Phill hahajajajjajajaj..... nope, before that... in another dimension two Supersomething fought and the explosion because that is what we know as "the big bang".
The oldest martial art is that ape from 2001 A Space Odyssey hiting the other one with a bone. Jokes apart, the difference between martial art styles is greatly exagerated by practitioners advocating their own styles.
Nah. Guns are more common in Jersey than sticks and feces. Not so much bullets, but guns can be bought like a mile from any other point for very little.
Dear scholagladiatoria, I like your channel and most of your sword collection,I am not here to argue about which is old martial, but when you talk about kalaripayattu ,i would love to mention some details , basically what you see in the videos and STAGE SHOW is not 100% real kalaripayattu, there are some HIDDEN footwork and weaponry in this art which is used thousands of years ago,still using by some Kalari GURUS, in TEKKEN KALARI MURA there is the written evidence about chuvadumura (foot work for empty hand and weapons) by agasthyar, kumbamuni. its not a argument when we talk in the social media please try to research more about it and learn more about it NOT FROM SOCIAL MEDIA BUT DIRECT FROM GURUS- Thanks for sharing your collection all the very best.
Things go on exaggerate or turn different when shared verbally from one person to another .think about what happens when this goes down through generations .now thats India . Anything is not exactly what it was in first place.
@Kshitij Raj Sorry to say that, there is still oldest kalari murai, may be you didnt see it, People just checking social Media and watched the some vadakkan style kalari and saying this is what it is,😉 But my friend travel by walking some areas you will defiantly will find the truth about real South indain Martial art 🙏♥️🌷
My martial art of Uhg-uhg huggah rah is clearly the oldest according Matt Easton. Vindicated! It's the ancient art of beating a woman over the head with a club and stealing her from her tribe. The words translate roughly into "Marriage".
World's oldest is Boxing. The art of fighting with fists (avoiding/blocking the punches of the other and connecting your own) predates humans. Its been around from the time we weren't even humans. It is the oldest!
I thought Kalaripayattu's main claim was that it was the origin of other famous Asian martial arts like kung fu and jiu jitsu. I also think the idea of it being the "oldest martial art" is based on a slightly different definition of "martial art" than just "the best way of crushing that guy's skull, because he came in and shat in your cave". They might for an example mean that it was the original martial art in Asia that brought in the more spiritual, philosophical and meditative side of martial arts that Asia is famous for. I also believe the language barrier might be the cause of certain misunderstandings here.
+brottarnacke And this is the problem with their claim. They are therefore claiming that the Chinese and Japanese had no systems for fighting before that. That's utterly ridiculous. All human groups have systems for fighting. What they should instead claim, is that their martial art influenced some other ones. That would be a perfectly reasonable claim to make (though there is very little actual evidence to support it, as far as I'm aware).
+brottarnacke "Asian martial arts like kung fu". If that's their claim, they need to understand that's like, as Russell Peters says, claiming that there's a language called "Indian".
+brottarnacke Meditation was never a part of original (pre 1800) asian MAs as a spiritual thing, it was used to calm you down and make you relax. Martial arts were the domain of common man back them, earning their keep with their hands, not philosophers, no matter what wuxia tells you. Sure, some, maybe even most, people did use it in spiritual sense, but that's like claiming that prayer before battle is an integral part of HEMA.
Regarding spears and bows, you could argue that these items were initially tools for hunting animals for food, and later became adapted for martial purposes. By contrast, the sword is definitely a tool of martial arts, meaning the sword is designed to kill human beings specifically, not animals.
I think that they are claiming that Chinese Gongfu is derived from Kalaripayattu, which came to China from Indian Buddhist monks. I find this problematic because it almost implies that China did not have a developed martial arts tradition in spite of constant warfare.
Junjun Read the second sentence...Also you are referring to a mythical dynasty. We have absolutely no evidence for a proper emperor prior to the Qin dynasty. 三皇五帝 (San Huang Wu Di) is not a historical document...and even it only goes as far back as 2070 BC. Where are you getting the date of 3000 BC from?
Junjun Oh my mistake! Well just to clear things up the first historical emperor is the Yellow Emperor of the Qin dynasty. All previous emperors are currently mythical. Unfortunately due to government regulations and strict party control over historical narrative in China, foreign and joint digs are difficult to arrange so if there were any previous emperors, we won't know for awhile. Cheers!
If I may throw my two cents into the debate, certainly not trying to answer the question in question. Can all fighting be called martial arts? While I can't define the term "art", I would confidently argue that "art" is something that requires practice and thereby a certain amount of skill to do. There was a video about knife fighting in a response to Lindybeige on this channel, where Matt talked about the stress factor in a physical conflict, where it is more than likely that a weak-minded individual will go into caveman mode, and just stab away as much and fast as possible, which is something anyone can do (given your arms are intact of course). Whereas proper knife fighting, where you try to strike the most effective targets and defend yourself from cuts as much as possible, requires skill and can be called a legitimate art. Same thing with 'modern art'; it's not "art", because it doesn't require skill and practice. And then to make the debate slightly easier, we should also divide martial arts into different categories, where I like to use three categories: arts based on strikes (karate, boxing, muay thai), arts based on grappling (wrestling, ju-jutsu, judo), and arts based on weaponry, both ranged and melee. There are of course arts that combine them, like MMA, but that's another debate. For this debate, we can also say there are weapon-based and non-weapon-based martial arts. I'll combine these two points of mine, and say that kalaripayattu can be called an art, and flailing-your-fists-wildly-like-an-ape is not an art. Humans have been doing the latter since they started existing, but didn't start developing arts for doing it effectively until a bit later (I believe). So was kalaripayattu the first martial art, if my points hold water? Probably not, but who knows.
I don't believe Kalari is as old as claimed and even if it is it was certainly very different to how it is today to the point of being a different martial art. Even so there are certainly older recorded martial arts than the earliest dates put for Kalaripayattu. Pankration by the ancient Greeks and there are wrestling forms depicted in 4000 year old Egyptian painting. Before that, well there is no evidence in writing I'm aware of (probably because there was very little writing before that). Weapons existed a lot time before that though (400k bc for spears) and if you're willing to spend hundreds of hours learning to craft weapons you'd almost certainly spend an equal amount of time figuring out how to use them efficiently and teaching those skills to others in your tribe. I'd call that a martial art.
The oldest martial art was clumsily flailing at an animal that was being hunted, but it wasn't a successful business model. Students weren't showing up at the dojo until it improved to 'use sharp stick for mild success'.
+Robert R Best accord to what standard? What are trying to solve? Guys with spears or muggers in the Bronx. Ritualized combat or closely packed legionaries. Indian society doesn't resemble the ancient environment that brought it into being. But as I understand it Kalripatyu is inseparable from the RELIGION it is a part of. Hence, it continues.
apebrain07 Well, if they still advertise themselves as self-defence then "better" for modern street fighting. I'm just saying that being older doesn't *automatically* make a martial art better in any regard, definitely not for self-defence.
A Martial Art is a System with a full set of rules, lineage, teachers, and weapons. They first used to train with weapons before they used to learn unarmed combat. In our known histoty, ancient Egypt they had already a system like that, we can see them on temple basoreliefs, same for India where we actually have the Rig Vedas that talk about the use of various arms and training. Lord Krishna tesching Arjuna. I can safely say, that the oldest system of fighting comes from India. It is tecorded also, that The monk Bhodidharma brought the Budhist Martial Arts to China. China had the Taoist tradition of Wu Dang mountain though. From the Book of Giants/Enoch we were told that all the martial knowledge was imparted to humans by the Watchers or the fallen angels.
First Martial Art, the practiced group throwing of Poo, Rocks and broken branches at enemies and slap punches and scratching biting when closer in contact.
+klyana130 And with all of the practitioners here shown in alot of recent TH-cam show off vids, being white I almost want to think it was some bullshit concocted to make money from ignorant whites or even POC hipsters looking for fulfillment and think they are getting some ancient non-Chinese secret ooh. Mix Yoga and basic Asian martial arts and call it some such or other BS, miraculously just now discovered! I've listened to Sikh Indian martial artists and they don't seem to know or talk of it but conveniently its from an area in south India not normally researched just now appearing the last 5yrs or so. whatevahs. The style and forms are so simple basic as a longterm practicing martial arts I COULD'VE MADE UP a similar system and say it was Native American farmers or Aztec and concoct weapons looking from that area to wield.
I think the point of the "oldest martial arts" discussion is more about a specific repeatable, teachable system. Though a man in ancient Rome may throw punch the same way as a man in ancient Japan by coincidence that does not make it a martial art only if the system is been passed on to others would I then consider it a martial art
Martial arts can be more than just fighting though... If we consider "The Art of War", it has a lot of information about how to conduct war and avoidiung it too.. And not much about the specifics of throwing a punch.
That moment when your recommendations section explains exactly why the video you've just watched was made: 12 videos from 2 posters with the above criticised claim.
The first Olympics were held in 776 BC. Boxing, wrestling and pankration were among the sports included. These were already fully developed Martial Arts at the time of the first Olympics so must actually date from a earlier period. Obviously there was combat and fighting by earlier peoples, but this is probably the first provable systems of fully developed Martial Arts that we have any information about.
