Original Samurai Arts?

[Ronnin]

So what were the original arts of feudal Japan?
I know everywhere you look today, be-it internet, magazines, books, or talking to people and teachers in a dojo it seems to be Aikido. Now obviously Aikido isn't one of the "old" arts, and we don't see many Jujutsu schools linked with samurai anymore either. So what were the original arts?

 

[jarrod]

So what were the original arts of feudal Japan?
I know everywhere you look today, be-it internet, magazines, books, or talking to people and teachers in a dojo it seems to be Aikido. Now obviously Aikido isn't one of the "old" arts, and we don't see many Jujutsu schools linked with samurai anymore either. So what were the original arts?

i'll let a better historian than me fill in the details, but i think the primary arts had to be archery, swordsmanship, & lance just like with most classes of mounted warrior. if you're talking unarmed arts, then jujitsu, but you will be very hard pressed to find a legitimate jujitsu ryu with unbroken lineage to the samurai & no influence from modern budo arts like judo & aikido. this is because

1) i think that most of us picture modern jujitsu being practiced by samurai a few hundred years ago. i'm not sure, but i doubt that was the case. yes it was the unarmed art of the samurai. but before it would play any significant role on the battlefield, a samurai would have to lose his spear or lance, be unhorsed, then lose both his swords. so i'm sure it was used, but i don't think that every samurai was a master of jujitsu in the sense that we picture it. just like many modern soldiers train hand-to-hand but few follow it through to mastery.

2) many arts were actively suppressed during the meiji restoration, especially those arts identified with the samurai class.

3) the high-profile judo vs jujitsu tournaments staged by the kodokan in it's early days pushed classical jujitsu even further into the background.

this is a lot of conjecture & guess work on my part, so anyone feel free to correct me. but i think that the significant developments in jujitsu happened well after the feudal era, making the true samurai unarmed combat somewhat obsolete.

if you're talking about japan as a whole & not just the samurai, then sumo is the oldest japanese martial art. a couple of books i can recommend are "classical bujutsu" by donn f. draeger & "secrets of the samurai: a survey of the martial arts of feudal japan" by oscar ratti & adele westbrook. if i had my copies of these in front of me i could give you a more detailed answer.

jf

 

[Aikicomp]

i'll let a better historian than me fill in the details, but i think the primary arts had to be archery, swordsmanship, & lance just like with most classes of mounted warrior. if you're talking unarmed arts, then jujitsu, but you will be very hard pressed to find a legitimate jujitsu ryu with unbroken lineage to the samurai

Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu can trace their lineage back 900 years to Minamoto Yoshimitsu who lived from 1045-1127. During the Gempei War.

& no influence from modern budo arts like judo & aikido. this is because

Judo and Aikido were influenced by AikiJujutsu which I believe both Kano and Ueshiba both studied under Sokaku Tekeda

1) i think that most of us picture modern jujitsu being practiced by samurai a few hundred years ago. i'm not sure, but i doubt that was the case. yes it was the unarmed art of the samurai. but before it would play any significant role on the battlefield, a samurai would have to lose his spear or lance, be unhorsed, then lose both his swords. so i'm sure it was used, but i don't think that every samurai was a master of jujitsu in the sense that we picture it.

I would disagree with that, The Samurai were the ultimate warrior with one purpose only and that was to fight and if need be die. All they did all their lives was to practice and perfect every aspect of warfare
so when that moment came they would have everything they needed to win a great battle or die a glorious death for the one they served... their Daimyo. Anything less than that to a Samurai would be unthinkable and dishonorable.

just like many modern soldiers train hand-to-hand but few follow it through to mastery.

Modern day soldiers are very different than Samurai, not even close to being in the same class

2) many arts were actively suppressed during the meiji restoration, especially those arts identified with the samurai class.

Very true. The Samurai class was outlawed. De-sworded, topknot cut off the whole nine yards.

