what would be an example of a western martial art?

Villeins would probably have been armed by the lord. Remember serfs weren't allowed to move or even marry without the consent of their Lord. Therefore the lord would keep the weapons in the castle and then dole them out when he called on them to fight. Only the knights were trained professional fighters who were properly armed and armoured. It's why a few knights in a castle could control vast areas of England. They were the mechanised infantry of the era.

Read the 1152 Assizes and you see laws like. You cannot export arms and that no lord may have more arms than he is legally entitled to.

The Bear.

 

OK, so I take some time off from this forum and look what I miss!

That kinda depends on who you believe. Period writers were pretty clear that any joint locks, chokes, or throws, etc. they were doing was pure CaCC, not any of that new-fangled Jiu-Jitsu stuff. OTOH, CaCC rule sets, as it was currently being practiced when JJ showed up in England in 1899 was seldom, if ever, practiced with chokes and joint-locks.

However, I have unassailable proof in the form of a manual I am currently republishing that many joint-locks and chokes, specifically labeled as CaCC, do, indeed, predate JJ.

My personal take on it is that the rules changed/morphed from about 1860-1899 to make most of those illegal in amateur bouts (and eventually were applied to pro) and when JJ came to England, it made all the CaCC guys nervous and Nationalistic. Thus they had to "rediscover" said locks, chokes, etc.

As has been pointed out, it's enjoying something of a Renaissance.

A bit more to it than that. It appears, at best guesses for current research in the Bartitsu Society, that it was JJ mixed with la Canne Vigny. Boxing & Savate were taught, at an educated guess, so that the Bartitsuka could know how to deal with them.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

Just as one of those "niggles" you mention, historically, this form of Pugilism was still called "Boxing" by everyone in most cases. Sometimes they'd use the term "Pugilism" but usually just "Boxing." Generally, we differentiate it by name between "Pugilism" and "Boxing" because 1) Everybody is familiar with modern Marquis of Q. Boxing and this clearly says 'this is different' and 2) It sounds more Victorian snooty and cool.

Oh, and, again, historically speaking, kicking was kept to a very minimum. Period manuals, when it mentions it, either calls it dirty fighting and the mark of a low class individual (in the Broughton era) or, in the London Prize Ring era, it was discussed as a clearly illegal 'foul' "but here's how some people get away with doing it, but don't you do it 'cuz it's illegal <wink wink nudge nudge>"

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

I was referring more to there being wrestling in other European countries before England, I didn't mean submissions at all. I was under the impression that its pretty common knowledge that the submissions of catch wrestling owe little (and in many cases pre-date) to those developed in Jiu Jitsu.

some one already replied with that same answer, as I said to them within travelling distance to me I can go and learn BJJ, Japanese Jiu Jitsu, Judo and if I really wanted to with a little extra effort greco - roman wrestling and even sambo. the same is not true of catch wrestling, and this is the case for most grappler's. I acknowledged that there is plenty of interest in catch wrestling and a number of people doing regular seminars but that to me is not a true renaissance.

again someone already replied with the same answer, a bit pedantic anyway is it not pretty clear my comment was made tongue in cheek ?

 

I know several people teaching CaCC. It is still a bit sparse so it can sometimes be hard to find an instructor. But here's the thing about CaCC: It's just western wrestling with a specifically defined rule set, when you get right down to it. There are any number of western wrestlers who's lineage flows back to CaCC guys, even if they don't practice under CaCC rules typically.

Nope. There are plenty of people in their 20-40's learning and practicing CaCC. Even if there weren't, it's primarily a rule set which "allows" or "disallows" certain techniques and there are gazillions of wrestlers who's coach's coach's coach was trained in a CaCC gym. It's sort of like if I said, "my coach taught me to play tennis and his coach did too, but my coach's coach's coach also played bad-mitten and ping-pong so I looked up the rules and am going to try getting some of my guys to play too."

OK, that's a major over-simplification, but you get the idea.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

Well, sort of yes, sort of no.

Tani & Uyenishi were both ko-ryu trained but they made their major accomplishments before Barton-Wright brought them to London was their Kosen competition records. IMS, after they came to England, both joined the Kodokan (which is, arguably, not ko-ryu). Then, when Bartitsu folded, the one went off into the beer hall circuit and the other founded the British Jiu Jitsu Society.

From what we can tell, Barton-Wright intended JJ to be the primary unarmed component of his art, perhaps to the exclusion of any real effort in either Boxing or Savate. We know that he knew how to box (or at least he thought he did) because, after Tani left, Barton-Wright wrote that he'd tried to teach Tani to box but that worthy had not talent for it. Tani, for his part, seems to have been of the opinion, "why should I bother with boxing? JJ is way better, dude!" It is the current opinion of the Bartitsu Society that Boxing and Savate were taught at the Bartitsu club mostly so that Bartitsuka would know how to use JJ &tc. against them. Barton-Wright, from what we can tell, intended la Canne Vigny to be the primary (sole?) weapon component of his art and there does seem to have been some effort made to merge JJ with Vigny's stick system.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

Mea culpa.

In my defense, there's a pretty common thread, particularly among bjj players, that CaCC is just a bunch of wrestlers with serious bjj envy trying to spackle a coat of sub-grappling on to something that never really had it. ...pretty much the exact same argument as between JJ exponents and CaCC exponents 100 years ago.

Which is why I wrote, "As has been pointed out"

Just because CaCC is not as available in Scotland as you would like does not mean that there is not a Renaissance. While I stipulate that CaCC is not as common as BJJ, Judo, Sombo, et all, there are teachers, there are students, and their numbers are growing at a rapid rate. That's kinda the definition of "Renaissance," no? A 'revival'???

Take it easy. I'm not trying to start a fight.

I read the whole thread (all 5 pages) before replying and I certainly didn't see the post (other than mine) which discusses the fact that Boxing and Savate appear, with current best understanding, to have been a "know how to fight against these" element of the Bartitsu training. 'Scuse me if I missed it.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

In know, but if I were to say boxing everyone's going to think of two athletes in a ring beating each other with big
gloves rather than two women settling a quarrel in the town square with what is now basically UFC.

I'm a great admirer of French fencing, and thus of dirty tricks and (as a French instructor taught me) the philosophy 'I ain't dead yet'.

 

Fair enough.

While true, I would like to point out that, particularly under the Broughton era, but also to some degree under the LPR, just because you could "get away with it under the rules" didn't mean it was particularly healthy to do so. This was especially true for things which might be considered not in "the spirit" of boxing. To be blunt, if you ****ed off the fans in attendance ("The Fancy") they might just very well storm the ring and beat you to death. Seriously.

I still remember a fight record in Swift's "The Hand-book to Boxing," which the author writes "Deaf Burke and O'Rourke fought in America. Ring broken in; the "Deaf Un" obliged to cut his stick for safety." (fight on May 12, 1837) I had no idea what the phrase meant and had to ask.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

Fortunately I favour fencing over boxing - so fair play is less relevant, since in the time period I wouldn't be likely to have spectators in quite the same way.

 

blank assumptions aren't much of a defence, especially when the person your assuming about's grappling experience is not confined to just bjj.

 

You seem pretty determined to take offense.

How shall we handle this? Duel maybe?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

hehe

Well, I admit that I'm not much for "pokey swords" and all, but a lot of my friends are and I've learned to respect 'em.

But yeah, duels were pretty ugly business. Have you seen some of the recorded Bowie Knife duels? YIKES!

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

pistols at dawn