Accounts very but jujutsu was basically a term used to describe the blen of kumi uchi, tai jutsu, yawara, koppo jutsu ect.... Jujutsu was an absolute last result if you somehow had to fight without your weapons. Jujutsu did not generally look like the Brazilian style. Some schools developed a super sensitive style while others used bruit force to drop armored folks on their noggin and would, at times, break their neck in the process. The Aizu clan used kenjutsu principals and created Aikijujutsu. After the samurai era was over, Aikijujutsu spawned aikido which is a non combative self defense style. Jujutsu turned into a sport we call judo and even kenjutsu spawned the competative art of kendo. Many modern styles changed from combat arts, jutsu and turned into sports or aesthetic ways or paths, Do.
ive been told something very interesting that you might know if its true... ive been told that the closest "modern" martial art to samurai grappling is sumo... the logic behind it is that falling on the ground was seen as been already dead... you are going to be stabbed... also, all the techniques used are found in one way or another in old styles of jujutsu and the third part is interesting but since i never grappled with armor i cant tell if its true... but the fact that sumo is "no gi" it would work in armor, and the mawashi(belt) grabs do work in armor(this is the part i cant tell if is true... is there an armor belt or something like that to grip like a mawashi?) anyways... if true, its an interesting fact
@@gingercore69 Back in the day it was called Sumai (struggle). Apparently combat sumo is no more and the goal was to cause unconditional surrender and was apparently different from Sumo that we now Know today and apparently Kumiuchi was developed to be more sophisticated Don F Dragger (Comprehensive Asian Fighting Arts) I think Catch Wrestling can give us a pretty good idea. The Samurai Forms where based from Combat experiences. There was Joint locking and Dislocation, A plethora of Trip's/Sweep's/Throw's/Takedown's, Neck Breaking, Gouging and various Strikes Sources: Legacies of the Sword Classical Fighting Arts of japan
Also important to draw a distinction between modern Brazilian jujitsu and traditional forms of Japanese jujitsu, older forms did not emphasize ground grappling as much
TheWarriorScholar You're forgetting about the Fusen Ryu. That's the school of traditional Japanese jujutsu that specialized in newaza(ground grappling), and that's the style that Jigoro Kano adopted newaza from and incorporated into Judo, which was later taught to Carlos Gracie by Judo master Mitsuyo Maeda, which eventually became Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.
This is pretty convincing. Makes me think of Seven Samurai, in which Kurosawa jokes about romantic misconceptions about the reality of medieval Japanese life.
There seems to be a confusion between Brazilian Jujitsu, which is a modern construct and Japanese armored grappling which is very different. I think the original question wasn't about percentages or how much grappling vs weapons use, everyone already knows weapons got used more, that's obvious. The question probably meant how, when, and in what situation was it used, if any? which wasn't really answered. As someone has already mentioned before, knowing how to grapple is a combative necessity in a close-quartered environment, saying "don't go to the ground" is like saying "don't get shot" or "don't get speared" its totally useless advice. In a chaotic situation you will find your self in all kinds of places, on the ground or otherwise, that's the reality of combat, and one must be prepared for anything. There is no good excuse not to learn grappling, or get emotionally defensive and conjure up these artificial weapons vs grappling arguments, they both complement each other, and are in no way antagonistic to each other.
Tachi Waza (Stand-Up fighting) and Ne Waza (Ground fighting) emerged after the founding of Kodokan Judo in 1882 by Jigoro Kano. Kano took several forms of Jujutsu and reformed them in order to represent the ideology of Budo (non-military arts). Jujutsu is historically a part of the Bujutsu/Bugei ideology and this was used by Bushi (Samurai) till the end of the Tokugawa regime. When the Meiji era began in 1868, most Jujutsu Ryu (approximately around 725+) were spread out and became obsolete. Interesting though is that mainstream martial arts will attribute all of grappling as “Jiu-Jitsu.” However, that is not the case. Jujutsu/Jiu-Jitsu is primarily a striking hand-to-hand combat with less or moderate use of grappling and its self defense aspect is delivered by a ‘one-blow’ method. Samurai will never waste their time “rolling” on the ground with another person b/c not only is it dangerous, it is also ridiculous!
Kano Judo was partly formed from his prejudices. He disliked groundwork & considered it undignified. As to Judo being better, where do you think the early Judoka came from? Other Ju-jitsu styles & when he put on demonstrations he would make sure the dice was loaded in his favour by using his most experienced students & instructors who had great experience in other styles. This is all documented.
The records are pretty clear... any grappling in koryu was to topple your enemy, body crashes were the focus. Similar in historical records to other cultures regarding battle-field grappling... Spartans, Romans, early pre-shuai jiao...etc., for exactly the reasons giving in this video. This can be seen in the few koryu schools, the atemi and grappling techniques are to break the balance, topple, so your buddy can run by and stab him as soon as he hits the ground. There were no "ju" techniques on the battlefield. Well put answer, thank you.
I totally agree with your premise on the use of jujutsu on the battlefield. I have spoken with several Special Forces types of individuals who have all said that if they have to resort to hand-to-hand combat that it is a bad and dangerous situation for them. They would rather use a firearm. Up close and personal combat is very dangerous and the tide can turn quickly and not always in your favor.
There is Diato Ryu Aiki Jujustsu (spelling may be off, sue me ), or Armor wearing wrestling, and was practiced and used on battlefields. It was generally considered foolish, and nearly all the techniques involved getting back to your feet. The remaining techniques we're about not getting taken down. I find you dissertation to be interesting, however.
Hi Anthony. Great video! I have a question. Is aikijujutsu considered a Samurai art? To my knowledge (I don't claim to be a historian) what we consider aikijutsu was created after the fall of the samurai. Do you think aikijujutsu was ever used by samurai on the battlefield? Thanks! Ian
Hi Antony, one question: the taijutsu / jujutsu (grappling and striking art as well) was anyway one the first martial art the japanese warriors had to learn (specially because of the body movements, blocks and blows) as foundation of the art of using weapons (bukijutsu)? thanks
Hey, Antony. I loved the vid. It's great how you clarified how most "servants" (the "meaning" of "Samurai") of the battlefield would die through arrows, then spears, then swords, then, at the very least resort, through a short blade. A fist or a grapple would be if you were past that stage of desperation, you were about to die, and had absolutely nothing to lose at that point. It's not just a "strictly Japanese warfare" or even a plain "medieval warfare in general" mentality; it's common sense. If the enemy's far away, you don't go running in there like some wayward knob. Also, not to be a pest, but I would really like your opinion on Shenmue, Persona 4, and Tokyo Vice. They all have to do with investigation (and sometimes even breaking and entering and subterfuge) in modern-day Japan, and I would really like to know what you think about these "semi-shinobi" tactics on gaining information when compared with more "traditional" shinobi-no-jutsu. Please Antony, if I were there in person, I would be begging you. Come on, please, just take a quick look at them. I know you're beyond busy, but I really would love your input on them. Just see if you can take even 5 minutes out of your extremely busy schedule (because I know you're a quick study) and just take a look at them. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. I'd ask you to take a look at "Yakuza Ishin" as well, but I've already asked you for way more than I have any right to, so I'll just leave now and hope that you'll read this and consider my request. Thank you.
I am terribly sorry that Antony missed your request, i recommend interacting with him on his most current video uploads to raise your chances of getting a response from him. He is very interactive on his current uploads, i also recommend dropping a small donation with your request, nothing big just a little something to help support the channel, i can say this with confidence because i have donated myself via super thanks, he also has a paypal, he is always extremely appreciative, you don't necessarily have to donate with the question, ask your question first and he will tell you whether he can give his opinion on these titles, i looked them up myself and a couple of them are very old so he might not be able to get access to game play to give a thorough opinion but i cant say for sure. I am only writing to you because i see you really wanted a response from him and you didn't get it and he is normally very interactive with viewers, subscribers, and supporters. Best of luck to you! if you follow my recommendation i am certain you will get a response from him. If for some reason you dont just let me know and i will also reach out to him but i doubt i will have to do that if you ask him on his latest upload. Also i want you to know that he doesn't receive notifications for replies to his replies, he only receives notifications for new comments! Once again very best of luck to you! be safe!!!
my dad had a saying from his drill Sargent days it goes " A good soldier will never pass a formal inspection". i think this goes along perfectly when you distinguish edo period samurai and Sengoku period samurai so i guess an Edo period samurai would have been of little use in the Sengoku era as the Sengoku period samurai had no place in the Edo period.