3) the high-profile judo vs jujitsu tournaments staged by the kodokan in it's early days pushed classical jujitsu even further into the background.

this is a lot of conjecture & guess work on my part, so anyone feel free to correct me. but i think that the significant developments in jujitsu happened well after the feudal era, making the true samurai unarmed combat somewhat obsolete.

Actually, I believe they were developed for the battlefield in case they were needed for hand to hand or when one Samurai would take the opponents head for proof of victory and display purposes. Yes, they actually had head viewings.

if you're talking about japan as a whole & not just the samurai, then sumo is the oldest japanese martial art. a couple of books i can recommend are "classical bujutsu" by donn f. draeger & "secrets of the samurai: a survey of the martial arts of feudal japan" by oscar ratti & adele westbrook. if i had my copies of these in front of me i could give you a more detailed answer.

jf

History's not to bad.

Oldest would indeed be Sumo followed by Archery (Kyudo) However pertaining to the sword: the early Japanese used straight swords (pre 5th century). Then came swords slung from the belt (blade down to facilitate cutting from horseback, I think from 5th thru the 17th century) When war was waged often. (warring states period) Then after Tokugawa defeated Toyotomi at the battle of Sekigahara (Tokugawa period 1600-1868) armed conflicts were not that prevelant and that's when the Samurai would wear the Daisho (Two swords that only Samurai could wear. Blade up through the obi without their armor on) which facilited drawing a sword while standing on the ground.

During the period of great warfare (maybe Ashikaga, momoyama or muromachi periods) the Samurai had to have a system of hand to hand combat that could be applied while wearing their bulky armor and I think that was where Ju-Jitsu, ju-jutsu, Kenjitsu, iaijitsu was first formulated. Then during the Tokugawa period it was refined into Kendo and iaido while the ju-jitsu and ju-jutsu names stayed the same and split off into different Ryu. Aikido and Judo are relative late comers to Budo rising after the turn of the 20th century.

Don't quote me it's been awhile since dusted off the Japanese history book and I'm going from pure memory so if there are mistakes forgive an old guy. There is a really good book called "Arms and Armor of the Samurai" by Ian Bottomley which explains how and in what progression the arms and armor changed throughout history giving the reasons why it changed, historical periods of change, how warefare, tactics and stragedy changed throughout history, ect. really good book.

Hope I was helpful

yours in Budo
Michael

 

[jarrod]

History's not to bad.

thank you, doing the best i can without access to my books.


Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu can trace their lineage back 900 years to Minamoto Yoshimitsu who lived from 1045-1127. During the Gempei War.

Judo and Aikido were influenced by AikiJujutsu which I believe both Kano and Ueshiba both studied under Sokaku Tekeda

daito-ryu claims unbroken lineage back 900 years, but there is no way of verifying it. the wiki article i'm looking at cites draeger as stating that the term aikijujitsu does not appear before the meiji restoration. in any case it clearly did influence modern budo.

I would disagree with that, The Samurai were the ultimate warrior with one purpose only and that was to fight and if need be die. All they did all their lives was to practice and perfect every aspect of warfare
so when that moment came they would have everything they needed to win a great battle or die a glorious death for the one they served... their Daimyo. Anything less than that to a Samurai would be unthinkable and dishonorable.

this was certainly the ideal, but reality often fell short. "musui's story: an autobiography of a tokugawa samurai" tells the story of at least one samurai who was more interested in drinking, shirking responsibility, & running away from gambling debts than in dying for any daimyo. stories of samurai dying glorious deaths are out there, of course, but those stories are carried on because they were exemplary...not because they were the norm. additionally, just like in the modern military, there were administrative posts which required relatively little martial skill, although a minimum of skill was expected to be maintained.

