Posts
(newest first)
Thursday, July 14, 2005
Martial Arts Evolution 4
Was reading in the local freebie newspaper in Manchester, UK, and for some reason, I guess out of human interest and a tenuous connection to the Olympics, on the back page, the feature photo was of two Mongolian wrestlers in Ulan Batur, who were battling for the coveted 'Elephant' trophy.
This 'Games' has its history in the military, dating at least as far back as Genghis Khan, and was a test of strength of the soldiers, factions, tribes etc. The games are based around wrestling/hand-to-hand, horseback and archery, all important battle skills of the roaming Mongolians.
This is the same as the original Olympics, where different Mediterranean countries or city states met on the battlefield of the arena with their best athletes, most likely made up of fighting men and perhaps aristocrats, one could presume. The events they competed in were, similarly, hunting or fighting skills, like javelin, archery, discus, running, wrestling, chariots etc.
So we know that at least for a couple of millenia, people have competed in events related to skills of warfare, but not on a battleground. So it wouldn't be foolish to presume that some, if not all, of the competitors had some degree of practice or training to be worthy of entering.
So Martial Arts, or fighting skills, have been around since the first humans learnt to engage in battle and practiced those skills, refined and polished them into a definable fighting system, theoretically unique perhaps to that village, town, city, country or just to a couple of individuals. Just because it has no attributed name, a fighting system is a martial art.
The Chinese words Wu Shu, means martial skills and they are commonly attributed to the esoteric forms we know from Shaolin. The refinement and peculiarity of those fighting forms have been distilled and tested and will no doubt always undergo evolutions and changes, but no matter what we hold as an image of a martial art, with what cultural attachments we apply to them, and how we view their use in society, a fighting system is created wholly for just one thing - Fighting.
This 'Games' has its history in the military, dating at least as far back as Genghis Khan, and was a test of strength of the soldiers, factions, tribes etc. The games are based around wrestling/hand-to-hand, horseback and archery, all important battle skills of the roaming Mongolians.
This is the same as the original Olympics, where different Mediterranean countries or city states met on the battlefield of the arena with their best athletes, most likely made up of fighting men and perhaps aristocrats, one could presume. The events they competed in were, similarly, hunting or fighting skills, like javelin, archery, discus, running, wrestling, chariots etc.
So we know that at least for a couple of millenia, people have competed in events related to skills of warfare, but not on a battleground. So it wouldn't be foolish to presume that some, if not all, of the competitors had some degree of practice or training to be worthy of entering.
So Martial Arts, or fighting skills, have been around since the first humans learnt to engage in battle and practiced those skills, refined and polished them into a definable fighting system, theoretically unique perhaps to that village, town, city, country or just to a couple of individuals. Just because it has no attributed name, a fighting system is a martial art.
The Chinese words Wu Shu, means martial skills and they are commonly attributed to the esoteric forms we know from Shaolin. The refinement and peculiarity of those fighting forms have been distilled and tested and will no doubt always undergo evolutions and changes, but no matter what we hold as an image of a martial art, with what cultural attachments we apply to them, and how we view their use in society, a fighting system is created wholly for just one thing - Fighting.
Thursday, July 07, 2005
Martial Arts Evolution Theory 3
Thinking now about how cultures and humankind as a whole have evolved dependent of meeting needs, we can assume that food and shelter are the first needs we have to meet, according to Maslow's hierachy of needs.
So when humankind first climbed down the trees and stepped foot on the savannah, it was possibly for exploration for food sources. Hence, hunting skills, evident in all the great apes, ergo our common ancestors, will be prevalent in those social groups exploring the open ground. With the number of megafauna (great big creatures) around, there will have been a requirement to defend oneself and the group, so those hunting skills are also interchangeable as battle skills.
Social creatures tend to hunt in groups, so the weight of numbers must have been a deciding factor in the hunt and in battle, but let us not discount the fact that humankind and our ancestor hominids have been making and using tools for 100's if not 1000's of millenia, so wielding weaponry is familiar to any person, as a natural extension of being an evolved tool user.
