How "old" is your art?

[Shorinryu Sensei]

I just posted about this same thing in the Korean Martial Arts Forum, so I figured I'd toss it out for everybody else to ponder.

 

Just how old is your martial art, and what exactly determines where that time frame starts counting?

 

For instance, there are some systems and sensei that claim their martial art is 2,000 years old (or more). To which I say...*!!!.

 

Why do I doubt that figure? Well, if you art is 2,000 years old..or even 500 years old...have they NEVER changed anything in their art at all during that time period? Nothing at all? No new techniques? No changes at all?

 

You see, in my opinion...warped as it is sometimes...I feel that anytime you make a change to the system...something halfway significant like a new break fall technique or grappling perhaps where before you didn't..that you have just markedly changed the system to something different, and in my opinion, at that point you need to restart your time clock in regards to how old your system is...because it is no longer the same system that it was prior to the changes. Does that make sense, or am I the one that's full of *?

 

With that in mind, the system I choose to practice is somewhere around 200 years old in its present form. We are actually trying to regress (go backwards) to the older ways as far as our research can take us. This is a daunting task, as Okinawa lost many of its records and practioneers during WWII. We're definitely not a "new and improved" system, which is the way that I like it. We kick, punch, grapple, lock and have all kinds of fun making pretzels out of each other. What more could you want?

[delta1]

Just how old is your martial art, and what exactly determines where that time frame starts counting?

 

American Kenpo- clock starts in the 50's, when Ed Parker started developing it. The last really significant changes he made were probably 20 25 yrs ago. But the art is designed to change and be changed perpetually. It is supposed to change in response to new threats or methods. It is changed by the practitioner to suit his style and as he progresses.

[manuelito]

tkd, shotokan and bjj are in the 50-100 catagory.

 

wing chun is the 100-500 catagory.

 

but ofcourse this is based on what it is today.

 

like many others i was told that these arts go back thousands of years, but i just have a hard time excepting that fact.

[Master Jules]

Goju goes back to the 1920's....but with roots in white crane.....its history is much older

[Sasori_Te]

At the risk of hijacking this post I want to make an observation. A lot of people seem to be VERY caught up in the whole "My art is thousands of years old so it must be good" thing.

 

I'm not saying that this is what you intended with your post Shorin Ryu Sensei. After reading many of your posts here I know better. I'm really commenting on the way some people have responded to your post with seemingly qualifying statements.

 

Does it really matter how old an art is as to whether it is effective or not? I too am proud of the history of the arts that I have taken, but it is just that, history. If you think about it, the "style" is all in the name and philosophy anyway. The human body only moves so many different ways with only a finite number of combinations of those ways.

 

I was trying to make a point somewhere here in all this rambling so I'll stop now before it's lost any further.

 

It seems my new style will be in IsshinRyu which originated in the 1950's with Shimabuku, Tatsuo Sensei. I'm done for now.

[KF Dude]

Hung-Ga Kuen comes from the Southern Shaolin Temple. I've been told it's about 450+ years old. The older stories about how the style developed are difficult to confirm for obvious reasons. Wong Fei Hung is credited with formalizing the style we know today.

[karatekid1975]

Sasori_Te, good post. I have to agree. Some people pick the martial art that fits them, not what the history is. Heck, when I did TSD, I didn't know the history. I didn't care how old it was. I picked it, because the instructor was good (from a novice point of view, and I turned out to be right). I might do TKD now, but I picked it (or this school) because of the instructor, not the art.

 

Just my opinion

[Master Jules]

I agree with Sasori Te as well.

[White Warlock]

Just to be a bugger, i marked the, "Christ was a teenager" option on that poll.

 

I have cared little for historical authenticity of arts, except to understand the basis of some of the theories. What has always mattered to me, is applicability. So when i see or hear something about a system being thousands of years old, I am intrigued, not disgusted. It doesn't matter to me, really. San soo, for example, is argued to be thousands of years old, and yet it is also argued that tsoi li fut is of the same origins, as are many other styles. So, in truth, as Shorin stated... what was and what is are two entirely different things. What is studied today is very likely far and away what was studied then... if indeed it was studied at all.

 

It's fun though, to look at the various arguments posed to justify the 'authenticity' of a system... when truly all that matters, is if the 'average' practitioner of said system can fight their way out of a paper bag.

[Flying Tiger]

The Manabi-Masho Ju-jitsu system was created in the 80's (at least that's my understanding) by Soke John H. Casarez. It supposed to incorporate aspects from Karate, Aikido, Judo, and Ju-jitsu. My instructor, who was Soke's student, also threw some Ninjitsu in. I would give a date for Tang Soo Do, but I don't exactly recall. I think its from the 50-100? year span. I would appreciate it if anyone would like to tell me, either by posting or email-- m_syner@yahoo.com