Modern day soldiers are very different than Samurai, not even close to being in the same class

& i'd disagree with you here as well on a few different levels. as i alluded to above the samurai have been a bit idealized in modern times. but more importantly professionalism among military personel is a universal virtue in martial culture. i think the above statement is a bit of a slight to the modern soldier, who trains & fights just as hard as soldiers have throughout history. not out of idealism, but because somebody put you in a place where lots of people are trying to kill you.

all the best,

jf

 

[Chris Parker]

Hi,

Yeah, as stated above, the very first arts (for battlefield usage) were based on mounted archery. In fact, the early Japanese warriors (before the term samurai), were said to follow "kyuba no michi". Translated, this simply means the path/way (michi, also pronounced do) of archery (kyu) and horsemanship (ba), and the warrior families were refered to as kyusen no ie, literally "bow and arrow family". Individual warriors might be refered to as "bushi", but were also sometimes called mono no fu, which simply means "man of things", in this case refering to weapons.

At this time (early 11th century), there was little in the way of regulated armies, with military service being arranged by the central government. A couple of families rose to prominence under the Emperor, after starting to organise their own armed forces, especially the Taira and their rivals the Minamoto, who then proceeded to try to gain the ultimate upper hand. These two minor aristocratic families (amongst others) sent the younger members to act as stewards and local government representatives, which is where the term samurai originated from (coming from the term "sabaru", meaning "to serve"), although it would be quite a while before that word was used to describe a warrior class.

The Taira and Minamoto clans rose to control the western and eastern regions of Japan respectively, with the then current capital of Heian as the centre. But, as often happens, each side wanted more, and soon enough a war began between the rivals, which ended in the defeat of the Minamoto. The children of the Minamoto were exiled, including the young Yoritomo and Yoshitsune. This was probably a mistake, as Yoritomo and Yoshitsune later came back to defeat and totally wipe out the Taira clan, although Yoritomo then also turned on his own brother Yoshitsune to establish the first samurai shogunate.

We'll skip through the Kamakura period, the Nambokucho period, and the Ashikaga Shogunate, and instead skip straight to the Sengoku Jidai. During this time, Kinoshita Yaemon an ashigaru (foot soldier) gunner in the army of Oda Nobuhide (father of Oda Nobunaga) had a son, named Tokichiro. The young Kinoshita Tokichiro ran away from home at the age of 16, and joined Oda Nobunaga's forces. He did well enough to be noticed by Nobunaga, rising quickly through the ranks. He was presented with the domain of Asai, at which point he changd his name to Hashiba Chikuzen no kami Hideyoshi.

After Nobunaga's death, he took control of the armies and went about gaining revenge of Nobunaga's enemies. After achieving this, all of Nobunaga's generals accepted him as the new leader, except one man: Tokugawa Ieyasu. However, after seeing Hideyoshi's leadership, Tokugawa allowed himself to be allied with the man. HIdeyoshi then continued to raise in stature, eventually taking the name Toyotomi Hideyoshi and being named Shogun (his birth name was too low to allow him access to this exalted positon).

Although he had begun his career as a low ranking foot soldier like his father, and had risen through the ranks to become the highest ranking warrior in Japan, Hideyoshi made decrees that the only way anyone could become a Samurai was to be born into an established Samurai family. After his death, Tokugawa quickly worked to become the new Shogun, and established the longest reigning period of peace Japan had known for centuries, lasting for over 250 years.

This period of peace forced the Samurai to become more introspective, and find other pursuits. This naturally led, as it does each time, to the development of the more philosophical and artistic expressions of the culture, including the rise of the chivalric-style code of bushido, as well as the wearing of two swords as a badge of the Samurai rank. At this point, the Samurai became what we typically think of as being Samurai.

So the question is, which particular stage in the development of the warriors of Japan are you asking about? Is it a question of "What was the first Martial Art practised in Japan?", or the first practised by professional warriors? Or are you wanting toknow what the first primary arts to be defined as "Samurai" arts were? Sorry, but this can get a bit tricky.

Within Ninjutsu schools, the Takagi Yoshin Ryu origin story claims that the skills were brought to Japan by a practitioner skilled in Jujutsu, Bojutsu, and Senban Nage, but it is generally accepted that this is a metaphorical story. It simply says that the earliest concepts of formalised fighting involved unarmed combat (jujutsu), projectile weaponry (senban nage), and impact weaponry (bojutsu). This was probably closely followed by bladed weaponry (kenjutsu, sojutsu).