+Apollo Olympos Don't quote me, but I remember reading something about Gilgamesh wresting lions, wrestling maidens and wrestling Enkidu in a totally not homoerotical way. That would put the date back a couple of millenniums.
For crying out loud kalaripayattu "might" - emphasis on might - be the oldest structured martial art in the Indo/China area but there are much older structured martial arts in other parts of the world, Pankration and it's origins come immediately to mind, I believe the babylonians had reference to fighting weapons in "Gilgamesh" so i would expect their was structured training there.
You are right to be done with it is not the oldest martial art as kalarippayattu is first of all not a martial art as you define it as its a was warriors way of fighting till death not just defeat.And present karali cant do justice to that so it did eveolve.
Vaughan MacEgan of which weapons u are talking about ?? Steel was invented in India so the first steel weapon also from india.. Kallripayattu is the oldest
One new hypothesis regarding why we have really hard skulls, a flat face, and a hand capable of forming into a fist was that they evolved as we got better at punching each other. And we can see our closest cousins chimpanzees can be really brutal in fights. Then we may consider the human ability to walk and run for really long distances. It''s useful in hunting and surely useful as a fighting tactic.
+kwanarchive I dont recall the specific species that evolved the great range of tortion of the wrist. But it is clear that the other great apes hands are most comfortable with the palms turned "down" and Humans are most comfortable with their palms turned "in", though down is also quite comfortable to humans. But The other great apes and most homonids would struggle to use a tool like a hammer or knife.. or indeed a spear. A chimpanzee for instance, doesnt punch.. it slaps in a downward motion. But that also makes sense as they dont have anywhere near the balance needed to punch, being primarily quardapedal.
***** Well, it doesn't have to be a punch. Could be a hammer fist. In fact probably felt more natural. Forward facing eyes do give superior depth perception, but lots of animals have forward facing eyes without a flat face. Coupled with our strong forehead, it really does look it was built to take a fist. It would be hilarious if the reason why we invented tools was because our heads got too hard to punch/hammer with our fists.
***** Biological features don't evolve to fit a need. They evolve if they create a significant increase in the chance of reproduction. People have been reproducing fine without being able to see their toes. Furthermore, humans have really flexible necks.
***** It's not a statistically significant advantage in reproduction. And when you're hunting, you're looking forward. Your downwards peripheral vision is far from straight down and would have barely been obstructed by a longer face. If a hunter needed more than that, they do what they all do: crouch. Crouching is a much cheaper solution, evolutionarily speaking. However, a flatter face because of all the fighting for the ladies will be more than statistically significant in reproduction. The relationship there is direct and easily falls into a reproductive arms race.
***** Yes, in which case, having the neck bend down a little isn''t going to hamper much if at all. Even the best hunters have to look directly at where their feet are from time to time. It's a natural almost reflex. For sure, the whole punching thing is a new hypothesis. I think it's too early to know how much it contributed. However, social combat doesn't have to get really to-the-death violent for flatter faces, stronger skulls and fistier hands to evolve. Just getting a few strong knocks to the head (and the ability to deliver those knocks) would deter a challenger. But then again, being related to chimpanzees, we are the more violent of the apes and it would seem real combat is more common with us.
The oldest martial art is what is today known as The Most Puissant and Venerable Martial Art of Fook You. Wherein you headbutt, use hammerfists, and then kick them repeatedly in the face when they're on the ground.
It is generally agreed among anthropologists that Neanderthal spears were not "throwing" spears. They used thick shafts and were held and used to stab large prey.
Modern kalarippayattu is just very small of the original. Original is only practiced for war. Edit- kalarippayattu is depicted in Vedas which dates back to 2000BCE. Making it a 3000 year old martial art.
scholagladiatoria Their spears seem to have been made with thick shafts though, suggesting they would've been too heavy to through. Sapiens used throwing spears at the same time, and spear-throwers, but Neanderthals are thought to have been more aggressive hunters who attacked at close range. The heavy damage found on their skeletons, which is about as severe as the damage in rodeo riders, also support the theory that they were melee hunters. UPDATE: It occurred to me just after I wrote this that my sources were pretty limited, so I did some more research and found that there is some evidence that certain groups of neanderthals may indeed have had throwing spears, but the subject is controversial among the paleo-anthropological community. So basically, you're right, we don't know for sure how they used them.
Josef Steinlechner Which period? As i mentioned in my response to Matt, my information was out of date, and Neanderthals may have had throwing spears after all, however, I've seen nothing about atl atls in europe prior to the arrival of homo sapiens sapiens
+Erudito “Subject 18” otidurE Thanks :-) Yes, I'm aware of the trends and theories (at least some of them). Though yes, we really don't know and probably never will. It's entirely possible that some Neanderthal hunted one way and other groups did it differently. I don't take the size of their weapons as any indicator, because we know they were on average stronger than us and in our history we know throwing spears can take a massive variety of shapes, sizes and weights. Apes throw things, so it seems highly unlikely to me that all humans wouldn't also have thrown things.
I believe in this case the word art-from the Latin ars-is more properly thought of as skill than our more usual usage of the word today. A martial art is a system of skills for fighting.
I really admire your unbiased, practical views on weapons and martial arts . As opposed to others who fall prey to rhetorics and flights of fancy . Keep up the great work Sir.
+scholagladiatoria i would think they threw them sometimes, at least in the heat of the moment, it's just that there is nothing that suggests they made a big deal out of it, unlike homo sapiens, and what we do find however suggests they used their spears more in a melee fashion. that is probably largely based on the appearance of what's left of some of their spears evaluated by archaeologists who have never thrown a spear in their life. which reminds me: who is the archaeologist here? i shouldn't open my mouth so wide i guess...
+Badger0fDeath No, that's not that the article says. The article says they might have thrown spears. For all we know, that neanderthal was the village idiot who desperately wanted to become a homo sapiens spear thrower and practiced thousands of hours of human spearthrowing without ever getting anywhere...
robert paulson actually while native americans had basically no metal work, they were anything but primitive in this regard and their stone tools could be more sophisticated and 'advanced' in the way they were created and used than some metal tools. stone age, technically, but high tech stone age. just to ground that on some things: sophisticated calendar... darn complex religion and society... darn ... depending on where in america farming... darn lamas... darn ...
While i by and large agree with what's been said in the video, i would consider some form of combat a martial art if it was codified and thus transmitted through generations. So kicking is kicking and wrestling is wrestling, but karate or greco-roman style or boxing or whatever are martial arts, in my opinion. That said, i'm not arguing the fact that the cave drawings of hunting may be just that - showing posterity a system of catching them pesky mastodons.
again, i disagree. Sports and martial arts are not mutually exclusive. My point is that a martial art - armed or unarmed - has to have a codified structure, that can be taught. And exceptional individuals don't really have much to do with that, unless they write and teach.
Gregor Stamejčič every skill we learn is taught from an elder. But a Martial artist is a great fighter so much so that they are considered artist. Look up artist it's a person with great skill. So they take their basics and improve on them.
Hey Matt. As you've been talking a bit about Indian martial arts lately. Would you be interested in making a video comparing Indian sword and buckler to European?
+Stephen Curtin It's something I'd love to approach in the future, however I would want to have an experienced gatka practitioner take part (which can happen) and also someone far more experienced than me with European sword and buckler systems. I'm a noob when it comes to bucklers.
Nice video! I saw a short video on Kalaripayattu on facebook not too long ago and it seems to me that this and your other recent video were commenting on that (I could be wrong). When I watched that kalaripyattu video it left me with MANY questions, haha. The "oldest" bit definitely had me shaking my head. My first reaction was just, "Really? Older than everything from the medieval period? Older than anything from classical antiquity? I doubt it." But then it got me thinking "how do you even prove a martial art is the oldest aside from mention in text?" Anyway, I'm glad you made this vid. Thanks!
Ah. Yes. The ancient medieval ages. Which started roughly 500 AD... As where Kalaripayattu was describred in the Vedas in great detail, dating back many thousands of years.
Kalarippayattu is only practiced by a certain people in old days. Prominantly solidiers. The problem why you can't find its roots is because it was destroyed by the British under their rule. At the time of pazhassi rule British banned the possession of kalari weapons and teaching. The only thing we study now is just 10% of the Original kalarippayattu. In these 10% teaches you to make your body very flexible. There will a lot of exercises. After that they will introduce different techniques, weapons, and after that you will be introduced to 600 marmas which helps you to know the different vulnerable parts of a human which later can be used to take advantage. I am not kalarippayattu scholar. As a native this is what I know. Kalarippayattu is also not just fighting it's also teaches different type of healing and different ayurvedic practices. The reason why kalarippayattu is called the mother of martial arts. Is because of the bhodhidharman who was a south indian who travelled from South to the china where the shaolin temple is and there he started teaching this kalarippayattu to them. After that the monks make a little modification to make it more effective and that's it. Years by years lot of modification has happened. I can't say kalarippayattu is effective I haven't learnt it. I can only say is east or west respect each other's culture no one is perfect in this. World. Thank you😊.
Doesn't most people when hearing the term "martial art" not only think of someone with skills in fighting but also a tradition or system to pass the knowledge and skill on to the next generation. On another note, Tenshin Shōden Katori Shintō-ryū is the oldest Japanese school with a uninterrupted tradition still existing, they claim to be founded in 1447, but some scholars claim circa 1480 is more historically accurate, according to wikipedia.