Great video Antony! I learned about your work through TH-cam and have since bought your first book. Interesting stuff! I was wondering if you had any thoughts on how this topic relates your previous videos about Aikido in MMA. You mentioned that the aiki techniques were meant for a committed battlefield type strikes and not for a competitive environment. Was this after the warring period in duels, or during warfare? I don't want to misquote you, so please set me straight if I'm remembering it incorrectly. Keep up the great work! -Brian
The people who asked you this seems to forget that it wasn't the watered down Brazilian version that was used by samurai. It was traditional Japanese ju-jutsu which is mostly standing up techniques. There was also Ni wasa, which was a small continuation of jiu-jitsu who consisted of ground techniques. Another misunderstanding about samurai is that they used kendo. This is not really true. Kendo is the watered down sport version of ken-jutsu which is the traditional way of using the katana sword in life and death battle.
Imo, grappling among samurai was fairly popular.. if someone has armor you obviously can’t punch them or kick them and expect to end the fight, it’s difficult enough to do this on an unarmored opponent, but grabbing someone’s arm and twisting in an unnatural position till it breaks.. regardless of armor it will work, so I think it was useful.. and I also think it happened a fair bit, I also think that your allies would protect you as you grapple with an enemy in battle.. especially if they were of high rank as opposition, restraining them with rope, or just out right killing them once you gained control over their body could and did come in handy. Much like modern police and or military, when grappling, they have someone else with them for assistance.. not all of the time but most of the time, in the instances where your alone, you have to extra vigilant and have the capability of ending the fight immediately so as to focus on another threat.
I think it is very easy to get bogged down in semantics in this kind of discussion. Sure, jujitsu in a strict sense might not have been used but as the video makes clear 'coming to grips' with an opponent certainly happened and I'm sure that is probably what the original questioner had in mind. Also absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because a technique isn't mentioned in the Gunkimono doesn't mean it never happened. I've never read about Samurai eye gouging or fish hooking but I'm pretty sure they did since that is the nature of combat.
HELLO TO ALL SAMURAI AND NINJA ENTHUSIASTS!!! ON BEHALF OF ANTONY CUMMINS I WOULD LIKE TO INFORM YOU THAT HE DOESN'T RECEIVE NOTIFICATIONS FOR REPLIES TO HIS REPLIES. HE ONLY RECEIVES NOTIFICATIONS FOR NEW COMMENTS. IF YOU ARE NEW TO THE CHANNEL ANTONY WOULD LIKE YOU TO START BY WATCHING HIS 2020 DOCUMENTARY.
Jujitsu or lets say Hand-to-hand combat, is only there to get to a knife, a knife is there to get to a sword, a sword is there to get to a spear, a spear is there to get to a bow and arrow... I think of H2H as a very last resort to keep you alive long enough to get to a weapon. Same as modern military H2H.
Thank you. All this needs to be said and understood. There has been a lot of misconceptions propagated not only by "Hollywood" (both sides of the Pacific Ocean) but also by skilled practitioners and instructors. Can't blame them too much, dojos don't just sell self defense they also sell romance, history, nostalgia, discipline, some sort of spirituality. When people/students figure out they have been just studying romantic reconstructions and/or 18-19 century sword etiquette forms, they feel ripped off. Sort of reminds me of the "current crisis" in aikido...it's obviously not all self-defense, neither is iaido, or any "....do" or, i guess, any ".....utsu" for that matter. However, don't get me wrong and i hope others don't get you wrong, you get out of it what you get out of it. It's not a waste of time if you enjoy the forms, culture, etc; it's truly an "art". You want to be "battle ready": go buy a compound/bunker in the wilderness, be a "Prepper", buy a butch of guns, ....no thank you, that's worse than romance.
Also, before the Edo period, Samurai would not have focused on the sword so much, since it wasn't a battlefield weapon. In the battlefield, Samurai preferred bows and spears. The focus on the sword probably really was just an Edo period thing, for a time when if they ever fought, it was likely using a sword, in self-defense.
Japanese Jujitsu, from what I understand is more of a weapon based grappling system. It's a lot less of it's own thing and more of a part of sword fighting. Clinches and ground fighting happen in sword fights just like they do in fist fights so you better at least know how lol
***** It is today, but that is because it's trying to stay relevant. Japanese Jujitsu was traditionally used by Samurai who didn't care much for being unarmed.
Just a comment about how unlikely and marginal grappling skills were on the field of battle. I don't know much about it, and especially little about Japan, but I read some European stuff and it all looked very practical to me. For once you have people in full armor. They just can't be easily killed. Even mock or exhibitions fights show how often they come into direct body contact, because bladed weapons are not particularly threatening to them. It seems to me, that the way to win was fairly often through superior grappling. You put the other guy down and grabbed a dagger. Even if you grabbed a dagger before, you still couldn't do much with it without winning a wrestling match beforehand. It took knowledge and effort to defeat a fully armored person, even on the ground. Then there was this account of a duel, when a superior wrestler was feared, and the other guy insisted on having daggers to even up his chances. If grappling was of marginal use, he wouldn't have done it. And there was Silver who criticized rapier for this very reason. Superior wrestler usually won, or simply a stronger person if both were unskilled. He didn't like it, but it meant that it was not uncommon for swordsmen to end up in a grappling match. There was this duel, where both guys used smallswords and decided to fight to the death. They ended up in a wrestling grip, and both died on the spot from previous wounds, but they were grappling as they died. All of that leads me to believe that wrestling or grappling were real battlefield skills. Not necessary something you would never use, but rather something you would use fairly often in close quarters fights.
That's due to the construction of European armours, though haha Comparatively, samurai harnesses are quite open, and probably not steel, making cuts not ideal, but in a pinch still effective. Besides, I think on a European battlefield while you would grapple and get someone to the ground for an easy kill, you'd still avoid getting onto the ground yourself and risk becoming a third party's easy kill haha
SerAlgernop BlitzKrieger I tend to pretty much assume that armor worked. If it didn't, people wouldn't bother paying for it (huge monies too) and wearing it. Japanese armors do look more open, but I guess it was necessary to stand the discomfort. Full body coverage makes heat exchange a real problem. In hot climate you can pass out. Or maybe there was some other reason, but I'm sure it worked nonetheless. It was too expensive and uncomfortable to even exist otherwise. Anyway, in a rapier or a smallsword duell you don't have any armor, yet grappling happened. To the point that it was even disallowed by the rules sometimes. Regarding throwing the other guy down while staying upright yourself, yes that's how it is depicted in the manuals. Despite that, I believe you need to pin the other guy down if you want to force your dagger into the eveyslots. But think about that - there existed wrestling on horseback. Would you even consider such a possibility? Yet we are sure it was used. Strange, but true.
bakters well, like I said, comparatively. The samurai stuff never got to the point you had to wrestle someone to get in one of the four-odd miniscule gaps with a sharpened metal stake. Clearly the armour still worked. That's why you don't see samurai in Battle of the Nations, it's not protective enough. Not that it ISN'T protective. The samurai harnesses being used it STEEL in Japan now are more like Western armour than any historical examples. Including the ones that used pieces of Portuguese armour. You don't necessarily go for the eye slots... There's wedging up under the gorget, under the armpit... Plus, you don't have to pin someone down to get a controlled face-stab. Well, there were grappling techniques for horseback, but they were for tackling off an opponent or disarming an opponent when you're unarmed.
SerAlgernop BlitzKrieger OK, valid points, they all make sense. Still, I do think that what I was saying applies to Japan to some degree too. For example, even with their armor grappling seems like a viable choice if two guys with polearms came into close contact. Then even on this channel I heard about head-hunting. Every account I recall involved some sort of grappling. There was even one whole video about how to modify shortsword scabbard (wakizashi saya...?) in such a way that you could draw your sword with one hand while grappling the other guy. It was based on a first hand account, so I believe it actually happened. Now, I'm not saying that Judo was used to overcome an armored enemy. More like sumo, I'd guess? Put 30 kg of armor on a strong guy, and you have yokozuna stats. ;-)
The art came across from china and was then remastered and renamed Samurai Jujitsu (Hei Jo Shinto Ryu, Bushido Jitsu) what ever it all was on single flowing art. One way, By the the sword. All arts, Kendo, Aikido, Kempo, Karate, Judo and Jujitsu. A long time ago before these existed it was just Jujitsu, Bubushi and Bushido which I think is...Body(Hand), Sword(Samurai) and Honour. It was all water, all one path, one way Shin Jitsu. The way of the Samurai. I think only 5 or so Samurai Jujitsu GrandMaster exist today.
@Anthony I thought that you might find this interesting and its a small glimpse at the answer of "Was jiu jitsu used on the battlefield' .I think that your thinking of Newaza which is a much less developed area pre Kano .However if you came to grips disarming and throws are vital . also there is one Kodokan technique where the opponent is thrown down by twisting the breast plate . Here is a Kata that has preserved some small part of Ancient battlefield technique from the Kodokan School. l Cheers th-cam.com/video/Mcxd0hK_IqQ/w-d-xo.html
Jujutsu was supplemental to the Bushi (Warrior Class) secondary....a weapon was ALWAYS preferred. Empty hands were only employed if a warrior was disarmed, the warrior would use Jujutsu to then get a hold of another weapon (or get killed in the process) Jujutsu was also used indoors where weapons were sometimes prohibited.