Oh, and for the record, Japanese fighting methods can be traced back even further than that which is mentioned here. Earlier forms of armour and weapons have been found and researched quite thoroughly, so we can go backabout as far as you like...

 

[jarrod]

figured you'd show up with your fancy book-learnin'.

jf

 

[Chris Parker]

Hey, if you use the right bait...

 

[Sukerkin]

I hope to have more to contribute to this tonight when I get home form work but I just wanted to comment on the fact that the Samurai have had almost as much nonsense spoken about them as the Ninja or the Knights of King Arthur.

I mean no direct criticism of what Aikicomp said above when I use this quote as illustrative of the problem:

"I would disagree with that, The Samurai were the ultimate warrior with one purpose only and that was to fight and if need be die. All they did all their lives was to practice and perfect every aspect of warfare
so when that moment came they would have everything they needed to win a great battle or die a glorious death for the one they served... their Daimyo. Anything less than that to a Samurai would be unthinkable and dishonorable"

Samurai were most known for their role as soldiers, it is true but it was far from their only 'profession'. They were administrators, civil servants, tax collectors and so on.

The majority of fighting was done by the common footsoldier such as the ashigaru and the most favoured weapon of the Samurai was the bow (followed by the gun once the Dutch kindly brought some along). There were some hand-to-hand techniques in their training, just as there was in the 'toolbox' of any European member of the knightly classes. Whether these comprised an organised 'system' depends on which period you are looking at and who you ask .

As for the 'glorious death' ideal, that was very much practised more in the breach than in the observance. The most usual thing for a defeated Samurai to do was go to work for the victorious General. They might change their name to protect their family 'honour' but not necessarily.

As I say, I don't mean to just be contradictory here; what I am atempting to point out that is that embroidering a coherent tapesty from the tangled webs of Japanese history and literature is by no means a simple task. Even when focussing just on what sword techniques were learned at which periods using what training methods the 'answers' can range very widely.

 

[Chris Parker]

I must have missed this the first time around, and would really be remiss if I didn't address it:

Originally Posted by jarrod
i'll let a better historian than me fill in the details, but i think the primary arts had to be archery, swordsmanship, & lance just like with most classes of mounted warrior. if you're talking unarmed arts, then jujitsu, but you will be very hard pressed to find a legitimate jujitsu ryu with unbroken lineage to the samurai

Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu can trace their lineage back 900 years to Minamoto Yoshimitsu who lived from 1045-1127. During the Gempei War.

Daito Ryu has a claimed history as stated, however, it has been very difficult to documet any history of the school before Sokaku Takeda. This by no means is definitive evidence one way or the other, but I would be very hesitant to give it such lineage, as would many others I warrant. That said, even if the art is, as many believe, a creation of Takeda Sensei, he was by all accounts an incrediby well trained and talented martial artist in his own right, and the creation of a false, or embelished history, often involving famous figures is a very common state of affairs.


& no influence from modern budo arts like judo & aikido. this is because

Judo and Aikido were influenced by AikiJujutsu which I believe both Kano and Ueshiba both studied under Sokaku Tekeda

Aikido, yes, but not Judo. Kano took his major influence from Tenshin Shinyo Ryu and Kito Ryu, although there is documentation of other schools. Not, from memory, Daito Ryu though.

1) i think that most of us picture modern jujitsu being practiced by samurai a few hundred years ago. i'm not sure, but i doubt that was the case. yes it was the unarmed art of the samurai. but before it would play any significant role on the battlefield, a samurai would have to lose his spear or lance, be unhorsed, then lose both his swords. so i'm sure it was used, but i don't think that every samurai was a master of jujitsu in the sense that we picture it.

I would disagree with that, The Samurai were the ultimate warrior with one purpose only and that was to fight and if need be die. All they did all their lives was to practice and perfect every aspect of warfare
so when that moment came they would have everything they needed to win a great battle or die a glorious death for the one they served... their Daimyo. Anything less than that to a Samurai would be unthinkable and dishonorable.

