's pseudo-Martial Arts rank-by-mail and Lard Rendering Factory." It's not always any easier to vette a credentialing organization than it is to vette a person's skills and lineage independent of credentials. This is why people get fake credentials or claim credentials which they didn't earn or do not actually exist; so that they can gather an "aire of legitimacy" by capitalizing on the confusion and convolution of what organizations, arts, lineages, and titles are actually "legitimate."

Yeah, this is more or less the point I was making in the original thread. TSDTexan's original source for his ideas was somebody online claiming expertise and credentials in historical Japanese arts. When TSDTexan tried to pass on those ideas, he was corrected by Chris, who is somebody else online claiming expertise and credentials in historical Japanese arts. (Chris probably has less impressive sounding credentials than whatever the other guy was claiming.) As it happens, Chris knows what he is talking about and the other guy doesn't. The problem is that TSDTexan isn't in a place to know that without doing further research on his own - which to his credit, he did. It doesn't really help for Chris to say - "trust me, I'm an expert and know what I'm talking about," because the flim-flam artists say the same thing.

 

[Chris Parker]

Hey Kirk.

Sure they were. Just because the credentials lack legitimacy doesn't mean they're not credentials. The confusion that this creates is a direct result of the whole point behind credentials. Credentials are given out so that other people don't have to go through the laborious and time consuming process of trying to figure out if the credentialed individual actually has any skill in what the credential accredits.

No, I'm going to stick with "not credentialed". Mainly as the credentials they claim were not given out by anyone… they were simply given to themselves, or just claimed (with no backup). To recap, we're discussing William Durbin, self proclaimed "Soke" of "Kiyojute Ryu Kempo", a system based in the teachings of persons known to be frauds, with a healthy dose of Koga Ryu Ninjutsu (and many unsubstantiated claims regarding it), with much of their "history" being completely fabricated, and at odds with reality. We're also discussing one Steven Cunningham… who claims a 6th Dan in Judo as part of his credentials… but no-one can remember him getting past a Shodan. To explain why his judo methods look so different (not Judo) to so many others, particularly high ranking ones, he came up with the story of receiving kuden (oral teachings) specially, and uniquely, when at the Kodokan in Japan… except he is remembered by exactly no-one there at any time at all. To then further bolster his credibility, he started claiming to teach an old system of Jujutsu, known at Takagi Ryu… with no connection to any of the known branches of Takagi Ryu in Japan… and no clear link to any teacher at all.

So, when we look at two people who have made up their own "credentials", I'm going to class that as not actually credentialed at all… I'm sure you can see why. Otherwise I might as well walk into a doctors office and claim to have completed medical school… and am therefore credentialed!

That's why Universities award Degrees and Doctorates and it's why Microsoft, Red Hat, and CompTIA award certificates. The problem arises when someone doesn't know that the credentialing body has no legitimacy. It's not as if the bogus credentialing agencies are titled, "Billy-Bob's pseudo-Martial Arts rank-by-mail and Lard Rendering Factory." It's not always any easier to vette a credentialing organization than it is to vette a person's skills and lineage independent of credentials.

Agreed. But even then, we have a link back to a disreputable source for the credentials… they still came from outside of the "credentialed" person themselves. That's not what we have in these cases.

This is why people get fake credentials or claim credentials which they didn't earn or do not actually exist; so that they can gather an "aire of legitimacy" by capitalizing on the confusion and convolution of what organizations, arts, lineages, and titles are actually "legitimate."

That's more like it.

Do most hombu/home-offices do detailed instructor-student lineage searches for free? I honestly don't know, never having tried to get one done. I assume that they wouldn't. I know I wouldn't.

Eh, most Koryu that I know are fairly open to serious researchers… but the thing is, it didn't even need that level of research. Simply googling the history of each art in turn will show whether or not there are common connections… which would quickly show that there isn't one. Especially in the way that TSDTexan set out.

Yeah, this one threw me a bit too. What more than "oral and written history" can you ask for? Video Cam footage maybe?

Yeah… it wasn't just that… it was more what exactly he "couldn't absolutely prove"… as well as my question as to what these materials were… as I highly doubt he's seen anything close the the total curriculum of at least a number of the ryu-ha he's discussed. Not that that was the main issue, of course…

I think he's saying that there wasn't any "closed door" or "secret" techniques taught, which is not true. Harrison wrote that when he studies Judo, circa 1911, that only Yudansha were taught Kappo/Katsu and only in private, closed door, lessons at the Sensei's home. He wrote that it was practiced by the new Shodans being choked out and then revived by the students being instructed.