Hoshiyama-Ryu Jujitsu is an example of an old Battlefiled Jujitsu, and you should not look at it thru the modern eye of what you see today. Back in those Samurai days techniques were also designed to work around armor.
Sorry, I usually agree with you. But not on this. First of all, cutting through well-made armor is impossible. Thrusting is possible, but unlikely. You're going to need to find the gaps in your opponent's armor which is easier said than done. Your best bet of killing someone is to wrestle them into the ground and shank them with a dagger. That's where the jiu-jitsu comes in. Obviously we're not talking about modern grappling where you pull guard and fight from the bottom. But being able to take the other guy to the ground, pin them, and then stab them is absolutely vital. Also, you underestimate the frequency clinching happens in a fight. Grappling happens often happens when neither party is seeking it.
You'll find the same emphasis on grappling in European martial arts like HEMA, where there's a heavy emphasis on grappling in armored fighting. In fact, I will even go so far as to say that grappling is so important in armored combat that it's more important than having a sword. Imagine an UFC fighter versus an Olympic Fencer. Both have full plate armour, but only the olympic fencer has a sword. The UFC fighter would maul the fencer with his superior grappling, steal the fencer's sword, and then kill him with it.
Hi. Good points. It has been a long time since i watched this video. I would say that you do not have a lot of time to grapple. You only have seconds. So i am not saying there is no grappling. What i am saying is there would not be a prolonged grapple and normally you want to get up fast. Also, most warriors in Japan had a lot less armour than people think. The first Europeans who went there started that they are often not very well armoured, that a lot of their flesh is out. Some would be, but many would have Baird legs and bare arms.
What about koppojutsu or dakenjutsu? Kukishin ryu taijutsu is great example of dakenjutsu style of unarmed combat, and Ogawa ryu is example of koppojutsu. There is no rolling around and grabbing collar in those kind of schools. Also, worth of mentioning is that Kukishin ryu is very old battlefield type school.
Were there not regiments of men in karate gi who rushed the field in days of old under musket fire and raining arrows who raised their magical silk banner on high to kick, punch or choke out the enemy? Take those spear wielding masses down to the mossy turf to grapple and nipple pinch their way to victory? LOL Any general in history stupid enough to suggest that as a viable strategy would have lost his commission on the spot. The armies carried weapons for practical purposes- they worked, brutally well.
Hi, I know that i am writing here with some delay, but in ther period of peace people loose the connection with the warfare, so they have plenty of time to "evolve" their art out of the limited boundaries of the warfare. So they have time to show what happens when you don't dress an armour, there are no swords, and you can only train with a partner who is better in a specific set of skill resemmling the ones that your ancestors used for fighting. So in the real previous ju jitsu, you didn't grab, there were no pijamas to grab, and one hand should still be free to catch your or the other's one dagger. Now during the peace, you can have the peaceful granted by rules, to catch your opponent with both of your arm, so aftyer the warfare, ju jitsu already involved to self-defense/sporty training. In the original ju jitsu there was no grappling as we know today, for the same reasons Antony explains in the video. Ironically, today just a few Ju Jitsu derivated schools stress the no grappling of the old ju jutsu. Aikido is one of them. Most of the more remarkable teachers show that you don't have to grab firmly in Aikido, well of course someone does, but you can see that the most of videos on youtube show an aikido aptitude mostly going to the extreme of almost no contact, or to a touch/throw aptitude, not grappling as such. There is no grappling in a real martial arts,at the best there is a work at a grappling distance. But today, again ironically, judo is considered more real than aikido, well this is also because in aikido it is really easy for the teachers to fake the movements, since the aikido teachers are used to create their charsima to braiwash students, but at the end of the day, there is more "warfare aptitude" in the gently art of aikido, than in the competitive ju jitsu called judo, which again is different than what Kano wanted to leave to people. It is not a coincidence that the actions you see in some kata, resemble very much aikido, without any real grappling action. But Judo is today jacket grappling, which never existed in Sengoku period. The evolution in peace broght to the confrontation one vs.one with all the grappling that in a battlefield, or in a real situation, is not the best idea. The Founder of aikido said that aikido is irimi and atemi, he didn't say grappling, and even with all the influences in the modern era, you cannot consider aikido as a grappling art. He said entering and striking. Which is the aptitude of people using a weapon and stabbing. If you don't have a weapon you just stab with your punches and kicks. It is more similar to chinese kempo, or the old judo, not the competitive one which is just to gratify the ego, all what the ancient arts weren't about. The ancient arts were about the necessity of surviving in a battlefield.
I agree, function first! Just like modern military and Law enforcement, hand to hand combat including grappling is trained minimally compared to weapons training and battle tactics.
Well, Jujutsu would be used along with a short sword or knife as swords are shit against armor. Throwing someone to the ground and then killing them with a sword or knife would likely be more common than you would think.
Cummins, you miss the point. What you call ju jutsu is in fact grappling, modern grappling in jacket as yourself say at a certain point. So the Ju jutsu you are speaking about is not the Koryu JuJutsu (KumiUchi), is the modern japanese sport practiced with a gi. Ancient martial arts evolved in 2 directions: one is the rituals i.e. of the aikido and this ritualism contains some truths between lines (for example the fact that many actions are justified from the presence of a weapon in yours or the other's hands and so the consequent tai sabaki in defence and offence), and the other i.e. is the sport like i.e. judo TODAY since there are not (anymore) weapons and no strike, so you try to maximize the grabs and the throws instead of defending against punches and knives (that you can see in Judo katas coming from the ancient "grappling" from JuJutsu, which was at the time part of many arts mastered from the professional warriors). By the way in aikido to grab is wrong as most of the teachers say (it doesn't matter if then they grab, they fail in front of their same eyes according to their own definitions, so they even don't do aikido and be called teachers). As you say, the "grappling" with the daga is different, and in fact I put the brackets many times when I meant ancient "grappling". Of course in war doesn't make sense fight on the ground and in factit wasn't Kano's idea the ju-grappling on the ground, as he pointed more at the nage side and he didin't see HIS Judo as a pure grappling system. What is clear is that once that the weapons disappear from BuJutsu, the "grappling" isn't "grappling" anymore. It becomes grappling on its own, and stops being a martial art to become sport. You don't go to war with the grappling, but you can need to know some "grappling" in battlefield. And of course method, aims, contents and extent change completely. When 2 swords or 2 arms clash, the musubi can start, but the musubi is not the aim of aiki arts. Musubi simply happens when the strikes don't reach the target but the bodies are connected in the action and you try to take advantage from that contact (which doesn't mean to start grappling!). The only thing that remains is the name JuJitsu. But it should be changed to Ju (or GO? )- grappling
Question. Why is the focus on ground jujutsu? That's Gracie jujutsu, not the stand up Japanese jujutsu meant to work against armor joints. Clearly, no one would start rolling around on the ground amid horse hooves, spears, and swords. I'd think of course Jujutsu wasn't used as primary . Archery, Spear, Sword much more. However, it may have likely been used as part of any undesirable close sword and dagger fighting. It may even have been part of how one warrior might hold an enemy so his mate could cut or spear him. Anything to gain advantage.
Oh, I should add this. I dont mean to sound disrespectful. I bought your Basenshukai translation and am really appreciating the work put into it. I'm only asking about the Jujutsu question, because I was surprised to hear that anyone doubted whether any of the old koryu jujitsu forms were ever used on the battlefield. They clearly at least must have formed out of combat experience with swords and armor. Many of them functionally mimic sword swinging or spear thrusting and work most effectively against someone else who is doing exactly that.
Anthony I think you are right. The people who fought psychologically were the same as us. They wanted to survive first and foremost. This would have meant that there was a strict adherence to techniques that were effective. I believe that they used a small number of highly effective techniques that actually worked. If you are gambling with not only your life but your families survival would you have time to try out a technique and then make it stylish. The romanticism that subsequently occurs is not reality. As a police officer who has had stab and gunshot victims die in my arms there is nothing civilized in close combat. It is brutal and base. The heavy reliance on projectile weapons in ancient times is only like our reliance on missiles. It removes the combat of last resort: hand to hand combat. I do believe that taijutsu/ komiuchi was developed to deal with this but the further you get away from actual combat the more sceptical of the techniques I become. However I do have one exception. That is if a technique is demonstrating the principle behind an more advanced technique. Then it is a teaching tool.
As for chiburui, I think it had its own use, as it came from a time when samurai where cutting down unarmored opponents, and even unarmed civilians. Obviously, if you just managed to hack down a couple bandits, you weren't gonna stay there and wipe your sword clean first; best you could do was a chiburui, get out before reinforcements arrive, and then just have your wife clean your sword when you get home. A katana would not have been bent out of shape from cutting down unarmored opponents. They also don't tend to get stuck due to the curved shape, and we know a lot of sword schools from Japan preferred cutting over stabbing.
