Daito-ryu & Yoshin-ryu

[Nathan Scott]

[Post deleted by user]

[Ellis Amdur]

Nathan -
1. This is the first quote (Sagawa - 2nd hand, so to speak) that gives any substantiation to the unlikely idea that Hoshina taught Takeda.
2. Re the Yoshin ryu "theory" - note my negative evaluation of the idea.
3. Re the Heiho Okugisho connection - per Toby Threadgill, no connection in fact. Although there is some apparent similarity when reading the two, the actual technical practice is quite different.
4. Again, I am noting the similarities between - essentially - ikkajo from "mainline" videos and Ueshiba in 1935 with Takamura-ha Shindo Yoshin-ryu basics. I have never seen the myoden of the latter. Secondly, I note that Kuroda's Shin Shin Takuma-ryu is probably the closest related to anything I've seen to advanced DR, to further debunk an explicit connection to Yoshin-ryu just because they look alike in some ways - as there is no connection with Kuroda's stuff historically. I therefore think such aiki type waza was probably,at one time, far more common at advanced levels.
5. One thing the article set out to establish is that Yoshin-ryu WAS probably responsible in large part for the dissemination of Chinese type ki/kokyu training thruout Japan.
6. The picture - can't remember where I've seen it last. Toby would know. As for the names - I aint the obsessive researcher. I'm the one who paints with the broad brush. Heck, all you'd have to do is get lists of lineages of all kinds of Yoshin-ryu, particularly in the north, and see if any of those names appear in the eimeiroku. Quit your job. Neglect your wife. You will have possibly found some utterly-useless-other-than-satisfying-idle-curiousity information.

Best

[Nathan Scott]

[Post deleted by user]

[Scott Harrington]

Nathan,

Interesting follow up on Ellis’s AJ article regarding Daito-ryu. A convoluted path for this art.

On the Chinese influence, Takeda Shingen seems to me the type not afraid to use outside sources to help him succeed. A big fan of Sun Tzu’s ‘Art of War’ (from which he took the famous saying), I often wonder if he had some ‘foreign consultants’ add a little to the family art.

Looking at the ‘Wu Bei Zhi” (and wondering why the hell didn’t China take over the world!) I can see there would have been much that could have been imported for the battlefield, perhaps by traveling Buddhist scholars. A what if, coulda, mighta. Not too farfetched if we just look at WW II and the import of Jewish physicists to the United States.

Regarding the Yoshin-ryu photograph with Takeda Sokaku, perhaps they were bringing in an outside consultant too, taking what they thought appropriate to ‘fight off’ this upstart Kodokan Judo. Having attended a Toby Threadgill seminar, the theory alone mentioned really opened my eyes. Perhaps a reverse transferal back to Ueshiba-ha Daito-ryu (Aikido.)

Reagarding Takeda Sokaku’s background, below is culled from translated copies of some of the Daitokan’s newsletters. Several things pop out.



Takeda Sokaku’s instructors

Takeda Sokichi (his father) / Sumo, Swordwork, bo, Hozoin Takada-ryu sojutsu

Shibuya Toma (Yokikan dojo) / Ono ha Itto-ryu

Kenkichi Sakakibara / Jiki Shinkage-ryu

Momonoi Shunzo / Kyoshin Meichi-ryu

Acrobatic Troupe / Acrobatics, Unicycle on tightrope

Okinawa / Observed Karate masters

Sakai (in Kumamoto) / Sojutsu

Unknown instructor / Shuriken

Old Ascetic / Esoteric Buddhism

Hoshina Chikanori (Saigo Tanomo)/ Aiki aspect of Daito-ryu
Assistant Priest of the Nikko Toshugu Shrine in Mt. Futara


Various masters in his travels in all 18 martial arts (small bow, kusarigama, naginata, etc.)

To mull about:

He had a solid background. He had a varied background. He made a point (thru his son’s recollection) that he had trained with Hoshina Chikanori.

So, certainly well trained, by ex-samurai, with certifiable lineages.

He wasn’t afraid to try new stuff. This reminds me of an AJ article by Wayne Muromoto (where is the next Furyu issue!) badmouthing some group for having a hodgepodge of stuff in a demo. UUUH! Sounds just like Takeda Sokaku. You make a ryu by stealing stuff.

The aiki part MADE a difference to regular techniques. Take a look at Kodo Horikawa footage and you see him doing jujutsu with aiki and then scenes of pure aiki.

While Stanley Pranin has done FABULOUS work bringing Daito-ryu further out than Draeger’s little recap, a) there is more out there and b) would you trust just one source?

Just imagine a southern historian writing about the War between the States (that’s what They call it), talking about the great leaders and fine soldiers and great victories and then surrendering at Appomatox. Huh! More work needs to be done, from other sources. The language barrier is great but where are the young Pranin’s?


Scott Harrington
Co-author “Aiki Toolbox: Exploring the Magic of Aikido”

[Raff]

Following up, Mr Amdur’s third part on “Daito-ryu’s speculative history”, I would like to make some comments:

Ben Holmes, on his website Best Judo (http://www.bestjudo.com/) does an excellent job in dissecting the Saigo Shiro myth. Perhaps the most salient points are that Saigo, born in 1866, moved to Tokyo in 1882, and at the age of sixteen, enrolled in the Kodokan as Kano’s eighth student.