During the Sengoku Jidai, unarmed arts were supplementary to the (primary) weapon arts. Often schools such as Takenouchi Ryu or Yagyu Shingan Ryu would refer to their unarmed sections with terms such as Kogusoku, meaning "small arms, or armour". These systems often involved the use of small weapons such as yoroi doshi (armour-piercing daggers), and focused on grappling so you can use small weapons when you have lost your primary armament. And, for the record, the Daisho came into fashion much later.

The focus on unarmed techniques was the result of peacetime exploration. During this time, some samurai found a way of making a living by teaching their methods to commoners, resulting in jujutsu being split into both samurai (warrior) and commone versions, sometimes even within the same school.

And, yes, while the samurai did have a great loyalty, the idea of dying as the ultimate was mainly propogating by the book Hagakure, which was one individuals idea on what he personally believed a samurai to be. And his views were by no means the mainstream.


just like many modern soldiers train hand-to-hand but few follow it through to mastery.

Modern day soldiers are very different than Samurai, not even close to being in the same class

2) many arts were actively suppressed during the meiji restoration, especially those arts identified with the samurai class.

Very true. The Samurai class was outlawed. De-sworded, topknot cut off the whole nine yards.

3) the high-profile judo vs jujitsu tournaments staged by the kodokan in it's early days pushed classical jujitsu even further into the background.

this is a lot of conjecture & guess work on my part, so anyone feel free to correct me. but i think that the significant developments in jujitsu happened well after the feudal era, making the true samurai unarmed combat somewhat obsolete.

Actually, I believe they were developed for the battlefield in case they were needed for hand to hand or when one Samurai would take the opponents head for proof of victory and display purposes. Yes, they actually had head viewings.

Well, I think you're both right... the classical systems developed both for use in expediant circumstances on the battlefield, as well as the more peacetime versions that often went into a lot more detail were put back a bit when Kano and his new Jujutsu system came about, for a few different reasons.

And, yes there were certainly head viewings... bit gruesome, but an essential part of establishing rank and prestige in fuedal Japan. In fact, there is a famous saying attributed to Tokugawa Ieyasu around the head viewing ceremony after the Battle of Sekigahara where the future Shogun called for his helmet, and stated "After the battle, tighten your helmet strings".


if you're talking about japan as a whole & not just the samurai, then sumo is the oldest japanese martial art. a couple of books i can recommend are "classical bujutsu" by donn f. draeger & "secrets of the samurai: a survey of the martial arts of feudal japan" by oscar ratti & adele westbrook. if i had my copies of these in front of me i could give you a more detailed answer.

As for Sumo being Japan's oldest Martial Art, that is attributed to a mythological story (which, like most myths, probably has more than an element of truth in it...) where two Gods fight to the death. This story is related in the Kojiki, the first written record of Japan's history. In the story, the two Gods are made to fight each other, and it is decided with a couple of kicks (one to break the ribs, the other to the loins, which kills one of the participants).



PS The red bits are mine, if I didn't make that clear...

 

[hungfistron]

The Secrets of the Samurai by Oscar Ratti & Adele Westbrook is one of the best for such questions.

Obtain it.

 

[Sukerkin]

I wouldn't be so hasty to put your faith in any one book that seems to cover the subject matter. Indeed, this book in particular has what we might call a bit of a 'curates egg' problem with it's contents. Some of it is regarding fairly incontestable things but there are also parts which are either fallacious or highly speculative.

To give you an idea, here is one of the reviews given of it (by Dr. Barbara Nostrand):

"I am writing this review, because people are erroneously using this book as a source for research into pre-modern Japan. It should not be used for this purpose. It belongs to a genre which I call "gosh golly" books. I will proceed to comments relating to previous reviews.

1. The illustrations are modern and appear to have been drawn by a western artist. What it does not contain is reproductions of premodern woodblock prints, paintings, &c. or photographs of actual artifacts.

2. While it has a large bibliography, the works are pretty much exclusively in English and appear to be popular rather than scholarly publications.

3. This book contains descriptions of Japanese "martial arts" such as "tessenjutsu" which do not appear in reliable Japanese literature.