You are right, but amongst the japanese, there is a known difference between yoroi kumi uchi and gendai jujitsu. Through my study of the samurai war arts, ne waza which is ground was a product of wat is called commoners jujutsu, and jujutsu was only utilized if a weapon was dropped or broken
You cannot hit anatomic parts protected by armor. But an armor must let articulations free to "move" on battle ground. So Jujutsu is designed to deal with armored enemy. This is why in Jujutsu one work on articulations and equilibrium. Look at Daito-Ryu Jujutsu's deadly techniques. Jujutsu is not gentle, but "body-intelligent".
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is a creation of the 20th century. Don't confuse that with Japanese Jujitsu which was created to accommodate the samurai on the battlefield.
666onfire As already stated, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is a 20th century martial art/martial sport formulated by GM Helio Gracie (1913 - 2009). He obviously wasn't around in the late 19th century.
I would have thought that battlefield = kill enemy quickly. I do remember conversations with relatives (that have now passed) when I asked about hand to hand combat their face used to go white and they would not talk about it. So I gather from that, grappling and hand-to-hand on a battlefield is a bad thing. After listening in on their conversations with their war mates, they always hoped their mates were around if things got that bad. Even today you would have to totally crazy to grapple someone to the ground because you don't know if their mates are nearby and ready to launch your head in to the next country, whist you are trying to "grapple". My personal take is: Grappling is last desperate resort. And best left for sport not reality.
Andrew Parsons But unfortunately that’s exactly what happened World War II soldiers and Marines were using hand to hand combat of the fight the Germans in the Japanese and did Johann hand many times along with Korea Vietnam and even now Falluja and hand was taking place in the tight corners of that city Marines and Army both and hand is also taught because it instills a sense of winning in the individual you know he’s going to die he knows he’s going to go out there and he’s going to give his best that’s what combat arms is for usually to make the other one die for their country but if necessary to take him there with
Why do you think noto wouldn't be done? Chiburi I agree doesn't really work but why not noto? Think about it I highly doubt u want to have to look down to put your sword away. Especially if not on the battle field and there's a possibility that you're not sure about the rest of the people around you but don't want to offend encase they aren't threatening you.
Adam Novath I think in a real context where you have felt you needed to draw a lethal weapon, you don't put it away until you're very sure you're safe again. Why would you be 'not sure' about the people around you? You've just had a fight with swords and they didn't get involved. You think your mortal enemies decided to let you defeat their allies, wait around awhile for you to sheathe your sword and then attack? Surely they'd just join in when the fight starts in hopes of overwhelming you. If someone has just jumped at you out of the shrubbery, I can't think why anyone would be offended if you decided to keep your sword out until the rest of the bushes have been checked.
Not all fighting was done in the battlefield and not all fights were fought chivalrously. quite often the "fights" were surprise attacks where as many people could get on is how many you'd have to fight just like in a street fight now. And yes they would wait for you to put your sword away that way they don't have top deal with you cutting at them otherwise it would be suicide to run in while a samurai has his sword out. You should always have an awareness and if your looking down to put your sword away that breaks your awareness, in Iaijutsu this awareness is called zanshin. Just like now a days in war a soldier never lets down his guard it was the same back then. Everything I'm telling you is the way its looked at in Muso Jikiden Eishin-ryu Iaijutsu.
I know it wasn't all done on the battlefield, but it still doesn't make sense. Who were these people who got attacked, fought off their enemies and then sheathed their weapons without combing the surrounding area? Who were these crack assassins who hung back while three or four people failed to kill the target and then decided to try on their own while the enemy was sheathing their sword? Not once he'd done it and turned his back on them mind, just waiting until the blade is halfway in.
If you don't mind me asking what style do you study? What doesn't make sense? Sometimes the people sent to kill a Samurai in feudal Japan was the Samurai's own friend if the friend was given orders from the daimyo or shogun to kill him. and who said the guy you cut with the sword is dead? samurai were trained that if they could take one more cut even though they were dying then it should be done, no different then modern fbi who are taught to keep shooting until they're guns are empty after they've been shot. Most who are taught to use weapons even in modern times are taught not to look away even if you think it's over because there is a good chance that its not.
I don't study japanese swordsmanship. This is just a question of logic. The point you are making about people still being dangerous etc...is exactly what I'm saying: when people have an encounter where it's actually become a matter of life and death, why would they sheathe their sword at all? I don't imagine the modern fbi are told to holster their weapon when things progress to that level. I would lay good money on them being taught to reload and secure the area before they even think about putting their gun away. If you are in mortal danger you surely keep your weapon out and ready. Once you know you are safe, (yes, you're never completely safe, but say in this context, once you've called a dozen retainers, told them to comb the surrounding area and kept a few nearby- possibly once you've had them escort you to somewhere safe), you can maybe put your weapon away, (although, again, in the case of a sword you would probably want to clean it properly and check it for damage rather rather than just sheathing it while looking around.) If you were to ask me to speculate (I know you aren't but what the hell) about why so much attention is paid to sheathing the sword in japanese martial arts, I would say that maybe it's a result of the attention paid to drawing it (which does make sense), a kind of ritualistic symetry if you will. Possibly helped along by a desire to emulate people with a lot of experience. (Presumably there were masters who drew and sheathed in a very quick, fluid, natural way in the same way that people who are always on their mobile phone seem to be able to make it appear in their hand and disappear back into their pocket as if by magic- just the result of endless repetition.)
Dumbest question I've ever heard!!! That's like saying does a soldier in the military use martial arts in the middle of a war. How can you use martial arts when you have bombs bullets and blades flying at you!! This question doesn't make any sense to me. There was absolutely no need to answer that question Anthony Cummins.
Yeah counts very it’s far as what it’s called jujitsu but elements of jujitsu were before the samurai and can be traced all the way back to China and even some say in the Africa some papyrus it was found somewhere I’m not up on that branch of it but I do know this traditional jujitsu was more than just grappling grappling was the last place you wanted to go to in combat and still Liz today as far as I’m concerned if you went down in his mates were around and they had already dispatched two they were fighting with you guess what was gonna happen grappling and I going to do you much good enough in a very bad place especially when you’re outnumbered if you got since you’re going to use whatever you can even run but as far as jujitsu goesIt was striking kicking wrist locks joint locks you name it it was all in there and it was an all encompassing system I give the Gracies kudos because they turned it into a very good sport but as far as what the samurai would use I don’t think that they would be using much of what the Brazilians have
Samurai battle field fights are very simple, once you close the distance it is throws, sweps, breaking arms / legs, quick chokes or ending with stabbing ( tanto or wakizashi ). It is fast, brutal and ugly.
The assumption that jiujitsu is just rolling on the ground, is idiotic. There are atemi techniques, some judo-like leg throws throws can be done while holding the sword with both hands. (Ouchigari, kouchigari are a couple of examples) What did the samurai do when his sword would break, what if he lost it during battle. Another misinformed concept is etiquette and the edo period. Osegawara Ryu shool of ettiquette dates to the 1300s, samurai likely adopted them in the early 1600, due to them being ascended in class during the edo period. Before that samurai were lower class than merchants and were not invited to formal events like the imperial palace. They adopted etiquette as a necessity during the edo period, but dies that mean they lost the functionality of their swordsmanship???? They had duels, and fight still, they would be ambushed and attacked at any moment. They policed their communities. This is the modern equivalent of saying cops nowadays don't know how to use guns, because there has not been a war since Afghanistan. If you believe using etiquette is "rubbish" then you have not understood Japanese culture as a whole. If you believe they all just hacked at each other with swords and technique/forms are of no value what is the point of training then, just go an do some pushups. And keep your reenactment Nat-a-real-ryu club.
Accounts very but jujutsu was basically a term used to describe the blen of kumi uchi, tai jutsu, yawara, koppo jutsu ect.... Jujutsu was an absolute last result if you somehow had to fight without your weapons. Jujutsu did not generally look like the Brazilian style. Some schools developed a super sensitive style while others used bruit force to drop armored folks on their noggin and would, at times, break their neck in the process. The Aizu clan used kenjutsu principals and created Aikijujutsu. After the samurai era was over, Aikijujutsu spawned aikido which is a non combative self defense style. Jujutsu turned into a sport we call judo and even kenjutsu spawned the competative art of kendo. Many modern styles changed from combat arts, jutsu and turned into sports or aesthetic ways or paths, Do.
ive been told something very interesting that you might know if its true... ive been told that the closest "modern" martial art to samurai grappling is sumo...
the logic behind it is that falling on the ground was seen as been already dead... you are going to be stabbed... also, all the techniques used are found in one way or another in old styles of jujutsu and the third part is interesting but since i never grappled with armor i cant tell if its true... but the fact that sumo is "no gi" it would work in armor, and the mawashi(belt) grabs do work in armor(this is the part i cant tell if is true... is there an armor belt or something like that to grip like a mawashi?) anyways... if true, its an interesting fact
@@gingercore69 Back in the day it was called Sumai (struggle). Apparently combat sumo is no more and the goal was to cause unconditional surrender and was apparently different from Sumo that we now Know today and apparently Kumiuchi was developed to be more sophisticated
Don F Dragger (Comprehensive Asian Fighting Arts) I think Catch Wrestling can give us a pretty good idea.