I think the main interest in the original question is to know the origins of modern martial arts: how they evolved and branched, presumably from some root martial art, in some country, practiced by some people. These are the blanks we seek to fill. Bringing in a dissertation on semantics is just six and a half minutes of sophistry. While I would not expect anyone to have a complete answer to these questions, I would expect someone who bothered to do a video on the subject to bring a little more meat to the table. Ultimately, most troubling questions can be dispatched with by forcing a reckoning of the terms, but it leaves one feeling empty. "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" Define "chicken."
Hello,Matt. I want to ask you two questions. What is the differences between medieval armingsword and renaissance cut and thrust sword or side sword? And also,from the swordsmanship,what is the differences between medieval armingswird and renaissance cut and thrust sword or side sword?They are both one handed sword in western Europe
Dropping by researching Kalaripayattu realizing some thumbs down?!? Thus, you have a point? Fine with me! Thanks a lot for pointing it out. Jokes aside, really well pointed out that one. Probably Neanderthals had an even older Martial Art. But then it must have been very modern by archaeologist standards.
One thing is sure that kalaripayatu is the mother many other martial art form. If you have doubts about the authenticity of kalaripayatu ,pls come to Kerala, India , and practice it , you may get an answer. I say this with confidence because I am from Kerala
@J 1995 who told you this foolishness..? We have a history which is written. Even before that we had an oral tradition which tells about the fighters. Moreover we have 'vaaythaaris'(spoken instructions) traditionally exchanged through generations. I never say kalari is the oldest or perfect. But surely it existed more than 2000 years before in its crude form as the initial stage of every martial art. It also has a medicinal practice to treat Brocken bones, misplaced joints, sprains and other such problems. Over the ages it has become a life style. Now it is practiced and on the path of revival. It may not be suitable for the present mma fights. But it is the best as a life style to live a healthy life.
Matt, thanks for keeping these informal and entertaining, but at the same time always aspiring for intellectual clarity and consistency. Dealing in 'absolutes' when discussing the past in general is fraught with peril, even more so the mists of the barely understood Ancient worlds.
Probably the oldest martial art in the world is the portuguese "Porrete", because our ancestral australopithecus already practiced it with femoral bones... :-)
Re: Kalari, there's an old documentary on it from-I think-the seventies, that goes into a little bit of detail of how the art was preserved. They show a (then) current master, Tilak Moses, in Madras transcribing texts from old palm leaves. The documentary claims they have been transcribed verbatim for 20 centuries, though I can't see that as anything but conjecture. Tamil is certainly old enough and I believe has undergone very few changes, so it's at least possible. The other ( more or less oral) source they show is from Indian classical dance, where various poses, especially those representing the many war deities of Hinduism (I think they specifically reference one), are very similar to those practiced in Kalari I'm afraid I can't find the documentary on youtube, perhaps someone will provide a link.
I'd have to say boxing, but not in the current form, but as "the martial art of fighting with fists". The word "boxing" is just a denomination created in europe, for instance: europeans could refer to muay thai punches as "thai boxing", while thailand could refer to western boxing as "chok", it's the same discipline with a couple of tiny diferences and with different names, same can be said about other fist fighting martial arts. So, for me, it's very plausible that before we learned to create weapons, and before we learned how to do fancy stuff like kicks, grappling and submissions; our ancestors most probably learned to fight with their fists before they came up with everything else. Hence fist fighting, boxing, or whatever you want to call it, is probably the oldest martial art.
My sensei told us a story. Back in 100,000 or maybe it was 200,000, I don't know, but back in so many years BC... some people killed a mammoth or an animal or they had something precious like that. And some other people came to try and take it so they fought! THAT is the origin of Karate... I loved his humor.
Jiu jitsu is basically grappling not even a specific school of it, what people call Jiu jitsu now is what came from Judo which is a training method that got extracted from few schools of Jiu jitsu and that focuses a lot on the ground fighting. Judo was going that way as well but in 20s rules were changed to focus on standup throws as they were considered more useful in street fighting where going to the ground is dangerous. Old stuff was often not unarmed but dealing with armoured opponent using a takedown to establish control of the body before stabbing them to death or choking them or whatever. Probably very similar to European wrestling in armour, when you are wearing full harness and vast majority of blows just glance off then taking person down to control them is a very good approach. Someone size of the Mountain is ASOIAF would be game over duelist in armor, even better someone like Aleksandr Karelin.
Wrestling and Pugilism can be trace back to Africa over 5000yrs. As it evolves, it was called the( Egyptian age) "Montu" arts. People fail to believe that the martial arts itself was a mixture between culture.
The oldest martial arts would have to be when humans first developed the use of weapons. They were made of stone, so it's likely the first martial art was a group that passed on a tradition of beating with or throwing stones. Probably the most impactful in terms of being widespread for a long time is archery. There's evidence of humans killed with arrows going back to around 15,000 BC. The bow was a really prominent weapon used in war for thousands of years, probably as the dominant weapon in warfare for a longer period of time than any other weapon or method of waging war ever. As far as other things that were really important, shields would be an obvious response to arrows. Spears and maces would have been a likely thing to accompany a shield. Obviously swords were very important. Horsemanship was a really important one. Slings were probably something that was a major factor in wars for thousands of years. I'm assuming these wars were less organized raiding and tribal conflicts, but it seems like that went on for a good 10,000 yrs or so. So as far as martial arts with long held traditions, I'd have to say archery, the simple use of a shield, handling a spear and a mace, and using a sling. Probably the longest standing martial arts in human history.
If there is a spesific school it is a specific art, if I go to the same school to learn both neanderthal spear throwing as roman pilae throwing, then it is the same
I think a point you danced around, but didn't quite make, is the idea that a martial art can be defined as a codified system, and that means not only does someone have to determine what the proper techniques, but has to do it in such a way that it can then be taught to others. By that measure, cavemen throwing spears or hitting things with rocks wouldn't be martial arts. What's more, it's not just about fighting and killing, but about war (even recreational or sport martial arts still owe their existence to this concept). So the very first martial arts would probably have coincided with the development both language, and structured warfare. By THAT definition, the question might actually have an answer. Whether we can discover that answer or not, is another matter entirely.
Just because harappan Indians lived a Little differently than moderne Indians doesnt mean that they werent Indians. In the same way martial arts Evolve and you cannot Say that that Kalaripayat isnt the oldest just because it has evolved with time
So basically, we have to figure out which farming tool Cain killed Able with. Oh wait, a whole lot of the world isn't going to agree with that cuz it only happened 5500 years ago lol.
Hey Matt!, this might sound like a funny question but could you do a video about long hair and martial arts. Since its so prevalent in movies with everything from the ancient greeks to vikings and knights. Was it really practical and weren't there a lot of downsides to having long hair like it would get in your eyes or someone would pull you by the hair or something similar ? I see that modern armies have gotten rid if this "fashion style" all together so why wasn't it done earlier ?
The medieval Europeans only had exercises for upper body.Its only after contact with indian wrestlers they developed sit ups and dive bomber push ups and so pm.Many exercise unique to chinese and indian martial arts were adopted by later as calisthenics and dance moves.Thats why they called it the exotic east ofcourse today the exotic spread out and has become common place.For eg, the indian mallakhamb was adopted as pole dancing.
I don't think it's really an argument that is searching for an objective truth. Rather I think it is about asserting or cultural superiority on one side of it and chipping away at the idea that such a thing even exists on the other side of it. I think historically martial superiority heavily influences cultural domination, assimilation, and transformation. And making a claim that one's ethnographic system of combat is the best, oldest, most codified, to me is a form of false-bravado used in place of the actual want or ability to make war. It's like saying "We are the best at this. It is proven by our ability to make our expression of it survive so long. And so you should yield to us without conflict."
kalaripayattu changed a little in a 1000 years ago. oral commands called vaithari which was used thousands of years ago, is still used today. not only that we developed a proper fighting system even before chinese and japanese societies were made. i wont say kalaripayyatu is the oldest martial arts, but is definitely the oldest and well developed martial arts in asia which influenced other martial arts as well. the biggest example is bhodidharma, a tamil prince, from south of india , travelled towards china. he was an expert in kalaripayyatu and ayurveda. he is called as damo in china and still worshipped there. even that evidence is not enough then just ask me i will give u more. kalaripayyatu is definitely the oldest well developed martial arts in the world. its not just a fighting art but a martial tradition and indians have a habbit if clinging to a tradition for a long time.
I disagree on the definition of "martial" art. we're not talking about military technology. we're talking "no weapons" conflict either aggressive or defensive. (no weapons other than your own body.) we remove boxing because its a "western" style of fighting. so martial arts are defined by the "eastern" traditions of non-use of weapons form of human conflict. that's what I was looking for when I came here; what was the first eastern form of human physical conflict that doesn't use weapons.
I must say, the idea that a technique has not changed in 500 years is not something that necessarily appeals to me. I realize that there are some techniques which are probably most ideal for the human phsyiology, but, the fact is, at any given time, people tend to find improvements over what came before. So, I'm not sure I really care how old a martial art is. 'Old' can mean 'effective,' but also it can mean 'unwilling to change.'