4. This book contains descriptions of highly improbable "martial arts" such as the supposed ability for a seated practitioner to kill an armed opponent by shouting at him.

5. The historical descriptions in the book betray a woeful ignorance. For example, chapter 1 includes a claim that Buddhism is "monotheistic". This makes me wonder how the authors managed to use the correct Japanese words for the military class and the court nobility. Saddly, the scattering of accurate information in this book makes it even less desireable as it lends credance to the book's fantasy elements.

6. One commentor recommended the books by Stephen Turnbull. If you are interested in more scholarly treatments of Japan's medieval period, I recommend consulting books by Marius B. Jansen, Paul Varley, John Witney Hall, William Wayne Farris, and Jeffrey P. Mass. Heavenly Warriors by Farris specifically deals with the origin of the buke class going beyond earlier work by Mass.

7. If what you are looking for is battle paintings, pictures of military artifacts, &c. then you should cosider ordering books from the Mook Series published by Gakken. These can be ordered online from amazon.co.jp. A representative title in this series can be found by entering the following ISBN number into their search engine: 4056042489.

In short. If you are seriously interested in Japan, please buy better books."

This critique exemplifies the symptomatic problem with a lot of the works available about Japanese history, particular as soon as Samurai and Ninja's come into the mix. By all means don't let my (or others) views stop you from buying any books you wish but be aware that, until a reader has a grounding in the history of Japan, by taking any one source as 'gospel' you can pick up a lot of misconstruations (made up word ) about certain matters.

EDIT: For balance, here is a link to where I found the above quoted review:

http://www.amazon.com/Secrets-Samurai-Martial-Feudal-Japan/dp/0804816840

 

[Senjojutsu]

I wouldn't be so hasty to put your faith in any one book that seems to cover the subject matter. Indeed, this book in particular has what we might call a bit of a 'curates egg' problem with it's contents. Some of it is regarding fairly incontestable things but there are also parts which are either fallacious or highly speculative.

To give you an idea, here is one of the reviews given of it (by Dr. Barbara Nostrand)...

... In short. If you are seriously interested in Japan, please buy better books."

This critique exemplifies the symptomatic problem with a lot of the works available about Japanese history, particular as soon as Samurai and Ninja's come into the mix. By all means don't let my (or others) views stop you from buying any books you wish but be aware that, until a reader has a grounding in the history of Japan, by taking any one source as 'gospel' you can pick up a lot of misconstruations (made up word ) about certain matters.

EDIT: For balance, here is a link to where I found the above quoted review:

http://www.amazon.com/Secrets-Samurai-Martial-Feudal-Japan/dp/0804816840

Hello,

I dusted off my copy of this book - one thing that is a little confusing is the date of publication as to what is on Amazon - I think the original text was actually published in 1973:
-----------------------------
LC Control No.: 72091551
LCCN Permalink: http://lccn.loc.gov/72091551
Type of Material: Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)
Personal Name: Ratti, Oscar.
Main Title: Secrets of the samurai; a survey of the martial arts of feudal Japan, by Oscar Ratti and Adele Westbrook.
Published/Created: Rutland, Vt., C. E. Tuttle Co. [1973]
Description: 483 p. illus. 27 cm.
--------------------------------
I spot checked the book's Bibliography of my version - I see no references to any work published after 1971 - which would support my statement.

However please correct me if I am wrong (possible revisons/updates?)- or if anyone has had dealings/communications with these authors.

P.S., what Sukerkin said!

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I don't know if this is of any use to you, but I just posted this:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=73344

A book from 1875 on what a Japanese "Gentleman" was supposed to know in the way of 'Manly Arts' and it includes notes on Samurai.

Sadly for those who are into head-chopping, it also says that the Samurai was expected to be able to write poetry and arrange flowers as well as fight.

 

[Aikicomp]

I hope to have more to contribute to this tonight when I get home form work but I just wanted to comment on the fact that the Samurai have had almost as much nonsense spoken about them as the Ninja or the Knights of King Arthur.