The Samurai Forms where based from Combat experiences. There was Joint locking and Dislocation, A plethora of Trip's/Sweep's/Throw's/Takedown's, Neck Breaking, Gouging and various Strikes
Sources:
Legacies of the Sword
Classical Fighting Arts of japan
Also important to draw a distinction between modern Brazilian jujitsu and traditional forms of Japanese jujitsu, older forms did not emphasize ground grappling as much
TheWarriorScholar You're forgetting about the Fusen Ryu. That's the school of traditional Japanese jujutsu that specialized in newaza(ground grappling), and that's the style that Jigoro Kano adopted newaza from and incorporated into Judo, which was later taught to Carlos Gracie by Judo master Mitsuyo Maeda, which eventually became Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.
This is pretty convincing. Makes me think of Seven Samurai, in which Kurosawa jokes about romantic misconceptions about the reality of medieval Japanese life.
There seems to be a confusion between Brazilian Jujitsu, which is a modern construct and Japanese armored grappling which is very different.
I think the original question wasn't about percentages or how much grappling vs weapons use, everyone already knows weapons got used more, that's obvious. The question probably meant how, when, and in what situation was it used, if any? which wasn't really answered.
As someone has already mentioned before, knowing how to grapple is a combative necessity in a close-quartered environment, saying "don't go to the ground" is like saying "don't get shot" or "don't get speared" its totally useless advice. In a chaotic situation you will find your self in all kinds of places, on the ground or otherwise, that's the reality of combat, and one must be prepared for anything. There is no good excuse not to learn grappling, or get emotionally defensive and conjure up these artificial weapons vs grappling arguments, they both complement each other, and are in no way antagonistic to each other.
Tachi Waza (Stand-Up fighting) and Ne Waza (Ground fighting) emerged after the founding of Kodokan Judo in 1882 by Jigoro Kano. Kano took several forms of Jujutsu and reformed them in order to represent the ideology of Budo (non-military arts). Jujutsu is historically a part of the Bujutsu/Bugei ideology and this was used by Bushi (Samurai) till the end of the Tokugawa regime. When the Meiji era began in 1868, most Jujutsu Ryu (approximately around 725+) were spread out and became obsolete.
Interesting though is that mainstream martial arts will attribute all of grappling as “Jiu-Jitsu.” However, that is not the case. Jujutsu/Jiu-Jitsu is primarily a striking hand-to-hand combat with less or moderate use of grappling and its self defense aspect is delivered by a ‘one-blow’ method. Samurai will never waste their time “rolling” on the ground with another person b/c not only is it dangerous, it is also ridiculous!
Most studies of earlier "warring period" samurai armour conclude that it was anti-arrow armour much more than anti-blade armour...
Jujutsu is not grappling only .
Traditional is broke a wrist or a arm .
Grappling is brazilian jj
Yeah thats true but grappling involves that as well.
Kano Judo was partly formed from his prejudices. He disliked groundwork & considered it undignified. As to Judo being better, where do you think the early Judoka came from? Other Ju-jitsu styles & when he put on demonstrations he would make sure the dice was loaded in his favour by using his most experienced students & instructors who had great experience in other styles. This is all documented.
The records are pretty clear... any grappling in koryu was to topple your enemy, body crashes were the focus. Similar in historical records to other cultures regarding battle-field grappling... Spartans, Romans, early pre-shuai jiao...etc., for exactly the reasons giving in this video. This can be seen in the few koryu schools, the atemi and grappling techniques are to break the balance, topple, so your buddy can run by and stab him as soon as he hits the ground. There were no "ju" techniques on the battlefield. Well put answer, thank you.
I totally agree with your premise on the use of jujutsu on the battlefield. I have spoken with several Special Forces types of individuals who have all said that if they have to resort to hand-to-hand combat that it is a bad and dangerous situation for them. They would rather use a firearm. Up close and personal combat is very dangerous and the tide can turn quickly and not always in your favor.
I think it would be more akijutsu more than jujitsu but yes it was used on the battlefield
I would also add that the point of "kyudo" in sengoku period was actually hitting the freaking target.
There is Diato Ryu Aiki Jujustsu (spelling may be off, sue me ), or Armor wearing wrestling, and was practiced and used on battlefields. It was generally considered foolish, and nearly all the techniques involved getting back to your feet. The remaining techniques we're about not getting taken down. I find you dissertation to be interesting, however.
Hi Anthony. Great video! I have a question. Is aikijujutsu considered a Samurai art? To my knowledge (I don't claim to be a historian) what we consider aikijutsu was created after the fall of the samurai. Do you think aikijujutsu was ever used by samurai on the battlefield?
Thanks!
Ian
Hi Antony, one question: the taijutsu / jujutsu (grappling and striking art as well) was anyway one the first martial art the japanese warriors had to learn (specially because of the body movements, blocks and blows) as foundation of the art of using weapons (bukijutsu)? thanks
No records go that far back
Hey, Antony. I loved the vid. It's great how you clarified how most "servants" (the "meaning" of "Samurai") of the battlefield would die through arrows, then spears, then swords, then, at the very least resort, through a short blade. A fist or a grapple would be if you were past that stage of desperation, you were about to die, and had absolutely nothing to lose at that point.
It's not just a "strictly Japanese warfare" or even a plain "medieval warfare in general" mentality; it's common sense. If the enemy's far away, you don't go running in there like some wayward knob.
Also, not to be a pest, but I would really like your opinion on Shenmue, Persona 4, and Tokyo Vice. They all have to do with investigation (and sometimes even breaking and entering and subterfuge) in modern-day Japan, and I would really like to know what you think about these "semi-shinobi" tactics on gaining information when compared with more "traditional" shinobi-no-jutsu.
Please Antony, if I were there in person, I would be begging you. Come on, please, just take a quick look at them. I know you're beyond busy, but I really would love your input on them. Just see if you can take even 5 minutes out of your extremely busy schedule (because I know you're a quick study) and just take a look at them. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
I'd ask you to take a look at "Yakuza Ishin" as well, but I've already asked you for way more than I have any right to, so I'll just leave now and hope that you'll read this and consider my request. Thank you.
I am terribly sorry that Antony missed your request, i recommend interacting with him on his most current video uploads to raise your chances of getting a response from him. He is very interactive on his current uploads, i also recommend dropping a small donation with your request, nothing big just a little something to help support the channel, i can say this with confidence because i have donated myself via super thanks, he also has a paypal, he is always extremely appreciative, you don't necessarily have to donate with the question, ask your question first and he will tell you whether he can give his opinion on these titles, i looked them up myself and a couple of them are very old so he might not be able to get access to game play to give a thorough opinion but i cant say for sure. I am only writing to you because i see you really wanted a response from him and you didn't get it and he is normally very interactive with viewers, subscribers, and supporters. Best of luck to you! if you follow my recommendation i am certain you will get a response from him. If for some reason you dont just let me know and i will also reach out to him but i doubt i will have to do that if you ask him on his latest upload. Also i want you to know that he doesn't receive notifications for replies to his replies, he only receives notifications for new comments! Once again very best of luck to you! be safe!!!
my dad had a saying from his drill Sargent days it goes " A good soldier will never pass a formal inspection". i think this goes along perfectly when you distinguish edo period samurai and Sengoku period samurai so i guess an Edo period samurai would have been of little use in the Sengoku era as the Sengoku period samurai had no place in the Edo period.
Great video Antony! I learned about your work through TH-cam and have since bought your first book. Interesting stuff!
I was wondering if you had any thoughts on how this topic relates your previous videos about Aikido in MMA. You mentioned that the aiki techniques were meant for a committed battlefield type strikes and not for a competitive environment. Was this after the warring period in duels, or during warfare?
I don't want to misquote you, so please set me straight if I'm remembering it incorrectly.
Keep up the great work!
-Brian
The people who asked you this seems to forget that it wasn't the watered down Brazilian version that was used by samurai. It was traditional Japanese ju-jutsu which is mostly standing up techniques. There was also Ni wasa, which was a small continuation of jiu-jitsu who consisted of ground techniques. Another misunderstanding about samurai is that they used kendo. This is not really true. Kendo is the watered down sport version of ken-jutsu which is the traditional way of using the katana sword in life and death battle.