Dude did u know that kalaripayattu is the mother of all martial arts, they doesn't call that for nothing . And the orgin of kalaripayattu is from the kerela (india)
kalari is not the oldest martial art.. people also say that the martial arts depicted inside the pyramids are the oldest martial arts which is pure baloney because to say that martial arts started in one part of the world while everybody else was sitting around with any knowledge of combat is ridiculous now kalari might be the oldest documented martial art in the world but that does not make it the oldest...
Neanderthals didn't throw their spears at all, it is one of the defining differences between that species and us. Their anatomy is not designed for throws, and all evidence (& anatomical design) shows they used in close/melee spear attacks for their hunting. Also, probably best to leave hunting skills out of this; it was hunting skills used vs other human(oids) on occasion, and not a "martial art", which would be primarily be about man vs man. It's a less ridiculous question than you think Matthew, although it gets ridiculous if one tries making ancient hunting skills/weapons into "martial arts".
Yes. Adimurai kalaripayattu is the oldest form of martial arts ever known. Adimurai is like an ocean with different forms. But, the art techniques are learnt today based on the ancient books written 2500 years ago. If you can understand tamil you can understand even Greek and Latin cos many of the world languages have roots words from tamil. Example: Navy is Navai in tamil found in tamil literature written 2000 years ago. Scientifically tamil people were advanced 2000 years ago with usage of the word atom in tamil literature Tirukkural. Cell division is explained in “Tholkaapiyam”is a book explaining the grammar for tamil language written 2500 years ago. The English word molecule is originally from tamil root word “moolakooru”. If we still speak the same language with same words spoken 2000 years ago, we can easily interpret the Adimurai kalaripayattu techniques from the tamil literatures written 2000 years ago. But learn it from real Tamil siddhars/gurus, not the ones who teaches for money. In ancient days, a master observed a student’s behavior and discipline for 12 years and only then he teaches this martial art to him or her. Imagine how pious they were is passing on the tradition to a successor who will use it for the human welfare and not for any selfish or evil reasons.
It is a ridiculous thing to argue over, but it is also ridiculous to kind of act jealous because one martial art other than yours says it's oldest. I don't know much about Kalaripayattu, but in the India the oldest martial code is probably the "Dhanurveda".
That question could have been better phrased- Which is the oldest known, surviving (recognisable to the original) Martial Art( system)? But it's quite unfair how you skipped the main question for clarification and then, not say much. You obviously know your bit of history for people to be interested in hearing your thoughts about it. Is it really similar to the original? Are they using primary sources? How viable would it be for its times?
I think it's far more interesting to sift through the various techniques etc. to find where all these martial arts are similar. I'll never forget when I learned about half-swording and how suddenly techniques that I had used with a staff became applicable or when I noticed the similarities between English Pugilism and Wing Chun Kung fu. We have the same bodies as our ancient ancestors, so naturally the differences in fighting systems are superficial at best.
I always thought of this argument in the same way I've always thought about sword traditions. There are only so many ways to move a sharpened steel object to offend another person. Similarly your body can only move in ways in which it can move. To me this means that a long time before we will ever likely have evidence to prove, someone figured out that there were only x number of ways to punch, x number of ways to kick and you can only throw a person on the ground x number of ways. Figuring out which ones worked the best probably didn't take nearly as long as we imagine.
Dear Matt; If there were a course that focused on "breaking" feats (breaking 2-by-4s, breaking rocks, etc. etc. Destroying things) with and without tools and using your body, would you consider that a martial art? I felt inspired when I read a stories about so called "fury rooms", where people would pay to be able to destroy a room. I was thinking, "how could you do with the most efficiency? What is the minimal amount of effort I could exert in the fastest time to break a pot?"
+scholagladiatoria Yeah agreed, was just saying that its a difficult conversation when people normally only think of martial arts as unarmed combat, or at least they do here in Aus.
Thanks for the interesting vid! I agree that a lot here hinges on the difinition of 'martial art'. Especially the *art* part seems of importance to me here. As I'm following a definition of art that's based on the medieval understanding of the *artes mechanicae* and is tightly connected to the greek idea of *techne*: Thus, I think there is only one martial art: martial art. This one art, though, is expressed in various ways in practice, modified through tools available as well as cultural context. That's, then, also why practice changes while the art remains the same, that is there are all the time the same underlying principles to be found.
In terms of jujutsu the ground fighting was less emphasized in judo, the progenitor of Brazilian juijutsu, as practiced by the samurai was more focused on the throw and heck even the strike. Kano took a lot out in the aim of making a simple codified system for self defense and sport. Evan saying that many koryu have differences in their unarmed combat. Just thought I would throw that out I personally love all the varieties of judo/jujutsu/juijutsu.
9 ปีที่แล้ว
Maybe if we said, oldest martial art continiously practised and still practised in living tradition today, we could decide what was oldest. But question is if it did relay look like it did at its inception. And if it did, would that be a good thing?
another question to consider is if older matters. If a martial art was invented 1,000 years ago and somehow remained completely unchanged to modern times is is better than an art invented in 1040? Yes the human body has not changed significantly in that time so many techniques of ancient systems will work today. But there are other things to consider such as laws, weather weapons are involved or not, if you are fighting in war, civilian self defense or for sport etc. There is some mystique to an art being older, as there is a mystique to ancient swords and such. But are ancient swords better than later ones? In many cases no. As technology improved in steel manufacture swords potentially are made of purer steel and with more consistant heating quality was better controlled. Sure there were the rare examples like the Ulfbhert swords that had steel of a quality not replicated in Europe for centuries, but this is an exception. So if one is wanting ancient tradition that is fine, but if one is looking to defend oneself in life and death situations...use what works best in your current time, society and for your body type. Study ancient culture and practices if that is enjoyable but don't assume that just because a system is ancient it is somehow better.
Martial arts started when one single cell organism accidentally absorbed another single sell organism four billion years ago...
Phill hahajajajjajajaj..... nope, before that... in another dimension two Supersomething fought and the explosion because that is what we know as "the big bang".
Evolution is fake
Those 2 cells battle must be legendary =)))
The oldest martial art is that ape from 2001 A Space Odyssey hiting the other one with a bone.
Jokes apart, the difference between martial art styles is greatly exagerated by practitioners advocating their own styles.
+Thiago Monteiro You may have been joking, but I actually think you might have won this round.
+Thiago Monteiro I thought it was throwing feces after that throwing stones :P
+Dennis Bauer I don't know where you come from, but stones tend to be a little more readily available than feces in most places.
+Prof. Luigi you my good man have never been to new jersey.
Nah. Guns are more common in Jersey than sticks and feces. Not so much bullets, but guns can be bought like a mile from any other point for very little.
Dear scholagladiatoria,
I like your channel and most of your sword collection,I am not here to argue about which is old martial, but when you talk about kalaripayattu ,i would love to mention some details , basically what you see in the videos and STAGE SHOW is not 100% real kalaripayattu, there are some HIDDEN footwork and weaponry in this art which is used thousands of years ago,still using by some Kalari GURUS, in TEKKEN KALARI MURA there is the written evidence about chuvadumura (foot work for empty hand and weapons) by agasthyar, kumbamuni.
its not a argument when we talk in the social media please try to research more about it and learn more about it NOT FROM SOCIAL MEDIA BUT DIRECT FROM GURUS-
Thanks for sharing your collection all the very best.
Yes man Kalari is not we think cause I am learning it
Look at this th-cam.com/video/oI84oM_bJeg/w-d-xo.html
Things go on exaggerate or turn different when shared verbally from one person to another .think about what happens when this goes down through generations .now thats India . Anything is not exactly what it was in first place.
@Kshitij Raj
Sorry to say that, there is still oldest kalari murai, may be you didnt see it,
People just checking social Media and watched the some vadakkan style kalari and saying this is what it is,😉
But my friend travel by walking some areas you will defiantly will find the truth about real South indain Martial art 🙏♥️🌷
My martial art of Uhg-uhg huggah rah is clearly the oldest according Matt Easton. Vindicated! It's the ancient art of beating a woman over the head with a club and stealing her from her tribe. The words translate roughly into "Marriage".
+Rick Szalay lmao
+KraljevicPavle found the anti feminist
This is getting more serious than I origionally intended...
Lmao 😂😂
The oldest martial art is eating things.
Apparently a white bald *British* man has been given the privilege to judge Indian traditions.
World's oldest is Boxing.
The art of fighting with fists (avoiding/blocking the punches of the other and connecting your own) predates humans. Its been around from the time we weren't even humans. It is the oldest!
I fear that telling people it's ridiculous to argue about may be one of the best ways to make people argue about it... ;)
Kalarippayattu is the Mother of Martial Arts!!! All other martial arts got evolved from this Indian martial art.
I thought Kalaripayattu's main claim was that it was the origin of other famous Asian martial arts like kung fu and jiu jitsu. I also think the idea of it being the "oldest martial art" is based on a slightly different definition of "martial art" than just "the best way of crushing that guy's skull, because he came in and shat in your cave". They might for an example mean that it was the original martial art in Asia that brought in the more spiritual, philosophical and meditative side of martial arts that Asia is famous for. I also believe the language barrier might be the cause of certain misunderstandings here.