In social groups in both humans and lesser animals, we see continual testing as a means of sorting the social order of a culture. Males and females alike will push and pull, physically and mentally, to establish their rank in the group, which also decides the rank of the other. These social struggles are not intended to harm or hurt, though they can, but also causes social bonding too, as a whole group, for a group without a hierarchy can lead to disfunction, and the inability to operate as a whole makes it weaker.
So, we see in our cousins the great apes, the means of social testing in the lead males, mock fighting when youngsters, becoming tests of strength and weakness when adult.
Of course some fights can lead to injuries, even death, but most are settled when the weaker backs down, and the positions are balanced.
So we must apply this to ourselves, for when we spar and wrestle, we are not out to hurt or harm the other, it is a means of testing, both physical and mental, both of the other and of oneself.
This is perhaps the most likely case of the birth of unarmed combat systems, as a means of testing without causing inappropriate harm.
We humans, though, enjoy power more than most other creatures led by mere instinct, for we can revel in power, greed, EGO. Our need for power, whether just or unjust, drives us to innovation, of thought, of strategy, of invention, so those driven by a need for power may have invented the forms of combat in an unarmed situation, where if all things being equal, of height, weight, strength and open-hands, it relies on ability and technique and mental agility.
Consider, if one proponent were facing another who was armed with a sword, and the opportunity for the unarmed to best the armed arose and they succeeded, the assumed power, respect, awe etc raises that proponent's stature in the group.
One road of thought implies that the individuals who go on to do great things, or become leaders, or top athletes, crave attention, affection, respect etc, largely as a means of layering the ego with what it needs to feed it (Read Marvin Harris, Our Kind, 1989), again as part of the whole fitting into society issue.
These are the Napoleons, the Genghis Khans, Alexanders of history. And I propose that these are the types of people who created a martial system, whether for good intentions or not, but it is the great, the brilliant, the steadfast, the thinkers, the do-ers of humankind who go forth in the world to add to it, not to take from it.
Think about the originators of any martial art, take even Bodhidharma, the most unlikely candidate of the powerhungry, who crossed from Persia to China on the silk route to SongShan to deliver translations of the Buddhist texts and so was born Chan (Zen) Buddhism. He also gave the monks age old meditation exercises, and so was born Shaolin WuShu. But everyone in the East knows his name, for he was revered as a great figure in history, even in his own day.
I'm sure he wasn't to know that MA would be so prolific in China because of him, but because of him, MA flourished there, even within the circle of Buddhist compassion and tolerance of all things.
But power is addictive, and individuals would have taken those simple forms and made them into powerful techniques, and so fighting systems become elaborate and deadly, no longer just a test of strength amongst peers, but a means of control, a means of respect.
Thus, from a simple exercise, someone craving power, control, respect, ability, revenge, ego abasement, all those ugly human traits, whether explicitly expressed or just as part of the mental makeup driving a particular individual, will have beaten and battered, and taken apart the techniques & skills and reformed them to better themselves, to meet their higher needs, subconscious or otherwise.
Perhaps that is where martial arts are born, from the memory of being a small creature battling for life in the reptilian brain, to the power hungry tendencies of our so-called human mind, all these different parts of self and ego may have driven us to use our hands and feet as natural weapons for defence and attack, whether in proving one's standing amidst one's peers and society, or using one's power and ability to issue control over others, martial arts are born of our psyche, of our ability to realise power.
So, by extension, a true martial artist should understand this, and exercise power only when it is needed, not as a means of stroking one's ego.
I wrote something similar to this several years back as a short thesis here: http://kungfulife.blogspot.com/2005/04/fighting-hero-appeal-of-martial-arts.html
So when humankind first climbed down the trees and stepped foot on the savannah, it was possibly for exploration for food sources. Hence, hunting skills, evident in all the great apes, ergo our common ancestors, will be prevalent in those social groups exploring the open ground. With the number of megafauna (great big creatures) around, there will have been a requirement to defend oneself and the group, so those hunting skills are also interchangeable as battle skills.