I practice and teach Japanese Jujutsu and Aikido and Shotokan Karate
Imo, grappling among samurai was fairly popular.. if someone has armor you obviously can’t punch them or kick them and expect to end the fight, it’s difficult enough to do this on an unarmored opponent, but grabbing someone’s arm and twisting in an unnatural position till it breaks.. regardless of armor it will work, so I think it was useful.. and I also think it happened a fair bit, I also think that your allies would protect you as you grapple with an enemy in battle.. especially if they were of high rank as opposition, restraining them with rope, or just out right killing them once you gained control over their body could and did come in handy. Much like modern police and or military, when grappling, they have someone else with them for assistance.. not all of the time but most of the time, in the instances where your alone, you have to extra vigilant and have the capability of ending the fight immediately so as to focus on another threat.
I WANNA KNOW WHAT YOUR NEXT BOOK IS ABOUT! nice video btw :-) Very interesting!
the 'flick' and then i wipe is what i think. but this is way better than your before bjj vid :)
I think it is very easy to get bogged down in semantics in this kind of discussion. Sure, jujitsu in a strict sense might not have been used but as the video makes clear 'coming to grips' with an opponent certainly happened and I'm sure that is probably what the original questioner had in mind. Also absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because a technique isn't mentioned in the Gunkimono doesn't mean it never happened. I've never read about Samurai eye gouging or fish hooking but I'm pretty sure they did since that is the nature of combat.
HELLO TO ALL SAMURAI AND NINJA ENTHUSIASTS!!! ON BEHALF OF ANTONY CUMMINS I WOULD LIKE TO INFORM YOU THAT HE DOESN'T RECEIVE NOTIFICATIONS FOR REPLIES TO HIS REPLIES. HE ONLY RECEIVES NOTIFICATIONS FOR NEW COMMENTS. IF YOU ARE NEW TO THE CHANNEL ANTONY WOULD LIKE YOU TO START BY WATCHING HIS 2020 DOCUMENTARY.
Jujitsu or lets say Hand-to-hand combat, is only there to get to a knife, a knife is there to get to a sword, a sword is there to get to a spear, a spear is there to get to a bow and arrow... I think of H2H as a very last resort to keep you alive long enough to get to a weapon. Same as modern military H2H.
Thank you. All this needs to be said and understood. There has been a lot of misconceptions propagated not only by "Hollywood" (both sides of the Pacific Ocean) but also by skilled practitioners and instructors. Can't blame them too much, dojos don't just sell self defense they also sell romance, history, nostalgia, discipline, some sort of spirituality. When people/students figure out they have been just studying romantic reconstructions and/or 18-19 century sword etiquette forms, they feel ripped off. Sort of reminds me of the "current crisis" in aikido...it's obviously not all self-defense, neither is iaido, or any "....do" or, i guess, any ".....utsu" for that matter.
However, don't get me wrong and i hope others don't get you wrong, you get out of it what you get out of it. It's not a waste of time if you enjoy the forms, culture, etc; it's truly an "art".
You want to be "battle ready": go buy a compound/bunker in the wilderness, be a "Prepper", buy a butch of guns, ....no thank you, that's worse than romance.
Also, before the Edo period, Samurai would not have focused on the sword so much, since it wasn't a battlefield weapon. In the battlefield, Samurai preferred bows and spears. The focus on the sword probably really was just an Edo period thing, for a time when if they ever fought, it was likely using a sword, in self-defense.
I'd like to add that Japanese Jujutsu focuses on standing grappling more than ground work.
Japanese Jujitsu, from what I understand is more of a weapon based grappling system. It's a lot less of it's own thing and more of a part of sword fighting. Clinches and ground fighting happen in sword fights just like they do in fist fights so you better at least know how lol
***** It is today, but that is because it's trying to stay relevant. Japanese Jujitsu was traditionally used by Samurai who didn't care much for being unarmed.
Just a comment about how unlikely and marginal grappling skills were on the field of battle. I don't know much about it, and especially little about Japan, but I read some European stuff and it all looked very practical to me.
For once you have people in full armor. They just can't be easily killed. Even mock or exhibitions fights show how often they come into direct body contact, because bladed weapons are not particularly threatening to them. It seems to me, that the way to win was fairly often through superior grappling. You put the other guy down and grabbed a dagger. Even if you grabbed a dagger before, you still couldn't do much with it without winning a wrestling match beforehand. It took knowledge and effort to defeat a fully armored person, even on the ground.
Then there was this account of a duel, when a superior wrestler was feared, and the other guy insisted on having daggers to even up his chances. If grappling was of marginal use, he wouldn't have done it.
And there was Silver who criticized rapier for this very reason. Superior wrestler usually won, or simply a stronger person if both were unskilled. He didn't like it, but it meant that it was not uncommon for swordsmen to end up in a grappling match.
There was this duel, where both guys used smallswords and decided to fight to the death. They ended up in a wrestling grip, and both died on the spot from previous wounds, but they were grappling as they died.
All of that leads me to believe that wrestling or grappling were real battlefield skills. Not necessary something you would never use, but rather something you would use fairly often in close quarters fights.
That's due to the construction of European armours, though haha
Comparatively, samurai harnesses are quite open, and probably not steel, making cuts not ideal, but in a pinch still effective.
Besides, I think on a European battlefield while you would grapple and get someone to the ground for an easy kill, you'd still avoid getting onto the ground yourself and risk becoming a third party's easy kill haha
SerAlgernop BlitzKrieger I tend to pretty much assume that armor worked. If it didn't, people wouldn't bother paying for it (huge monies too) and wearing it.
Japanese armors do look more open, but I guess it was necessary to stand the discomfort. Full body coverage makes heat exchange a real problem. In hot climate you can pass out. Or maybe there was some other reason, but I'm sure it worked nonetheless. It was too expensive and uncomfortable to even exist otherwise.
Anyway, in a rapier or a smallsword duell you don't have any armor, yet grappling happened. To the point that it was even disallowed by the rules sometimes.
Regarding throwing the other guy down while staying upright yourself, yes that's how it is depicted in the manuals. Despite that, I believe you need to pin the other guy down if you want to force your dagger into the eveyslots.
But think about that - there existed wrestling on horseback. Would you even consider such a possibility? Yet we are sure it was used. Strange, but true.
bakters well, like I said, comparatively. The samurai stuff never got to the point you had to wrestle someone to get in one of the four-odd miniscule gaps with a sharpened metal stake. Clearly the armour still worked.
That's why you don't see samurai in Battle of the Nations, it's not protective enough. Not that it ISN'T protective. The samurai harnesses being used it STEEL in Japan now are more like Western armour than any historical examples. Including the ones that used pieces of Portuguese armour.
You don't necessarily go for the eye slots... There's wedging up under the gorget, under the armpit... Plus, you don't have to pin someone down to get a controlled face-stab.
Well, there were grappling techniques for horseback, but they were for tackling off an opponent or disarming an opponent when you're unarmed.
Also, note. Rapier or small sword DUEL. Not exactly a battlefield.
SerAlgernop BlitzKrieger OK, valid points, they all make sense. Still, I do think that what I was saying applies to Japan to some degree too.
For example, even with their armor grappling seems like a viable choice if two guys with polearms came into close contact.
Then even on this channel I heard about head-hunting. Every account I recall involved some sort of grappling. There was even one whole video about how to modify shortsword scabbard (wakizashi saya...?) in such a way that you could draw your sword with one hand while grappling the other guy.
It was based on a first hand account, so I believe it actually happened.
Now, I'm not saying that Judo was used to overcome an armored enemy. More like sumo, I'd guess? Put 30 kg of armor on a strong guy, and you have yokozuna stats. ;-)
The art came across from china and was then remastered and renamed Samurai Jujitsu (Hei Jo Shinto Ryu, Bushido Jitsu) what ever it all was on single flowing art. One way, By the the sword. All arts, Kendo, Aikido, Kempo, Karate, Judo and Jujitsu. A long time ago before these existed it was just Jujitsu, Bubushi and Bushido which I think is...Body(Hand), Sword(Samurai) and Honour. It was all water, all one path, one way Shin Jitsu. The way of the Samurai. I think only 5 or so Samurai Jujitsu GrandMaster exist today.
@Anthony I thought that you might find this interesting and its a small glimpse at the answer of "Was jiu jitsu used on the battlefield' .I think that your thinking of Newaza which is a much less developed area pre Kano .However if you came to grips disarming and throws are vital . also there is one Kodokan technique where the opponent is thrown down by twisting the breast plate . Here is a Kata that has preserved some small part of Ancient battlefield technique from the Kodokan School. l Cheers th-cam.com/video/Mcxd0hK_IqQ/w-d-xo.html
Not all that different than today.
Grappling is never really ideal. Things get, complicated when you go to the ground.
Jujutsu was supplemental to the Bushi (Warrior Class) secondary....a weapon was ALWAYS preferred. Empty hands were only employed if a warrior was disarmed, the warrior would use Jujutsu to then get a hold of another weapon (or get killed in the process) Jujutsu was also used indoors where weapons were sometimes prohibited.
thanks. so form and ettiquete were there to teach function and ability, but after edo period there was too much emphasis on form.