+brottarnacke And this is the problem with their claim. They are therefore claiming that the Chinese and Japanese had no systems for fighting before that. That's utterly ridiculous. All human groups have systems for fighting. What they should instead claim, is that their martial art influenced some other ones. That would be a perfectly reasonable claim to make (though there is very little actual evidence to support it, as far as I'm aware).
+brottarnacke "Asian martial arts like kung fu".
If that's their claim, they need to understand that's like, as Russell Peters says, claiming that there's a language called "Indian".
+brottarnacke Meditation was never a part of original (pre 1800) asian MAs as a spiritual thing, it was used to calm you down and make you relax. Martial arts were the domain of common man back them, earning their keep with their hands, not philosophers, no matter what wuxia tells you. Sure, some, maybe even most, people did use it in spiritual sense, but that's like claiming that prayer before battle is an integral part of HEMA.
+kwanarchive "Somebody gonna get a huuurrt!"
+MartinGreywolf Is calming down and relaxing a part of martial arts? I don't know.
I'm currently learning the confirmed oldest martial art
Dinorei Ryu: The Way of the Dinosaur
Regarding spears and bows, you could argue that these items were initially tools for hunting animals for food, and later became adapted for martial purposes. By contrast, the sword is definitely a tool of martial arts, meaning the sword is designed to kill human beings specifically, not animals.
I think that they are claiming that Chinese Gongfu is derived from Kalaripayattu, which came to China from Indian Buddhist monks. I find this problematic because it almost implies that China did not have a developed martial arts tradition in spite of constant warfare.
Junjun Read the second sentence...Also you are referring to a mythical dynasty. We have absolutely no evidence for a proper emperor prior to the Qin dynasty. 三皇五帝 (San Huang Wu Di) is not a historical document...and even it only goes as far back as 2070 BC. Where are you getting the date of 3000 BC from?
Junjun
Oh my mistake! Well just to clear things up the first historical emperor is the Yellow Emperor of the Qin dynasty. All previous emperors are currently mythical. Unfortunately due to government regulations and strict party control over historical narrative in China, foreign and joint digs are difficult to arrange so if there were any previous emperors, we won't know for awhile. Cheers!
But didn't Chinese martial arts start around 5th century bce era? Or atleast that's what i heard.
NakMuayify I think it might be mix of both Chinese Nd Indian martial arts
If I may throw my two cents into the debate, certainly not trying to answer the question in question.
Can all fighting be called martial arts? While I can't define the term "art", I would confidently argue that "art" is something that requires practice and thereby a certain amount of skill to do. There was a video about knife fighting in a response to Lindybeige on this channel, where Matt talked about the stress factor in a physical conflict, where it is more than likely that a weak-minded individual will go into caveman mode, and just stab away as much and fast as possible, which is something anyone can do (given your arms are intact of course). Whereas proper knife fighting, where you try to strike the most effective targets and defend yourself from cuts as much as possible, requires skill and can be called a legitimate art.
Same thing with 'modern art'; it's not "art", because it doesn't require skill and practice.
And then to make the debate slightly easier, we should also divide martial arts into different categories, where I like to use three categories: arts based on strikes (karate, boxing, muay thai), arts based on grappling (wrestling, ju-jutsu, judo), and arts based on weaponry, both ranged and melee. There are of course arts that combine them, like MMA, but that's another debate. For this debate, we can also say there are weapon-based and non-weapon-based martial arts.
I'll combine these two points of mine, and say that kalaripayattu can be called an art, and flailing-your-fists-wildly-like-an-ape is not an art. Humans have been doing the latter since they started existing, but didn't start developing arts for doing it effectively until a bit later (I believe).
So was kalaripayattu the first martial art, if my points hold water? Probably not, but who knows.
I don't believe Kalari is as old as claimed and even if it is it was certainly very different to how it is today to the point of being a different martial art. Even so there are certainly older recorded martial arts than the earliest dates put for Kalaripayattu.
Pankration by the ancient Greeks and there are wrestling forms depicted in 4000 year old Egyptian painting.
Before that, well there is no evidence in writing I'm aware of (probably because there was very little writing before that). Weapons existed a lot time before that though (400k bc for spears) and if you're willing to spend hundreds of hours learning to craft weapons you'd almost certainly spend an equal amount of time figuring out how to use them efficiently and teaching those skills to others in your tribe. I'd call that a martial art.
The oldest martial art was clumsily flailing at an animal that was being hunted, but it wasn't a successful business model. Students weren't showing up at the dojo until it improved to 'use sharp stick for mild success'.
+No Free Will I like Rusty Shackleford's take
Ó Slatraigh
Who you talking about, I'm Dale Gribble.... er. I mean, yeah. Rusty is what I go by.
No Free Will God dammit Dale.
Why does it matter? Being "the oldest martial art" doesn't make it any better.
It matters because it is a speculation of history, the asking and then answering of a question, which is always important.
+Robert R Doesn't matter much, no, but it's still something people will debate endlessly. And it's nice to hear mr Eastons take on it.
+Robert R Best accord to what standard? What are trying to solve? Guys with spears or muggers in the Bronx. Ritualized combat or closely packed legionaries. Indian society doesn't resemble the ancient environment that brought it into being. But as I understand it Kalripatyu is inseparable from the RELIGION it is a part of. Hence, it continues.
apebrain07 Well, if they still advertise themselves as self-defence then "better" for modern street fighting. I'm just saying that being older doesn't *automatically* make a martial art better in any regard, definitely not for self-defence.
irrelevant to the point
A Martial Art is a System with a full set of rules, lineage, teachers, and weapons. They first used to train with weapons before they used to learn unarmed combat. In our known histoty, ancient Egypt they had already a system like that, we can see them on temple basoreliefs, same for India where we actually have the Rig Vedas that talk about the use of various arms and training. Lord Krishna tesching Arjuna. I can safely say, that the oldest system of fighting comes from India. It is tecorded also, that The monk Bhodidharma brought the Budhist Martial Arts to China. China had the Taoist tradition of Wu Dang mountain though. From the Book of Giants/Enoch we were told that all the martial knowledge was imparted to humans by the Watchers or the fallen angels.
First Martial Art, the practiced group throwing of Poo, Rocks and broken branches at enemies and slap punches and scratching biting when closer in contact.
+klyana130 And with all of the practitioners here shown in alot of recent TH-cam show off vids, being white I almost want to think it was some bullshit concocted to make money from ignorant whites or even POC hipsters looking for fulfillment and think they are getting some ancient non-Chinese secret ooh. Mix Yoga and basic Asian martial arts and call it some such or other BS, miraculously just now discovered! I've listened to Sikh Indian martial artists and they don't seem to know or talk of it but conveniently its from an area in south India not normally researched just now appearing the last 5yrs or so. whatevahs. The style and forms are so simple basic as a longterm practicing martial arts I COULD'VE MADE UP a similar system and say it was Native American farmers or Aztec and concoct weapons looking from that area to wield.
I think the point of the "oldest martial arts" discussion is more about a specific repeatable, teachable system. Though a man in ancient Rome may throw punch the same way as a man in ancient Japan by coincidence that does not make it a martial art only if the system is been passed on to others would I then consider it a martial art
Kalari was born in southern part of india in keral...tamilnadu
Martial arts can be more than just fighting though... If we consider "The Art of War", it has a lot of information about how to conduct war and avoidiung it too.. And not much about the specifics of throwing a punch.
+Reichtangle Musashi would disagree.
That moment when your recommendations section explains exactly why the video you've just watched was made: 12 videos from 2 posters with the above criticised claim.
The first Olympics were held in 776 BC. Boxing, wrestling and pankration were among the sports included. These were already fully developed Martial Arts at the time of the first Olympics so must actually date from a earlier period. Obviously there was combat and fighting by earlier peoples, but this is probably the first provable systems of fully developed Martial Arts that we have any information about.
+Apollo Olympos Don't quote me, but I remember reading something about Gilgamesh wresting lions, wrestling maidens and wrestling Enkidu in a totally not homoerotical way. That would put the date back a couple of millenniums.
+José Sandoval Well, actual historical records are not the same as epic poetry... Though the "wrestling maidens" thing *does* sound interesting!
There's a cave painting from 7000 BC depicting wrestling in Mongolia, and several records of wrestling in ancient Egypt from around 2000 BC.
For crying out loud kalaripayattu "might" - emphasis on might - be the oldest structured martial art in the Indo/China area but there are much older structured martial arts in other parts of the world, Pankration and it's origins come immediately to mind, I believe the babylonians had reference to fighting weapons in "Gilgamesh" so i would expect their was structured training there.
You are right to be done with it is not the oldest martial art as kalarippayattu is first of all not a martial art as you define it as its a was warriors way of fighting till death not just defeat.And present karali cant do justice to that so it did eveolve.
bioticum greeks new pan Croatian and who’s Greece Alexander the Great and who went India. Alexander the Great
bioticum what
bioticum the Indian monk that went to China. Alex and a great new pan creation. And went India
Vaughan MacEgan of which weapons u are talking about ??
Steel was invented in India so the first steel weapon also from india..