Yeah, I'm not so sure… I mean, I don't have a clue what the "10th Gen [this is not the english word generation]" thing was about… or what closed door techniques had to do with anything… before we even get to whether he's talking about Daito Ryu, Takenouchi Ryu (both of which absolutely have "closed door" methods), Judo, BJJ, or who knows what…

I will caveat to say that it is nearly impossible to have secrete and closed door techniques now, in today's modern environment.

Not in Koryu, my friend… there are a number of aspects and methods of a range of ryu-ha that I have been highly privileged to be given a glimpse of that are certainly not anything you'll find in any book, on any video, on any website, or at any demo…

Hey, it's all Juijitsu anyway, right? <ducking>

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

See, I'm not sure if you're joking or not here… ha! Suffice to say, no, it's absolutely not "all jujutsu"… at all!

Yeah, this is more or less the point I was making in the original thread. TSDTexan's original source for his ideas was somebody online claiming expertise and credentials in historical Japanese arts. When TSDTexan tried to pass on those ideas, he was corrected by Chris, who is somebody else online claiming expertise and credentials in historical Japanese arts. (Chris probably has less impressive sounding credentials than whatever the other guy was claiming.) As it happens, Chris knows what he is talking about and the other guy doesn't. The problem is that TSDTexan isn't in a place to know that without doing further research on his own - which to his credit, he did. It doesn't really help for Chris to say - "trust me, I'm an expert and know what I'm talking about," because the flim-flam artists say the same thing.

Thing is, I didn't just say "no, wrong, trust me", I corrected, gave reasons the information was wrong, pointed out discrepancies, described my background and emphasis, had the verification and validation of my information from other members, and so on. I agree that I (and anyone else) shouldn't just be accepted on their word because we say so… but with all the other supporting aspects, more weight is applied. For the record, go to the "Joe Rogan" thread, page 3 onwards for the actual breakdown….

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Mainly as the credentials they claim were not given out by anyone… they were simply given to themselves, or just claimed (with no backup). To recap, we're discussing William Durbin, self proclaimed "Soke" of "Kiyojute Ryu Kempo", a system based in the teachings of persons known to be frauds, with a healthy dose of Koga Ryu Ninjutsu (and many unsubstantiated claims regarding it), with much of their "history" being completely fabricated, and at odds with reality. We're also discussing one Steven Cunningham… who claims a 6th Dan in Judo as part of his credentials… but no-one can remember him getting past a Shodan.

The problem is, it's hard for an outsider without sufficient background knowledge to distinguish between "credentials" that are self-awarded or awarded by the martial arts equivalent of a diploma mill and meaningful credentials awarded by someone with actual expertise in the field.

I was actually looking through Mr. Durbin's website the other day to find some info on the Kiyojute Ryu Kempo group mentioned in the "League of Fistmasters" thread. I've learned enough over the years that alarm bells went off immediately, but 20-30 years ago I might have very well taken his claims at face value.

Thing is, I didn't just say "no, wrong, trust me", I corrected, gave reasons the information was wrong, pointed out discrepancies, described my background and emphasis, had the verification and validation of my information from other members, and so on.

1) Your "reasons the information was wrong" were just lists of the correct historical information. Durbin's site has lists of incorrect historical information, mixed in with genuine history, mentioning a lot of the same names and info. Without background knowledge a reader would have no way of knowing which of you is correct.

2) You described your background and emphasis. Durbin describes his "background and emphasis" as well, but his sounds much more impressive. Heck, he's written books that I've seen in the store. One of his Kempo books has a blurb from Bill Wallace and he co-wrote a book on Judo with Jimmy Pedro. To the average reader without the pre-existing knowledge to judge these things, Mr. Durbin would seem like much more of an subject matter expert than you are.

3) You had the validation from other members, but the same problem applies. TSDTexan doesn't know any of us from Adam. For all he knows, we're a bunch of keyboard warriors whose martial arts knowledge comes from YouTube and Wikipedia.

Given all that, TSDTexan did the right thing by going out and doing additional research to confirm what you were saying. Admittedly, he was somewhat begrudging and pompous about doing so, but he did it. Most people don't like to be corrected on matters they think themselves knowledgeable about. Many will refuse to re-examine the evidence. Of those that do, most will not come back and make a post saying "I was wrong."

I'm in favor of giving positive reinforcement to those who are willing to re-examine the evidence for something they believed and admit they were wrong. You can always choose to criticize them for being wrong in the first place or for not being humble enough when they admit their mistake, but that sort of feedback tends to make people less likely to admit their mistakes or re-examine their positions in the future.