Social creatures tend to hunt in groups, so the weight of numbers must have been a deciding factor in the hunt and in battle, but let us not discount the fact that humankind and our ancestor hominids have been making and using tools for 100's if not 1000's of millenia, so wielding weaponry is familiar to any person, as a natural extension of being an evolved tool user.
In social groups in both humans and lesser animals, we see continual testing as a means of sorting the social order of a culture. Males and females alike will push and pull, physically and mentally, to establish their rank in the group, which also decides the rank of the other. These social struggles are not intended to harm or hurt, though they can, but also causes social bonding too, as a whole group, for a group without a hierarchy can lead to disfunction, and the inability to operate as a whole makes it weaker.
So, we see in our cousins the great apes, the means of social testing in the lead males, mock fighting when youngsters, becoming tests of strength and weakness when adult.
Of course some fights can lead to injuries, even death, but most are settled when the weaker backs down, and the positions are balanced.
So we must apply this to ourselves, for when we spar and wrestle, we are not out to hurt or harm the other, it is a means of testing, both physical and mental, both of the other and of oneself.
This is perhaps the most likely case of the birth of unarmed combat systems, as a means of testing without causing inappropriate harm.
We humans, though, enjoy power more than most other creatures led by mere instinct, for we can revel in power, greed, EGO. Our need for power, whether just or unjust, drives us to innovation, of thought, of strategy, of invention, so those driven by a need for power may have invented the forms of combat in an unarmed situation, where if all things being equal, of height, weight, strength and open-hands, it relies on ability and technique and mental agility.
Consider, if one proponent were facing another who was armed with a sword, and the opportunity for the unarmed to best the armed arose and they succeeded, the assumed power, respect, awe etc raises that proponent's stature in the group.
One road of thought implies that the individuals who go on to do great things, or become leaders, or top athletes, crave attention, affection, respect etc, largely as a means of layering the ego with what it needs to feed it (Read Marvin Harris, Our Kind, 1989), again as part of the whole fitting into society issue.
These are the Napoleons, the Genghis Khans, Alexanders of history. And I propose that these are the types of people who created a martial system, whether for good intentions or not, but it is the great, the brilliant, the steadfast, the thinkers, the do-ers of humankind who go forth in the world to add to it, not to take from it.
Think about the originators of any martial art, take even Bodhidharma, the most unlikely candidate of the powerhungry, who crossed from Persia to China on the silk route to SongShan to deliver translations of the Buddhist texts and so was born Chan (Zen) Buddhism. He also gave the monks age old meditation exercises, and so was born Shaolin WuShu. But everyone in the East knows his name, for he was revered as a great figure in history, even in his own day.
I'm sure he wasn't to know that MA would be so prolific in China because of him, but because of him, MA flourished there, even within the circle of Buddhist compassion and tolerance of all things.
But power is addictive, and individuals would have taken those simple forms and made them into powerful techniques, and so fighting systems become elaborate and deadly, no longer just a test of strength amongst peers, but a means of control, a means of respect.
Thus, from a simple exercise, someone craving power, control, respect, ability, revenge, ego abasement, all those ugly human traits, whether explicitly expressed or just as part of the mental makeup driving a particular individual, will have beaten and battered, and taken apart the techniques & skills and reformed them to better themselves, to meet their higher needs, subconscious or otherwise.
Perhaps that is where martial arts are born, from the memory of being a small creature battling for life in the reptilian brain, to the power hungry tendencies of our so-called human mind, all these different parts of self and ego may have driven us to use our hands and feet as natural weapons for defence and attack, whether in proving one's standing amidst one's peers and society, or using one's power and ability to issue control over others, martial arts are born of our psyche, of our ability to realise power.
So, by extension, a true martial artist should understand this, and exercise power only when it is needed, not as a means of stroking one's ego.
I wrote something similar to this several years back as a short thesis here: http://kungfulife.blogspot.com/2005/04/fighting-hero-appeal-of-martial-arts.html
Monday, July 04, 2005
Further Theory of Martial Arts evolution
So let us take the premise that many martial arts are based on warfare, battle and hunting skills, all part of the hunter/gatherer tribal society of neolithic prehistoric eras.