Kallripayattu is the oldest
One new hypothesis regarding why we have really hard skulls, a flat face, and a hand capable of forming into a fist was that they evolved as we got better at punching each other. And we can see our closest cousins chimpanzees can be really brutal in fights.
Then we may consider the human ability to walk and run for really long distances. It''s useful in hunting and surely useful as a fighting tactic.
+kwanarchive I dont recall the specific species that evolved the great range of tortion of the wrist.
But it is clear that the other great apes hands are most comfortable with the palms turned "down" and Humans are most comfortable with their palms turned "in", though down is also quite comfortable to humans. But The other great apes and most homonids would struggle to use a tool like a hammer or knife.. or indeed a spear.
A chimpanzee for instance, doesnt punch.. it slaps in a downward motion. But that also makes sense as they dont have anywhere near the balance needed to punch, being primarily quardapedal.
***** Well, it doesn't have to be a punch. Could be a hammer fist. In fact probably felt more natural.
Forward facing eyes do give superior depth perception, but lots of animals have forward facing eyes without a flat face. Coupled with our strong forehead, it really does look it was built to take a fist.
It would be hilarious if the reason why we invented tools was because our heads got too hard to punch/hammer with our fists.
***** Biological features don't evolve to fit a need. They evolve if they create a significant increase in the chance of reproduction. People have been reproducing fine without being able to see their toes.
Furthermore, humans have really flexible necks.
***** It's not a statistically significant advantage in reproduction. And when you're hunting, you're looking forward. Your downwards peripheral vision is far from straight down and would have barely been obstructed by a longer face. If a hunter needed more than that, they do what they all do: crouch. Crouching is a much cheaper solution, evolutionarily speaking.
However, a flatter face because of all the fighting for the ladies will be more than statistically significant in reproduction. The relationship there is direct and easily falls into a reproductive arms race.
***** Yes, in which case, having the neck bend down a little isn''t going to hamper much if at all. Even the best hunters have to look directly at where their feet are from time to time. It's a natural almost reflex.
For sure, the whole punching thing is a new hypothesis. I think it's too early to know how much it contributed. However, social combat doesn't have to get really to-the-death violent for flatter faces, stronger skulls and fistier hands to evolve. Just getting a few strong knocks to the head (and the ability to deliver those knocks) would deter a challenger. But then again, being related to chimpanzees, we are the more violent of the apes and it would seem real combat is more common with us.
The oldest martial art is what is today known as The Most Puissant and Venerable Martial Art of Fook You. Wherein you headbutt, use hammerfists, and then kick them repeatedly in the face when they're on the ground.
It is generally agreed among anthropologists that Neanderthal spears were not "throwing" spears. They used thick shafts and were held and used to stab large prey.
i love youtube, never watch freeview tv anymore now, youtube rocks
Modern kalarippayattu is just very small of the original. Original is only practiced for war.
Edit- kalarippayattu is depicted in Vedas which dates back to 2000BCE. Making it a 3000 year old martial art.
In which veda Kalaripayattu is mentioned...? Martial art of Kerala and north India is different.
@@CJ-ud8nf bruh idk if i am the commented this lol. I think some shitty hacker got my account gotta change my account password lol.
Off subject?
Thoughts on Giacomo di Grassi Rapier vs Cappa Feiro?
or Italian Vs Spanish Rapier styles?
Could you make a video on either subjects?
Pretty sure the oldest martial art is "Ibashyourface-do."
Neanderthals actually didn't have throwing spears as far as we know, they used heavy thrusting spears.
+Erudito “Subject 18” otidurE They had spears - we currently have no way of knowing how they used them. Not that I have seen any evidence for anyway.
+Erudito „Subject 18“ otidurE Erm...how on earth are we supposed to know that??? All we have to go by is pure speculation...
scholagladiatoria Their spears seem to have been made with thick shafts though, suggesting they would've been too heavy to through. Sapiens used throwing spears at the same time, and spear-throwers, but Neanderthals are thought to have been more aggressive hunters who attacked at close range. The heavy damage found on their skeletons, which is about as severe as the damage in rodeo riders, also support the theory that they were melee hunters.
UPDATE: It occurred to me just after I wrote this that my sources were pretty limited, so I did some more research and found that there is some evidence that certain groups of neanderthals may indeed have had throwing spears, but the subject is controversial among the paleo-anthropological community. So basically, you're right, we don't know for sure how they used them.
Josef Steinlechner Which period? As i mentioned in my response to Matt, my information was out of date, and Neanderthals may have had throwing spears after all, however, I've seen nothing about atl atls in europe prior to the arrival of homo sapiens sapiens
+Erudito “Subject 18” otidurE Thanks :-) Yes, I'm aware of the trends and theories (at least some of them). Though yes, we really don't know and probably never will. It's entirely possible that some Neanderthal hunted one way and other groups did it differently. I don't take the size of their weapons as any indicator, because we know they were on average stronger than us and in our history we know throwing spears can take a massive variety of shapes, sizes and weights. Apes throw things, so it seems highly unlikely to me that all humans wouldn't also have thrown things.
I believe in this case the word art-from the Latin ars-is more properly thought of as skill than our more usual usage of the word today. A martial art is a system of skills for fighting.
I really admire your unbiased, practical views on weapons and martial arts . As opposed to others who fall prey to rhetorics and flights of fancy . Keep up the great work Sir.
I know you're trying to make a point, but Neanderthals didn't use throwing spears, which is probably part of the reason they dies out.
+kokofan50 See the other comments here on that topic. We don't know whether they threw spears or not :-)
+scholagladiatoria
i would think they threw them sometimes, at least in the heat of the moment, it's just that there is nothing that suggests they made a big deal out of it, unlike homo sapiens, and what we do find however suggests they used their spears more in a melee fashion.
that is probably largely based on the appearance of what's left of some of their spears evaluated by archaeologists who have never thrown a spear in their life.
which reminds me: who is the archaeologist here? i shouldn't open my mouth so wide i guess...
+Badger0fDeath No, that's not that the article says.
The article says they might have thrown spears. For all we know, that neanderthal was the village idiot who desperately wanted to become a homo sapiens spear thrower and practiced thousands of hours of human spearthrowing without ever getting anywhere...
Yup, Ron Perlman is a classic example upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Ron_Perlman_February_2015.jpg
robert paulson
actually while native americans had basically no metal work, they were anything but primitive in this regard and their stone tools could be more sophisticated and 'advanced' in the way they were created and used than some metal tools.
stone age, technically, but high tech stone age.
just to ground that on some things:
sophisticated calendar... darn
complex religion and society... darn
...
depending on where in america
farming... darn
lamas... darn
...
While i by and large agree with what's been said in the video, i would consider some form of combat a martial art if it was codified and thus transmitted through generations. So kicking is kicking and wrestling is wrestling, but karate or greco-roman style or boxing or whatever are martial arts, in my opinion. That said, i'm not arguing the fact that the cave drawings of hunting may be just that - showing posterity a system of catching them pesky mastodons.
So does that make no-holds-barred street fighting a martial art?
in my opinion no, it makes it a brawl. Individual streetfighters, however, may be trained in various martial arts and use them at their discretion.
again, i disagree. Sports and martial arts are not mutually exclusive. My point is that a martial art - armed or unarmed - has to have a codified structure, that can be taught. And exceptional individuals don't really have much to do with that, unless they write and teach.
Gregor Stamejčič every skill we learn is taught from an elder. But a Martial artist is a great fighter so much so that they are considered artist. Look up artist it's a person with great skill. So they take their basics and improve on them.
***** there's no bad style just bad training or lack of training.
I literally saluted my computer when you pronounced Neanderthal correctly
Hey Matt. As you've been talking a bit about Indian martial arts lately. Would you be interested in making a video comparing Indian sword and buckler to European?
+Stephen Curtin It's something I'd love to approach in the future, however I would want to have an experienced gatka practitioner take part (which can happen) and also someone far more experienced than me with European sword and buckler systems. I'm a noob when it comes to bucklers.
Well even if you only got a gatka practicioner to come in and talk about Indian style sword and buckler. That would be great.
Nice video! I saw a short video on Kalaripayattu on facebook not too long ago and it seems to me that this and your other recent video were commenting on that (I could be wrong). When I watched that kalaripyattu video it left me with MANY questions, haha. The "oldest" bit definitely had me shaking my head. My first reaction was just, "Really? Older than everything from the medieval period? Older than anything from classical antiquity? I doubt it." But then it got me thinking "how do you even prove a martial art is the oldest aside from mention in text?"
Anyway, I'm glad you made this vid. Thanks!
Ah. Yes. The ancient medieval ages. Which started roughly 500 AD... As where Kalaripayattu was describred in the Vedas in great detail, dating back many thousands of years.
@@MrArik86 I didn't say the Medieval period and classical antiquity were the same thing. Try again.
Kalarippayattu is only practiced by a certain people in old days. Prominantly solidiers. The problem why you can't find its roots is because it was destroyed by the British under their rule. At the time of pazhassi rule British banned the possession of kalari weapons and teaching. The only thing we study now is just 10% of the Original kalarippayattu. In these 10% teaches you to make your body very flexible. There will a lot of exercises. After that they will introduce different techniques, weapons, and after that you will be introduced to 600 marmas which helps you to know the different vulnerable parts of a human which later can be used to take advantage. I am not kalarippayattu scholar. As a native this is what I know. Kalarippayattu is also not just fighting it's also teaches different type of healing and different ayurvedic practices.