 

[Chris Parker]

The problem is, it's hard for an outsider without sufficient background knowledge to distinguish between "credentials" that are self-awarded or awarded by the martial arts equivalent of a diploma mill and meaningful credentials awarded by someone with actual expertise in the field.

I was actually looking through Mr. Durbin's website the other day to find some info on the Kiyojute Ryu Kempo group mentioned in the "League of Fistmasters" thread. I've learned enough over the years that alarm bells went off immediately, but 20-30 years ago I might have very well taken his claims at face value.

Agreed.

1) Your "reasons the information was wrong" were just lists of the correct historical information. Durbin's site has lists of incorrect historical information, mixed in with genuine history, mentioning a lot of the same names and info. Without background knowledge a reader would have no way of knowing which of you is correct.

2) You described your background and emphasis. Durbin describes his "background and emphasis" as well, but his sounds much more impressive. Heck, he's written books that I've seen in the store. One of his Kempo books has a blurb from Bill Wallace and he co-wrote a book on Judo with Jimmy Pedro. To the average reader without the pre-existing knowledge to judge these things, Mr. Durbin would seem like much more of an subject matter expert than you are.

3) You had the validation from other members, but the same problem applies. TSDTexan doesn't know any of us from Adam. For all he knows, we're a bunch of keyboard warriors whose martial arts knowledge comes from YouTube and Wikipedia.

Sure, I can see that.

Given all that, TSDTexan did the right thing by going out and doing additional research to confirm what you were saying. Admittedly, he was somewhat begrudging and pompous about doing so, but he did it. Most people don't like to be corrected on matters they think themselves knowledgeable about. Many will refuse to re-examine the evidence. Of those that do, most will not come back and make a post saying "I was wrong."

In spirit, I agree. Of course, I get a little less willing to be gentle when the admitting of being wrong is littered with such comments as the arguments that "swayed him" being "weak"… kinda taints the whole humility of the post, really.

I'm in favor of giving positive reinforcement to those who are willing to re-examine the evidence for something they believed and admit they were wrong. You can always choose to criticize them for being wrong in the first place or for not being humble enough when they admit their mistake, but that sort of feedback tends to make people less likely to admit their mistakes or re-examine their positions in the future.

I get that approach… and honestly, I respect it. However, my approach is not to encourage behaviour that might lead to further issues… including not letting petty digs go through just because someone is trying to hide them in the rest of a post.

 

[lklawson]

kinda taints the whole humility of the post, really.

Why does it have to be "humble?" I can think of a number of times when I've written or said the equivalent of, "Crap. Apparently I was wrong; turns out that $&!+head was right after all (and he's a wang)!"

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

See, I'm not sure if you're joking or not here… ha! Suffice to say, no, it's absolutely not "all jujutsu"… at all!

Mostly just joking with just a dash of poking at you regarding the spelling of JuiJitsu, both of which I know are hot-buttons for you.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Mostly just joking with just a dash of poking at you regarding the spelling of JuiJitsu, both of which I know are hot-buttons for you.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Judging from the Brazilians I've talked to, the spelling should actually be something like "Zhu-Zhitsu."

 

[Steve]

Judging from the Brazilians I've talked to, the spelling should actually be something like "Zhu-Zhitsu."

You're wrong, Tony. WRONG!!!

It's actually zhoo-zheetsu. And for the record, jiu-jitsu is not a Japanese word (and this is not a pipe).

 

[lklawson]

And for the record, jiu-jitsu is not a Japanese word

The reference was playful banter with Chris referencing issues he has with the evolution of the term in English.

Here's the Reader's Digest version of it so that you can get up to speed quick

In the early 20th Century, when most of the Western world was beginning to become familiar with Japanese martial arts, the Romanization standard for Kanji-to-English was what most today, particularly Chris, consider, ...um... sort of 'lax' and did not always perfectly (even for Romanization) mirror the phonetics. We see this illustrated in notable early texts such as "JIU-JUTSU or JIU-DO" by Yamanaka and "The Game of Ju-Jitsu" by Miyake and Tani.

Notice that the titles are exact quotes from the original texts, not "corrected." Further, notice who the Authors are. "Jiu" by Yamanaka, with the "i" preceding the "u" always. And he uses that spelling repeatedly through out his text. "Jitsu" by Miyake and Tani, with the "i" instead of the "u." And they use that spelling repeatedly throughout the text. The conclusion is that "Jiu-Jitsu" was a valid Romanization style, rendering in English, circa 1920 or so, by first generation expat Japanese instructors of the arts in the West.

