http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...kgEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5162,6790593&dq=jiujitsu&hl=en
January 22, 1905. Yes, 1905. Check this out!
January 22, 1905. Yes, 1905. Check this out!
Jiu-Jitsu is for Defense and Not for Sport!
- Thread starter Bill Mattocks
- Start date
Interesting article.
I wasn't even thought of back then..lol, but I"m going to take a shot in the dark and say that many, if not all arts that were developed back then, were designed to be for sd, taught in a traditional manner, belts were earned, not handed out like candy, and nothing was watered down.A shame that alot of what we see today, is the complete opposite.
Bruno@MT
Senior Master
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2009
- Messages
- 3,399
- Reaction score
- 74
Either self defense or killing. Points and rules are relatively modern inventions.
The closest thing to 'sport' in traditional JMA used to be the duelling and dojo challenges. But is was understood that either could end with a crippling injury or death. I was told that there is still a law on the books in Japan, specifying that if you die or get injured in a dojo challenge, you (or he next of kin) can't sue anyone to get compensation.
Not sure if it is still true or not, but it indicates that fighting and duelling were once a lot more serious than stepping into a ring / cage with the protection of rules and refs.
The closest thing to 'sport' in traditional JMA used to be the duelling and dojo challenges. But is was understood that either could end with a crippling injury or death. I was told that there is still a law on the books in Japan, specifying that if you die or get injured in a dojo challenge, you (or he next of kin) can't sue anyone to get compensation.
Not sure if it is still true or not, but it indicates that fighting and duelling were once a lot more serious than stepping into a ring / cage with the protection of rules and refs.
Shifu Steve
Green Belt
"A man can become fairly proficient in the art in six months or a year, and once learned it is never forgotten." - Martin Kahihari, Japanese man in Brooklyn
That's a bold statement.
That's a bold statement.
Sumo goes back a very long time in Japan
Lei Tai has a long history in China
Wrestling, fencing & boxing hav a very long history in the west
Sport martial arts with rules and spectators go back pretty much to the beginning of recorded history, not sure why this idea of it being new seems popular.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,692
- Reaction score
- 176
It isn't new so much as repopularized after a generational absence, is my take.
"Sport" arts of the past are very different then today. Iain Abernethy does a podcast on Joe Figgs, a boxer from the 1600s, and he describes his training and his bouts. Typically, a "boxing match" included three bouts. One with cudgels or swords, another to exchange grips and pin/submit, and one to strike with various parts of the body. There was no protective gear and very few rules. Basically, do what you can to take the other guy out, but try not to kill him.
Today's martial sport arts are designed with safety in mind. Our society doesn't have an apatite for real bloodsport (although we have some pretty sick fantasies). The sport arts of old were more variant of technique and more violent, and probably more useful as civilian self defense methods.
I agree. IMO, an entire system would be impossible to learn in that amount of time. However, I'd say specific things would and should be able to be learned and be able to be applied within that time. When I say specific things, I'm talking about basically stripping down a system, removing certain things, ie: kata, and focusing on the meat.
Similar threads