The reason why kalarippayattu is called the mother of martial arts. Is because of the bhodhidharman who was a south indian who travelled from South to the china where the shaolin temple is and there he started teaching this kalarippayattu to them. After that the monks make a little modification to make it more effective and that's it. Years by years lot of modification has happened. I can't say kalarippayattu is effective I haven't learnt it. I can only say is east or west respect each other's culture no one is perfect in this. World. Thank you😊.
The oldest martial art is the "K.O. bitch slap"
TIL that kalaripayattu might be the worlds oldest martial art.
Doesn't most people when hearing the term "martial art" not only think of someone with skills in fighting but also a tradition or system to pass the knowledge and skill on to the next generation.
On another note, Tenshin Shōden Katori Shintō-ryū is the oldest Japanese school with a uninterrupted tradition still existing, they claim to be founded in 1447, but some scholars claim circa 1480 is more historically accurate, according to wikipedia.
I saw the comment asking this yesterday and knew in my gut that there would be a video on it :)
+Neos Neos I saw this video and knew in my gut there must have been a comment shortly before this video arguing about this topic.
Im gonna be so hyped to see your channel reach 100k idk why just like u rule dude keep u[ the gr8 viz
I think the main interest in the original question is to know the origins of modern martial arts: how they evolved and branched, presumably from some root martial art, in some country, practiced by some people. These are the blanks we seek to fill. Bringing in a dissertation on semantics is just six and a half minutes of sophistry. While I would not expect anyone to have a complete answer to these questions, I would expect someone who bothered to do a video on the subject to bring a little more meat to the table. Ultimately, most troubling questions can be dispatched with by forcing a reckoning of the terms, but it leaves one feeling empty.
"Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" Define "chicken."
Oldest martial art would be: stone age era spear and club fighting.
Hello,Matt.
I want to ask you two questions.
What is the differences between medieval armingsword and renaissance cut and thrust sword or side sword?
And also,from the swordsmanship,what is the differences between medieval armingswird and renaissance cut and thrust sword or side sword?They are both one handed sword in western Europe
Correeda is thought to have existed as a tradition over 30,000 years ago which is much older than kalaripayattu
Well said Matt!
Just wanted to say it, its good to point out why questions like the "oldest" or the "best" are silly out of specific context.
Dropping by researching Kalaripayattu realizing some thumbs down?!? Thus, you have a point? Fine with me! Thanks a lot for pointing it out.
Jokes aside, really well pointed out that one. Probably Neanderthals had an even older Martial Art. But then it must have been very modern by archaeologist standards.
One thing is sure that kalaripayatu is the mother many other martial art form. If you have doubts about the authenticity of kalaripayatu ,pls come to Kerala, India , and practice it , you may get an answer. I say this with confidence because I am from Kerala
@J 1995 who told you this foolishness..? We have a history which is written. Even before that we had an oral tradition which tells about the fighters. Moreover we have 'vaaythaaris'(spoken instructions) traditionally exchanged through generations. I never say kalari is the oldest or perfect. But surely it existed more than 2000 years before in its crude form as the initial stage of every martial art. It also has a medicinal practice to treat Brocken bones, misplaced joints, sprains and other such problems. Over the ages it has become a life style. Now it is practiced and on the path of revival. It may not be suitable for the present mma fights. But it is the best as a life style to live a healthy life.
@J 1995 yes. I never said kalaprippayatt is the oldest or the mother of other martial arts. But it is not fake. I spoke about that
Matt, thanks for keeping these informal and entertaining, but at the same time always aspiring for intellectual clarity and consistency. Dealing in 'absolutes' when discussing the past in general is fraught with peril, even more so the mists of the barely understood Ancient worlds.
Will this eventually become a war between traditions, called the Scholari Payattu War?
Probably the oldest martial art in the world is the portuguese "Porrete", because our ancestral australopithecus already practiced it with femoral bones... :-)
Re: Kalari, there's an old documentary on it from-I think-the seventies, that goes into a little bit of detail of how the art was preserved. They show a (then) current master, Tilak Moses, in Madras transcribing texts from old palm leaves. The documentary claims they have been transcribed verbatim for 20 centuries, though I can't see that as anything but conjecture. Tamil is certainly old enough and I believe has undergone very few changes, so it's at least possible.
The other ( more or less oral) source they show is from Indian classical dance, where various poses, especially those representing the many war deities of Hinduism (I think they specifically reference one), are very similar to those practiced in Kalari
I'm afraid I can't find the documentary on youtube, perhaps someone will provide a link.
I'd have to say boxing, but not in the current form, but as "the martial art of fighting with fists". The word "boxing" is just a denomination created in europe, for instance: europeans could refer to muay thai punches as "thai boxing", while thailand could refer to western boxing as "chok", it's the same discipline with a couple of tiny diferences and with different names, same can be said about other fist fighting martial arts. So, for me, it's very plausible that before we learned to create weapons, and before we learned how to do fancy stuff like kicks, grappling and submissions; our ancestors most probably learned to fight with their fists before they came up with everything else. Hence fist fighting, boxing, or whatever you want to call it, is probably the oldest martial art.
My sensei told us a story. Back in 100,000 or maybe it was 200,000, I don't know, but back in so many years BC... some people killed a mammoth or an animal or they had something precious like that. And some other people came to try and take it so they fought! THAT is the origin of Karate... I loved his humor.
Jiu jitsu is basically grappling not even a specific school of it, what people call Jiu jitsu now is what came from Judo which is a training method that got extracted from few schools of Jiu jitsu and that focuses a lot on the ground fighting. Judo was going that way as well but in 20s rules were changed to focus on standup throws as they were considered more useful in street fighting where going to the ground is dangerous. Old stuff was often not unarmed but dealing with armoured opponent using a takedown to establish control of the body before stabbing them to death or choking them or whatever. Probably very similar to European wrestling in armour, when you are wearing full harness and vast majority of blows just glance off then taking person down to control them is a very good approach. Someone size of the Mountain is ASOIAF would be game over duelist in armor, even better someone like Aleksandr Karelin.
Wrestling and Pugilism can be trace back to Africa over 5000yrs. As it evolves, it was called the( Egyptian age) "Montu" arts. People fail to believe that the martial arts itself was a mixture between culture.
The oldest martial arts would have to be when humans first developed the use of weapons. They were made of stone, so it's likely the first martial art was a group that passed on a tradition of beating with or throwing stones. Probably the most impactful in terms of being widespread for a long time is archery.
There's evidence of humans killed with arrows going back to around 15,000 BC. The bow was a really prominent weapon used in war for thousands of years, probably as the dominant weapon in warfare for a longer period of time than any other weapon or method of waging war ever.
As far as other things that were really important, shields would be an obvious response to arrows. Spears and maces would have been a likely thing to accompany a shield. Obviously swords were very important. Horsemanship was a really important one. Slings were probably something that was a major factor in wars for thousands of years. I'm assuming these wars were less organized raiding and tribal conflicts, but it seems like that went on for a good 10,000 yrs or so.
So as far as martial arts with long held traditions, I'd have to say archery, the simple use of a shield, handling a spear and a mace, and using a sling. Probably the longest standing martial arts in human history.
Indians r not foolish mens ok
If there is a spesific school it is a specific art, if I go to the same school to learn both neanderthal spear throwing as roman pilae throwing, then it is the same
I think a point you danced around, but didn't quite make, is the idea that a martial art can be defined as a codified system, and that means not only does someone have to determine what the proper techniques, but has to do it in such a way that it can then be taught to others.
By that measure, cavemen throwing spears or hitting things with rocks wouldn't be martial arts. What's more, it's not just about fighting and killing, but about war (even recreational or sport martial arts still owe their existence to this concept). So the very first martial arts would probably have coincided with the development both language, and structured warfare.
By THAT definition, the question might actually have an answer. Whether we can discover that answer or not, is another matter entirely.
Jujutsu that we all know nowadays is focused mostly on the ground aspect of the art, the original Jujutsu was a complete system.
neanderthal were not human and were thought to not be able to throw a spear because they didnt have a rotating shoulder
Just because harappan Indians lived a Little differently than moderne Indians doesnt mean that they werent Indians. In the same way martial arts Evolve and you cannot Say that that Kalaripayat isnt the oldest just because it has evolved with time
not someone punching someone in the eye for stealing their nut-cracking rock?
Word oldest exists.
India : aah! Here we go again !!!
@Vishnu K None said that. I already said that No one is trynna prove who is superior nor inferiors.
Rock-in-face, I think. Edit: Ha.
So basically, we have to figure out which farming tool Cain killed Able with. Oh wait, a whole lot of the world isn't going to agree with that cuz it only happened 5500 years ago lol.
In another dimension two Supersomething fought and the explosion because that is what we know as "the big bang".
Hey Matt!, this might sound like a funny question but could you do a video about long hair and martial arts. Since its so prevalent in movies with everything from the ancient greeks to vikings and knights. Was it really practical and weren't there a lot of downsides to having long hair like it would get in your eyes or someone would pull you by the hair or something similar ? I see that modern armies have gotten rid if this "fashion style" all together so why wasn't it done earlier ?