There will always have been particular individuals who are extremely adept at their chosen skill, either in some way as a 'natural' talent, perhaps because of good reaction skills, quick movement, strength. strategic thought etc, or through practice of the skill in one way or another, be it direct or indirect (a butcher practices his knife wielding skills everyday for example, and this might be easily translated to battle technique).
Societies naturally attribute those who have such skills as an expert, and, by extension of intent and use, as champion or master. So the inquisitive human mind, such that we have, we search to improve self, for selfless or selfish reasons regardless, but those who do will strive to better their current range of skills.
To continue this premise, it might be easy to make a further assumption that a sword user practising daily with his peers or students might experience being disarmed, so then that practicioner will want to still defend themselves in some way, so unarmed combat becomes a requirement.
We see that a lot of old pugilistic arts revolve around wrestling (and boxing, but I consider the two together as one), so once disarmed, the defender might either make a retreat or, if that is unlikely, to face their opponent without weapons.
This thought might have passed through the minds of any passingly decent fighter, warrior or military commander, and might well have been an issue of concern, so its imaginable that they would have taken steps to focus on unarmed combat skills as a complement to their usual weaponry.
The other possibility is that even armed, you still have use of other limbs: your feet, your free/shield hand, your head, so its not inconceivable to use a simple punch or kick to complement your armed skills mid-combat.
Another path of evolution, perhaps less well-trodden, is the hunter's, either as a pack or solitary. The hunter may be hunting a strong, vicious animal like a large predator (a tiger? a leopard?), so needs to develop a combat style when confronting said beast. Perhaps such experiences led adept hunters to create a system of meeting the beast in a confrontation and so led to the creation of a fighting style.
A hunter is also usually a warrior, so the skills, we can surmise, must translate easily between the two disciplines.
And perhaps the deciding factor as to the style of individual martial arts systems is most likely the environment, with cultural, genetic, environmental and social influences going to shape how a martial art system is founded.
J
There will always have been particular individuals who are extremely adept at their chosen skill, either in some way as a 'natural' talent, perhaps because of good reaction skills, quick movement, strength. strategic thought etc, or through practice of the skill in one way or another, be it direct or indirect (a butcher practices his knife wielding skills everyday for example, and this might be easily translated to battle technique).
Societies naturally attribute those who have such skills as an expert, and, by extension of intent and use, as champion or master. So the inquisitive human mind, such that we have, we search to improve self, for selfless or selfish reasons regardless, but those who do will strive to better their current range of skills.
To continue this premise, it might be easy to make a further assumption that a sword user practising daily with his peers or students might experience being disarmed, so then that practicioner will want to still defend themselves in some way, so unarmed combat becomes a requirement.
We see that a lot of old pugilistic arts revolve around wrestling (and boxing, but I consider the two together as one), so once disarmed, the defender might either make a retreat or, if that is unlikely, to face their opponent without weapons.
This thought might have passed through the minds of any passingly decent fighter, warrior or military commander, and might well have been an issue of concern, so its imaginable that they would have taken steps to focus on unarmed combat skills as a complement to their usual weaponry.
The other possibility is that even armed, you still have use of other limbs: your feet, your free/shield hand, your head, so its not inconceivable to use a simple punch or kick to complement your armed skills mid-combat.
Another path of evolution, perhaps less well-trodden, is the hunter's, either as a pack or solitary. The hunter may be hunting a strong, vicious animal like a large predator (a tiger? a leopard?), so needs to develop a combat style when confronting said beast. Perhaps such experiences led adept hunters to create a system of meeting the beast in a confrontation and so led to the creation of a fighting style.
A hunter is also usually a warrior, so the skills, we can surmise, must translate easily between the two disciplines.
And perhaps the deciding factor as to the style of individual martial arts systems is most likely the environment, with cultural, genetic, environmental and social influences going to shape how a martial art system is founded.
J