Hoshiyama-Ryu Jujitsu is an example of an old Battlefiled Jujitsu, and you should not look at it thru the modern eye of what you see today. Back in those Samurai days techniques were also designed to work around armor.
Sorry, I usually agree with you. But not on this. First of all, cutting through well-made armor is impossible. Thrusting is possible, but unlikely. You're going to need to find the gaps in your opponent's armor which is easier said than done. Your best bet of killing someone is to wrestle them into the ground and shank them with a dagger. That's where the jiu-jitsu comes in. Obviously we're not talking about modern grappling where you pull guard and fight from the bottom. But being able to take the other guy to the ground, pin them, and then stab them is absolutely vital. Also, you underestimate the frequency clinching happens in a fight. Grappling happens often happens when neither party is seeking it.
You'll find the same emphasis on grappling in European martial arts like HEMA, where there's a heavy emphasis on grappling in armored fighting. In fact, I will even go so far as to say that grappling is so important in armored combat that it's more important than having a sword. Imagine an UFC fighter versus an Olympic Fencer. Both have full plate armour, but only the olympic fencer has a sword. The UFC fighter would maul the fencer with his superior grappling, steal the fencer's sword, and then kill him with it.
Hi. Good points. It has been a long time since i watched this video. I would say that you do not have a lot of time to grapple. You only have seconds. So i am not saying there is no grappling. What i am saying is there would not be a prolonged grapple and normally you want to get up fast. Also, most warriors in Japan had a lot less armour than people think. The first Europeans who went there started that they are often not very well armoured, that a lot of their flesh is out. Some would be, but many would have Baird legs and bare arms.
What about koppojutsu or dakenjutsu? Kukishin ryu taijutsu is great example of dakenjutsu style of unarmed combat, and Ogawa ryu is example of koppojutsu. There is no rolling around and grabbing collar in those kind of schools. Also, worth of mentioning is that Kukishin ryu is very old battlefield type school.
Were there not regiments of men in karate gi who rushed the field in days of old under musket fire and raining arrows who raised their magical silk banner on high to kick, punch or choke out the enemy? Take those spear wielding masses down to the mossy turf to grapple and nipple pinch their way to victory? LOL Any general in history stupid enough to suggest that as a viable strategy would have lost his commission on the spot. The armies carried weapons for practical purposes- they worked, brutally well.
Hi,
I know that i am writing here with some delay,
but
in ther period of peace people loose the connection with the warfare, so they have plenty of time to "evolve" their art out of the limited boundaries of the warfare.
So they have time to show what happens when you don't dress an armour, there are no swords, and you can only train with a partner who is better in a specific set of skill resemmling the ones that your ancestors used for fighting.
So in the real previous ju jitsu, you didn't grab, there were no pijamas to grab, and one hand should still be free to catch your or the other's one dagger.
Now during the peace, you can have the peaceful granted by rules, to catch your opponent with both of your arm, so aftyer the warfare, ju jitsu already involved to self-defense/sporty training.
In the original ju jitsu there was no grappling as we know today, for the same reasons Antony explains in the video.
Ironically, today just a few Ju Jitsu derivated schools stress the no grappling of the old ju jutsu. Aikido is one of them. Most of the more remarkable teachers show that you don't have to grab firmly in Aikido, well of course someone does, but you can see that the most of videos on youtube show an aikido aptitude mostly going to the extreme of almost no contact, or to a touch/throw aptitude, not grappling as such.
There is no grappling in a real martial arts,at the best there is a work at a grappling distance.
But today, again ironically, judo is considered more real than aikido, well this is also because in aikido it is really easy for the teachers to fake the movements, since the aikido teachers are used to create their charsima to braiwash students, but at the end of the day, there is more "warfare aptitude" in the gently art of aikido, than in the competitive ju jitsu called judo, which again is different than what Kano wanted to leave to people.
It is not a coincidence that the actions you see in some kata, resemble very much aikido, without any real grappling action. But Judo is today jacket grappling, which never existed in Sengoku period.
The evolution in peace broght to the confrontation one vs.one with all the grappling that in a battlefield, or in a real situation, is not the best idea.
The Founder of aikido said that aikido is irimi and atemi, he didn't say grappling, and even with all the influences in the modern era, you cannot consider aikido as a grappling art.
He said entering and striking. Which is the aptitude of people using a weapon and stabbing. If you don't have a weapon you just stab with your punches and kicks. It is more similar to chinese kempo, or the old judo, not the competitive one which is just to gratify the ego, all what the ancient arts weren't about. The ancient arts were about the necessity of surviving in a battlefield.
I agree, function first! Just like modern military and Law enforcement, hand to hand combat including grappling is trained minimally compared to weapons training and battle tactics.
Antony check into Kogusokujutsu. This will help.
Well, Jujutsu would be used along with a short sword or knife as swords are shit against armor. Throwing someone to the ground and then killing them with a sword or knife would likely be more common than you would think.
Cummins,
you miss the point.
What you call ju jutsu is in fact grappling, modern grappling in jacket as yourself say at a certain point.
So the Ju jutsu you are speaking about is not the Koryu JuJutsu (KumiUchi), is the modern japanese sport practiced with a gi.
Ancient martial arts evolved in 2 directions: one is the rituals i.e. of the aikido and this ritualism contains some truths between lines (for example the fact that many actions are justified from the presence of a weapon in yours or the other's hands and so the consequent tai sabaki in defence and offence), and the other i.e. is the sport like i.e. judo TODAY since there are not (anymore) weapons and no strike, so you try to maximize the grabs and the throws instead of defending against punches and knives (that you can see in Judo katas coming from the ancient "grappling" from JuJutsu, which was at the time part of many arts mastered from the professional warriors). By the way in aikido to grab is wrong as most of the teachers say (it doesn't matter if then they grab, they fail in front of their same eyes according to their own definitions, so they even don't do aikido and be called teachers).
As you say, the "grappling" with the daga is different, and in fact I put the brackets many times when I meant ancient "grappling". Of course in war doesn't make sense fight on the ground and in factit wasn't Kano's idea the ju-grappling on the ground, as he pointed more at the nage side and he didin't see HIS Judo as a pure grappling system.
What is clear is that once that the weapons disappear from BuJutsu, the "grappling" isn't "grappling" anymore. It becomes grappling on its own, and stops being a martial art to become sport.
You don't go to war with the grappling, but you can need to know some "grappling" in battlefield.
And of course method, aims, contents and extent change completely.
When 2 swords or 2 arms clash, the musubi can start, but the musubi is not the aim of aiki arts. Musubi simply happens when the strikes don't reach the target but the bodies are connected in the action and you try to take advantage from that contact (which doesn't mean to start grappling!).
The only thing that remains is the name JuJitsu. But it should be changed to Ju (or GO? )- grappling
Well it was part of budō like suijutsu but i don't know if it was really used a lot
Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu , look it up
Jujutsu is grappling that's what it focused on unarmed combat is good your going to have your hands and feet
Question. Why is the focus on ground jujutsu? That's Gracie jujutsu, not the stand up Japanese jujutsu meant to work against armor joints. Clearly, no one would start rolling around on the ground amid horse hooves, spears, and swords.
I'd think of course Jujutsu wasn't used as primary . Archery, Spear, Sword much more. However, it may have likely been used as part of any undesirable close sword and dagger fighting. It may even have been part of how one warrior might hold an enemy so his mate could cut or spear him. Anything to gain advantage.
Oh, I should add this. I dont mean to sound disrespectful. I bought your Basenshukai translation and am really appreciating the work put into it.
I'm only asking about the Jujutsu question, because I was surprised to hear that anyone doubted whether any of the old koryu jujitsu forms were ever used on the battlefield. They clearly at least must have formed out of combat experience with swords and armor. Many of them functionally mimic sword swinging or spear thrusting and work most effectively against someone else who is doing exactly that.
Anthony I think you are right. The people who fought psychologically were the same as us. They wanted to survive first and foremost. This would have meant that there was a strict adherence to techniques that were effective. I believe that they used a small number of highly effective techniques that actually worked. If you are gambling with not only your life but your families survival would you have time to try out a technique and then make it stylish. The romanticism that subsequently occurs is not reality. As a police officer who has had stab and gunshot victims die in my arms there is nothing civilized in close combat. It is brutal and base. The heavy reliance on projectile weapons in ancient times is only like our reliance on missiles. It removes the combat of last resort: hand to hand combat. I do believe that taijutsu/ komiuchi was developed to deal with this but the further you get away from actual combat the more sceptical of the techniques I become. However I do have one exception. That is if a technique is demonstrating the principle behind an more advanced technique. Then it is a teaching tool.
As for chiburui, I think it had its own use, as it came from a time when samurai where cutting down unarmored opponents, and even unarmed civilians. Obviously, if you just managed to hack down a couple bandits, you weren't gonna stay there and wipe your sword clean first; best you could do was a chiburui, get out before reinforcements arrive, and then just have your wife clean your sword when you get home.