The medieval Europeans only had exercises for upper body.Its only after contact with indian wrestlers they developed sit ups and dive bomber push ups and so pm.Many exercise unique to chinese and indian martial arts were adopted by later as calisthenics and dance moves.Thats why they called it the exotic east ofcourse today the exotic spread out and has become common place.For eg, the indian mallakhamb was adopted as pole dancing.
I don't think it's really an argument that is searching for an objective truth. Rather I think it is about asserting or cultural superiority on one side of it and chipping away at the idea that such a thing even exists on the other side of it. I think historically martial superiority heavily influences cultural domination, assimilation, and transformation. And making a claim that one's ethnographic system of combat is the best, oldest, most codified, to me is a form of false-bravado used in place of the actual want or ability to make war. It's like saying "We are the best at this. It is proven by our ability to make our expression of it survive so long. And so you should yield to us without conflict."
kalaripayattu changed a little in a 1000 years ago. oral commands called vaithari which was used thousands of years ago, is still used today. not only that we developed a proper fighting system even before chinese and japanese societies were made. i wont say kalaripayyatu is the oldest martial arts, but is definitely the oldest and well developed martial arts in asia which influenced other martial arts as well. the biggest example is bhodidharma, a tamil prince, from south of india , travelled towards china. he was an expert in kalaripayyatu and ayurveda. he is called as damo in china and still worshipped there. even that evidence is not enough then just ask me i will give u more. kalaripayyatu is definitely the oldest well developed martial arts in the world. its not just a fighting art but a martial tradition and indians have a habbit if clinging to a tradition for a long time.
I disagree on the definition of "martial" art. we're not talking about military technology. we're talking "no weapons" conflict either aggressive or defensive. (no weapons other than your own body.) we remove boxing because its a "western" style of fighting. so martial arts are defined by the "eastern" traditions of non-use of weapons form of human conflict. that's what I was looking for when I came here; what was the first eastern form of human physical conflict that doesn't use weapons.
Its not true u r linking with bible 😕
Son of Adam ...He hit his bro. with rock 😂
I must say, the idea that a technique has not changed in 500 years is not something that necessarily appeals to me. I realize that there are some techniques which are probably most ideal for the human phsyiology, but, the fact is, at any given time, people tend to find improvements over what came before.
So, I'm not sure I really care how old a martial art is. 'Old' can mean 'effective,' but also it can mean 'unwilling to change.'
If any tribes of early humans or proto-humans formerlized a way of using stone axes, that would likely be the oldest martial art, but who can tell?
Very round-about, and yet still interesting.
The oldest martial art started with the first militaries.
Biting is clearly the oldest martial art.
Dude did u know that kalaripayattu is the mother of all martial arts, they doesn't call that for nothing . And the orgin of kalaripayattu is from the kerela (india)
kalari is not the oldest martial art.. people also say that the martial arts depicted inside the pyramids are the oldest martial arts which is pure baloney because to say that martial arts started in one part of the world while everybody else was sitting around with any knowledge of combat is ridiculous now kalari might be the oldest documented martial art in the world but that does not make it the oldest...
Neanderthals didn't throw their spears at all, it is one of the defining differences between that species and us. Their anatomy is not designed for throws, and all evidence (& anatomical design) shows they used in close/melee spear attacks for their hunting.
Also, probably best to leave hunting skills out of this; it was hunting skills used vs other human(oids) on occasion, and not a "martial art", which would be primarily be about man vs man.
It's a less ridiculous question than you think Matthew, although it gets ridiculous if one tries making ancient hunting skills/weapons into "martial arts".
You forgot to mention that Numidian spear throwing kicked out the Romans back then
Yes. Adimurai kalaripayattu is the oldest form of martial arts ever known. Adimurai is like an ocean with different forms. But, the art techniques are learnt today based on the ancient books written 2500 years ago. If you can understand tamil you can understand even Greek and Latin cos many of the world languages have roots words from tamil. Example:
Navy is Navai in tamil found in tamil literature written 2000 years ago.
Scientifically tamil people were advanced 2000 years ago with usage of the word atom in tamil literature Tirukkural. Cell division is explained in “Tholkaapiyam”is a book explaining the grammar for tamil language written 2500 years ago. The English word molecule is originally from tamil root word “moolakooru”. If we still speak the same language with same words spoken 2000 years ago, we can easily interpret the Adimurai kalaripayattu techniques from the tamil literatures written 2000 years ago. But learn it from real Tamil siddhars/gurus, not the ones who teaches for money. In ancient days, a master observed a student’s behavior and discipline for 12 years and only then he teaches this martial art to him or her. Imagine how pious they were is passing on the tradition to a successor who will use it for the human welfare and not for any selfish or evil reasons.
Neanderthal didn't throw spears, they used their spears for thrusting
I understand that is a theory. Totally unproven though.
It is a ridiculous thing to argue over, but it is also ridiculous to kind of act jealous because one martial art other than yours says it's oldest. I don't know much about Kalaripayattu, but in the India the oldest martial code is probably the "Dhanurveda".
That question could have been better phrased- Which is the oldest known, surviving (recognisable to the original) Martial Art( system)? But it's quite unfair how you skipped the main question for clarification and then, not say much. You obviously know your bit of history for people to be interested in hearing your thoughts about it. Is it really similar to the original? Are they using primary sources? How viable would it be for its times?
I think it's far more interesting to sift through the various techniques etc. to find where all these martial arts are similar. I'll never forget when I learned about half-swording and how suddenly techniques that I had used with a staff became applicable or when I noticed the similarities between English Pugilism and Wing Chun Kung fu. We have the same bodies as our ancient ancestors, so naturally the differences in fighting systems are superficial at best.
I always thought of this argument in the same way I've always thought about sword traditions. There are only so many ways to move a sharpened steel object to offend another person. Similarly your body can only move in ways in which it can move. To me this means that a long time before we will ever likely have evidence to prove, someone figured out that there were only x number of ways to punch, x number of ways to kick and you can only throw a person on the ground x number of ways. Figuring out which ones worked the best probably didn't take nearly as long as we imagine.
Dear Matt; If there were a course that focused on "breaking" feats (breaking 2-by-4s, breaking rocks, etc. etc. Destroying things) with and without tools and using your body, would you consider that a martial art?
I felt inspired when I read a stories about so called "fury rooms", where people would pay to be able to destroy a room. I was thinking, "how could you do with the most efficiency? What is the minimal amount of effort I could exert in the fastest time to break a pot?"
+Alderick van Klaveren Only if the traditional end-goal of that activity was to increase effectiveness in combat.
I guess you would just say that any martial practice could be a martial art? People wouldn't generally call archery a martial art though..
+Battam Archery certainly is a martial art though. More than some things which get called martial arts.
+scholagladiatoria What is something like Judo then, which is specifically a sport?
+scholagladiatoria Yeah agreed, was just saying that its a difficult conversation when people normally only think of martial arts as unarmed combat, or at least they do here in Aus.
Thanks for the interesting vid! I agree that a lot here hinges on the difinition of 'martial art'. Especially the *art* part seems of importance to me here. As I'm following a definition of art that's based on the medieval understanding of the *artes mechanicae* and is tightly connected to the greek idea of *techne*:
Thus, I think there is only one martial art: martial art. This one art, though, is expressed in various ways in practice, modified through tools available as well as cultural context. That's, then, also why practice changes while the art remains the same, that is there are all the time the same underlying principles to be found.
In terms of jujutsu the ground fighting was less emphasized in judo, the progenitor of Brazilian juijutsu, as practiced by the samurai was more focused on the throw and heck even the strike. Kano took a lot out in the aim of making a simple codified system for self defense and sport. Evan saying that many koryu have differences in their unarmed combat. Just thought I would throw that out I personally love all the varieties of judo/jujutsu/juijutsu.
Maybe if we said, oldest martial art continiously practised and still practised in living tradition today, we could decide what was oldest. But question is if it did relay look like it did at its inception. And if it did, would that be a good thing?
The creator of kung fu is from india...kung fu is kalaripayatu..the chinese learned from the indian kalaripayutu and named kung fu
another question to consider is if older matters. If a martial art was invented 1,000 years ago and somehow remained completely unchanged to modern times is is better than an art invented in 1040? Yes the human body has not changed significantly in that time so many techniques of ancient systems will work today. But there are other things to consider such as laws, weather weapons are involved or not, if you are fighting in war, civilian self defense or for sport etc. There is some mystique to an art being older, as there is a mystique to ancient swords and such. But are ancient swords better than later ones? In many cases no. As technology improved in steel manufacture swords potentially are made of purer steel and with more consistant heating quality was better controlled. Sure there were the rare examples like the Ulfbhert swords that had steel of a quality not replicated in Europe for centuries, but this is an exception. So if one is wanting ancient tradition that is fine, but if one is looking to defend oneself in life and death situations...use what works best in your current time, society and for your body type. Study ancient culture and practices if that is enjoyable but don't assume that just because a system is ancient it is somehow better.
Interesting you used the word Woomera instead of Atlatl. Been studying Australian Aboriginal history of late?
+Luciffrit Thought the same thing