Now Chris' position is that, who gives a crap what the early 20th Century Romanization standard was? It's wrong. The pronunciation of the Japanese doesn't particularly match "Jiu-Jitsu" at all and most closely, on the Western tongue, sounds like "Jujutsu." Thus the early English texts were just wrong about the Romanization.

To that, I bow to his superior understanding of the Japanese language. Nevertheless, I still hold that, historically speaking, the spelling is correct, at least in the context of early 20th Century practice of Japanese arts in England and the U.S.

Chris and I have agreed that it's not something worth Pistols at Dawn (and I'm a better shot anyway ) but it does give us the opportunity to enjoy some friendly banter about what is, to be honest, a comparatively inconsequential bit of minutia.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Chris Parker]

Why does it have to be "humble?" I can think of a number of times when I've written or said the equivalent of, "Crap. Apparently I was wrong; turns out that $&!+head was right after all (and he's a wang)!"

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

I don't necessarily think it would need to be humble… but I do think that having a pot shot at the very arguments that proved him wrong was something that was kinda, well, incongruent.

Mostly just joking with just a dash of poking at you regarding the spelling of JuiJitsu, both of which I know are hot-buttons for you.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Cool… reason I ask is that neither of the systems I chose are jujutsu systems… they're both kenjutsu ryu-ha…

The reference was playful banter with Chris referencing issues he has with the evolution of the term in English.

Here's the Reader's Digest version of it so that you can get up to speed quick

In the early 20th Century, when most of the Western world was beginning to become familiar with Japanese martial arts, the Romanization standard for Kanji-to-English was what most today, particularly Chris, consider, ...um... sort of 'lax' and did not always perfectly (even for Romanization) mirror the phonetics. We see this illustrated in notable early texts such as "JIU-JUTSU or JIU-DO" by Yamanaka and "The Game of Ju-Jitsu" by Miyake and Tani.

Actually, I have not a lot of issue with "jiu"… or "jyu"… or "juu"… all can be considered correct, even by todays romanization standards. And, depending on the form of romanization being applied, you might find "jutu" for "jutsu" as well… the main bone of contention is "jitsu". Not just because it's not correct phonetically, or by any current (standard) romanizations, but because that romanization is correct for an entirely different word… it makes more sense when you read the kanji, of course:

"Jutsu" - じゅつ; 術 "practical art, technique"
"Jitsu" - じつ; 実 - "truth, correct, reality"

Notice that the titles are exact quotes from the original texts, not "corrected." Further, notice who the Authors are. "Jiu" by Yamanaka, with the "i" preceding the "u" always. And he uses that spelling repeatedly through out his text. "Jitsu" by Miyake and Tani, with the "i" instead of the "u." And they use that spelling repeatedly throughout the text. The conclusion is that "Jiu-Jitsu" was a valid Romanization style, rendering in English, circa 1920 or so, by first generation expat Japanese instructors of the arts in the West.

In the past tense, ("was a valid rendering"), yep, agreed.

Now Chris' position is that, who gives a crap what the early 20th Century Romanization standard was? It's wrong. The pronunciation of the Japanese doesn't particularly match "Jiu-Jitsu" at all and most closely, on the Western tongue, sounds like "Jujutsu." Thus the early English texts were just wrong about the Romanization.

Based on currently known/accepted "correct" romanji, yep.

To that, I bow to his superior understanding of the Japanese language. Nevertheless, I still hold that, historically speaking, the spelling is correct, at least in the context of early 20th Century practice of Japanese arts in England and the U.S.

I'd only argue a slight bit with that… I'd say that the spelling WAS correct, at least in they context of early 20th Century practice of Japanese arts in England and the US (and other Western countries).

Chris and I have agreed that it's not something worth Pistols at Dawn (and I'm a better shot anyway ) but it does give us the opportunity to enjoy some friendly banter about what is, to be honest, a comparatively inconsequential bit of minutia.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Pistols? Nah, not worth it… probably… now, if you'd suggested tachi…

 

[kuniggety]

The conclusion is that "Jiu-Jitsu" was a valid Romanization style, rendering in English, circa 1920 or so, by first generation expat Japanese instructors of the arts in the West.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

I think this is a really good point. I also think people tend to forget that Japanese dialectial differences vary as much as any Western language. With the promulgation of radio and TV broadcasts, the country has moved more towards a standardized dialect that is the Tokyo dialect but they still exist and a hundred years ago (and longer) they were much stronger. We can argue all day how something should be pronounced but none of us were around 100 years ago and fluent in all of the dialects.