A katana would not have been bent out of shape from cutting down unarmored opponents. They also don't tend to get stuck due to the curved shape, and we know a lot of sword schools from Japan preferred cutting over stabbing.
Outside
You are right, but amongst the japanese, there is a known difference between yoroi kumi uchi and gendai jujitsu. Through my study of the samurai war arts, ne waza which is ground was a product of wat is called commoners jujutsu, and jujutsu was only utilized if a weapon was dropped or broken
Ok so ill just take up gun fu ill give up my dreams of being a ninja
You cannot hit anatomic parts protected by armor. But an armor must let articulations free to "move" on battle ground. So Jujutsu is designed to deal with armored enemy. This is why in Jujutsu one work on articulations and equilibrium. Look at Daito-Ryu Jujutsu's deadly techniques. Jujutsu is not gentle, but "body-intelligent".
If weapon dropped and turned into a knife fight sure. But just as long as next in rank spears the dude.
horse shit clean you said that ones jujuitsu not battle field thing i do practices it a little not much
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is a creation of the 20th century. Don't confuse that with Japanese Jujitsu which was created to accommodate the samurai on the battlefield.
ChristianWarrior76 late 19th century during the meiji period
666onfire As already stated, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is a 20th century martial art/martial sport formulated by GM Helio Gracie (1913 - 2009). He obviously wasn't around in the late 19th century.
I would have thought that battlefield = kill enemy quickly.
I do remember conversations with relatives (that have now passed) when I asked about hand to hand combat their face used to go white and they would not talk about it. So I gather from that, grappling and hand-to-hand on a battlefield is a bad thing. After listening in on their conversations with their war mates, they always hoped their mates were around if things got that bad.
Even today you would have to totally crazy to grapple someone to the ground because you don't know if their mates are nearby and ready to launch your head in to the next country, whist you are trying to "grapple".
My personal take is: Grappling is last desperate resort. And best left for sport not reality.
Andrew Parsons But unfortunately that’s exactly what happened World War II soldiers and Marines were using hand to hand combat of the fight the Germans in the Japanese and did Johann hand many times along with Korea Vietnam and even now Falluja and hand was taking place in the tight corners of that city Marines and Army both and hand is also taught because it instills a sense of winning in the individual you know he’s going to die he knows he’s going to go out there and he’s going to give his best that’s what combat arms is for usually to make the other one die for their country but if necessary to take him there with
Sorry to see you just never had a good Iai teacher to teach you variants of noto with a cloth to clean.
Why do you think noto wouldn't be done? Chiburi I agree doesn't really work but why not noto? Think about it I highly doubt u want to have to look down to put your sword away. Especially if not on the battle field and there's a possibility that you're not sure about the rest of the people around you but don't want to offend encase they aren't threatening you.
Adam Novath I think in a real context where you have felt you needed to draw a lethal weapon, you don't put it away until you're very sure you're safe again.
Why would you be 'not sure' about the people around you? You've just had a fight with swords and they didn't get involved. You think your mortal enemies decided to let you defeat their allies, wait around awhile for you to sheathe your sword and then attack? Surely they'd just join in when the fight starts in hopes of overwhelming you.
If someone has just jumped at you out of the shrubbery, I can't think why anyone would be offended if you decided to keep your sword out until the rest of the bushes have been checked.
Not all fighting was done in the battlefield and not all fights were fought chivalrously. quite often the "fights" were surprise attacks where as many people could get on is how many you'd have to fight just like in a street fight now. And yes they would wait for you to put your sword away that way they don't have top deal with you cutting at them otherwise it would be suicide to run in while a samurai has his sword out. You should always have an awareness and if your looking down to put your sword away that breaks your awareness, in Iaijutsu this awareness is called zanshin. Just like now a days in war a soldier never lets down his guard it was the same back then. Everything I'm telling you is the way its looked at in Muso Jikiden Eishin-ryu Iaijutsu.
I know it wasn't all done on the battlefield, but it still doesn't make sense. Who were these people who got attacked, fought off their enemies and then sheathed their weapons without combing the surrounding area? Who were these crack assassins who hung back while three or four people failed to kill the target and then decided to try on their own while the enemy was sheathing their sword? Not once he'd done it and turned his back on them mind, just waiting until the blade is halfway in.
If you don't mind me asking what style do you study? What doesn't make sense? Sometimes the people sent to kill a Samurai in feudal Japan was the Samurai's own friend if the friend was given orders from the daimyo or shogun to kill him. and who said the guy you cut with the sword is dead? samurai were trained that if they could take one more cut even though they were dying then it should be done, no different then modern fbi who are taught to keep shooting until they're guns are empty after they've been shot. Most who are taught to use weapons even in modern times are taught not to look away even if you think it's over because there is a good chance that its not.
I don't study japanese swordsmanship. This is just a question of logic. The point you are making about people still being dangerous etc...is exactly what I'm saying: when people have an encounter where it's actually become a matter of life and death, why would they sheathe their sword at all? I don't imagine the modern fbi are told to holster their weapon when things progress to that level. I would lay good money on them being taught to reload and secure the area before they even think about putting their gun away. If you are in mortal danger you surely keep your weapon out and ready. Once you know you are safe, (yes, you're never completely safe, but say in this context, once you've called a dozen retainers, told them to comb the surrounding area and kept a few nearby- possibly once you've had them escort you to somewhere safe), you can maybe put your weapon away, (although, again, in the case of a sword you would probably want to clean it properly and check it for damage rather rather than just sheathing it while looking around.)
If you were to ask me to speculate (I know you aren't but what the hell) about why so much attention is paid to sheathing the sword in japanese martial arts, I would say that maybe it's a result of the attention paid to drawing it (which does make sense), a kind of ritualistic symetry if you will. Possibly helped along by a desire to emulate people with a lot of experience. (Presumably there were masters who drew and sheathed in a very quick, fluid, natural way in the same way that people who are always on their mobile phone seem to be able to make it appear in their hand and disappear back into their pocket as if by magic- just the result of endless repetition.)
You sure you dont have any relation with connor mcgregor?
Dumbest question I've ever heard!!! That's like saying does a soldier in the military use martial arts in the middle of a war. How can you use martial arts when you have bombs bullets and blades flying at you!! This question doesn't make any sense to me. There was absolutely no need to answer that question Anthony Cummins.
You don't know anything about the Japanese marital arts Ninjutsu is it's own art
Yeah counts very it’s far as what it’s called jujitsu but elements of jujitsu were before the samurai and can be traced all the way back to China and even some say in the Africa some papyrus it was found somewhere I’m not up on that branch of it but I do know this traditional jujitsu was more than just grappling grappling was the last place you wanted to go to in combat and still Liz today as far as I’m concerned if you went down in his mates were around and they had already dispatched two they were fighting with you guess what was gonna happen grappling and I going to do you much good enough in a very bad place especially when you’re outnumbered if you got since you’re going to use whatever you can even run but as far as jujitsu goesIt was striking kicking wrist locks joint locks you name it it was all in there and it was an all encompassing system I give the Gracies kudos because they turned it into a very good sport but as far as what the samurai would use I don’t think that they would be using much of what the Brazilians have
Samurai battle field fights are very simple, once you close the distance it is throws, sweps, breaking arms / legs, quick chokes or ending with stabbing ( tanto or wakizashi ). It is fast, brutal and ugly.
1467-1868
Aikido is also used by the samurai
Aikido was invented a century ago and has never been used for anything. lol
Well… at least you started by saying you didn't know if you could answer the questions… cause you didn't. At least, not accurately, or correctly.
The assumption that jiujitsu is just rolling on the ground, is idiotic. There are atemi techniques, some judo-like leg throws throws can be done while holding the sword with both hands. (Ouchigari, kouchigari are a couple of examples)
What did the samurai do when his sword would break, what if he lost it during battle.
Another misinformed concept is etiquette and the edo period. Osegawara Ryu shool of ettiquette dates to the 1300s, samurai likely adopted them in the early 1600, due to them being ascended in class during the edo period. Before that samurai were lower class than merchants and were not invited to formal events like the imperial palace. They adopted etiquette as a necessity during the edo period, but dies that mean they lost the functionality of their swordsmanship???? They had duels, and fight still, they would be ambushed and attacked at any moment. They policed their communities. This is the modern equivalent of saying cops nowadays don't know how to use guns, because there has not been a war since Afghanistan. If you believe using etiquette is "rubbish" then you have not understood Japanese culture as a whole. If you believe they all just hacked at each other with swords and technique/forms are of no value what is the point of training then, just go an do some pushups. And keep your reenactment Nat-a-real-ryu club.
Forgot to mention, the weapon retention techniques are the basis of the yawara of jiujitsu too.
"Antony Cummins".. never heard of that, sounds like a Ninja wannabe.
If I want history about Samurais I'd read Stephen Turnbull.
Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu , look it up