I mean no direct criticism of what Aikicomp said above when I use this quote as illustrative of the problem:

"I would disagree with that, The Samurai were the ultimate warrior with one purpose only and that was to fight and if need be die. All they did all their lives was to practice and perfect every aspect of warfare
so when that moment came they would have everything they needed to win a great battle or die a glorious death for the one they served... their Daimyo. Anything less than that to a Samurai would be unthinkable and dishonorable"

Samurai were most known for their role as soldiers, it is true but it was far from their only 'profession'. They were administrators, civil servants, tax collectors and so on.

Yup I realize that, I was just addressing their "soldier aspect".

The majority of fighting was done by the common footsoldier such as the ashigaru and the most favoured weapon of the Samurai was the bow (followed by the gun once the Dutch kindly brought some along). There were some hand-to-hand techniques in their training, just as there was in the 'toolbox' of any European member of the knightly classes. Whether these comprised an organised 'system' depends on which period you are looking at and who you ask .

As for the 'glorious death' ideal, that was very much practised more in the breach than in the observance. The most usual thing for a defeated Samurai to do was go to work for the victorious General. They might change their name to protect their family 'honour' but not necessarily.

I was trying to show what the mindset of a true (ideally) Samurai should be. However, as you said, most went to the other side or became Ronin. When Hideyoshi Toyotomi's army lost at Sekigahara, for one we would have never heard of Musashi.

As I say, I don't mean to just be contradictory here; what I am atempting to point out that is that embroidering a coherent tapesty from the tangled webs of Japanese history and literature is by no means a simple task. Even when focussing just on what sword techniques were learned at which periods using what training methods the 'answers' can range very widely.

Understood, no offense taken, thanks for your input.

 

[Chris Parker]

The one point I would like to make (interpretations of what an ideal "true" samurai would/should be aside...) is that Tokugawa never faced Toyotomi. In fact, Tokugawa was allied with Toyotomi, and was one of his most powerful generals. The battle of Sekigahara occured, amongst other reasons, because Toyotomi had already died. So a more accurate statement, instead of Toyotomi's army, might be the supporters of Toyotomi's selected heir's (Hideyori, from his mistress Yodogimi) army, headed by his former generals, such as Ishida Mitsunari.

But the battle itself wasn't even that clear cut. There were many factions involved, and more than a few actually switched sides from Ishida to Tokugawa during the battle. Essentially, it was a battle for supremacy amongst the generals of Toyotomi, because, although Tokugawa was considered the most senior, others were wanting the power. And those who were not in a position to vie for it, supported those who they hoped would come out on top, in hopes of good fortune later.

 

[Aiki Lee]

I have heard that Daito ryu was the basis for not only aikido and judo, but hapkido as well.

I can't for the life of me name any sources though.

 

[Saitama Steve]

I have heard that Daito ryu was the basis for not only aikido and judo, but hapkido as well.

I can't for the life of me name any sources though.

Aikido & possibly Hapkido. Ueshiba Morihei studied Daito-ryu under Takeda Sokaku for a number of years and recieved some licences in the system, before founding Aikido based on his studies in Daito-ryu & his religious ideals from Omoto-Kyo.

Kodokan Judo was founded by Kano Jigoro. He studied two systems of koryu jujutsu as a young man; Tenjin Shinyo-ryu & Takenaka-ha Kito-ryu. After recieving menkyo kaiden in both schools, Kano opened up the Kodokan dojo and taught a brand of jujutsu based on his own ideals as an educator, omitting the more severe, damaging techniques from koryu jujutsu. He also added randori into the Kodokan's training program, which originally came from Tenjin Shinyo-ryu jujutsu.

 

[Aiki Lee]

So then judo has no connection to daito ryu?

 

[Saitama Steve]

So then judo has no connection to daito ryu?

That is correct.

 

[Aiki Lee]

Ah, thanks. I hear so much contradictiory information about martial arts history (even from within their own groups) that I can never be sure about what is accurate. Are there any creditable martial arts history books anyone there knows about?