I wish Mr Holmes also had done some research on Jigoro Kano’s actual fighting abilities when the latter founded the Kodokan in 1882 after barely 5 years of study under three different masters. Kano started his journey in Jujutsu in 1877 (at the age of 17), studying with Fukuda Hachinosuke of the Tenjin shin’yo ryu. Unfortunately, Fukuda died in 1879 at the age of 52 forcing Kano to seek out for a new teacher. His new teacher, Iso Masachi, also from the Tenjin shi’yo ryu was alredy 62 years old and died shortly after Kano’s entrance in 1881. After Iso’s death, Kano met another master: Iikubo Tsunetochi of the kito ryu, a style famous for its nage waza. In 1882, Professor Jigoro Kano decided to establish officially the Kodokan at the Eisho-ji temple where he is said to have wait several months prior seeing finally a first student, Tomita Tsunejiro, crossing the door of his Dojo. We also know that Iikubo helped Kano a lot by teaching at the recently founded Kodokan until his death in 1888 and that Iikubo was far superior to Kano in randori. So, despite his relative inexperience, and his more than disputable skills, Kano founded the Kodokan and started to teach. To teach but not to fight, at least not at one of the various shiai the Kodokan would have to face in the coming years. On the other hand, Saigo was the undisputed champion of the early years of the Kodokan and was never defeated by anybody. I have a really hard time imagining that Kano could instruct a complete beginner and turn him into one of the best Judo player of all times. The relationship between Kano and Saigo is certainly not to be compared to a master/student relationship as it is obvious that Saigo was far superior to Kano as far as fighting abilities are concerned.

The fact that Saigo was a 16 years old fellow should not be the tree which hides the whole forest, a certain Miyamoto Musashi killed his first opponent at the age of the 13 by throwing him to the ground before finishing the guy off with his bo. Who would believe, today, that a 13 years old child could defeat (not to talk about killing?!!!) an adult? It seems rather impossible, but it happened anyway. It is also said that no one could defeat Tokimune Takeda when he was 16, so being young and very skilled, not to say dangerous is possible and so was Saigo Shiro. A last detail, Saigo seems to have enrolled as the seventh student not the eighth but this is just a detail.

1st student: Tomita Tsunejiro who enrolled the 5th June 1882 and one of the Shitenno.
2nd Student: Higuchi Seiko
3rd Student: Arima Noribumi
4th student: Tamakachi Nakajima
5th student: Matsuoka Toraoro
6th student: Arima Noriomi
and then finally Saigo Shiro

A legend that Hoshina may have taught Saigo martial arts (something he never asserted) seems to have grown up, at first independent of Daito-ryu history, perhaps because Hoshina was a high ranking member of the bushi class. How, otherwise, people imagine, could Saigo Shiro have become so brilliant so fast?

I think that we should, here, talk about Saigo’s fight on behalf of the Kodokan against some famous exponent of various Jujutsu schools. In 1883, two men came at the Kodokan to challenge Saigo. This two men were Yokoyama Sakujiro and Tobari Takisaburo both exponent of the Tenjin shin’yo ryu and student of Inoue Heitaro. Saigo defeated both of them, it must be said that Yokoyama was called the Demon (oni) and that he was one of the most feared Jujutsuka of the time. Both men became later member of the Kodokan, Yokoyama, despite his 95 kg, lost his shiai against a 58 kg man but became later nonetheless a Shitenno and contributed very actively in making the Kodokan famous. In 1884, Saigo faced Okuda Matsugoro and defeated him. Two fellow students of Okuda had also come to the Kodokan with him (Ichikawa Daihachi and Otake Morikichi) and were defeated by Sakujiro Yokoyama and Yamashita Yoshiaki (also a shitenno). In 1885, Saigo defeated a Yoshin ryu exponent named Terushima Taro who was a student of the famous Master Totsuka Hikosuke at the Tokyo metropolitan Police Dojo. Finally in 1888, Saigo met another “demon”, Kochi Entaro of the Totsuka-ha Yoshin Ryu who was rumoured to be the best fighter in Tokyo. Anyway, Kochi Entaro like many before him lost his shiai against a much smaller, thinner and lighter opponent.

So, considering the fact that Saigo entered the Kodokan in 1882, started to defeat, fare and square, famous Jujutsuka of the time from 1883, one should actually really wonder how this is possible!! It is obvious that Saigo had a strong background before entering the Kodokan at a very young age. Furthermore, a book was written in 1904 by a certain Arima (one of the very first student to join the Kodokan), we find a description of Saigo techniques:

“His skills were such that, as soon as he was touched by his opponent, his opponent seemed to lose all control over his balance and strength, and would be thrown with ease. How he accomplished this was hard to explain, even if one saw it with one’s eyes”.

I might be wrong but this does look like a perfect description of somebody mastering the principles of Aiki. Such words could also be used to describe some of the most prominent Daito-ryu figures of all time, and, if instead of Saigo, the names of Sokaku Takeda, Yukioshi Sagawa or Kodo Horikawa were to be read, there would be almost nothing to add.

I must also admit that I have not seen the book nor I know where to purchase it. Anyway, it seems that Mr Amdur and Mr Scott have a greater access to Japanese sources than I do, I think that it is definitely worth checking on the book to make sure that this quote does indeed exist and that the translation is correct, especially considering that Mr Arima was a student of judo and thus not a supporter of Daito-ryu.

This idea was then further conflated with the history of Takeda Sokaku, when he, too, was associated with Hoshina

.

So, once again, how could he become so brilliant so fast? In order to get strong, you need , first of all a good teacher, some king of genetic help, talent, will and a good fighting methodology. Saigo had probably access to an outstanding methodology, may be the same methodology Sokaku would later get, I can’t see any other rational explanation. According to Sagawa Shohan, Aiki is a technique that can be taught and learnt, not a divine gift.
How can you explain, for instance, that Sokaku became a martial art phenomenon in Jujutsu just after his relationship with Hoshina when he was mostly famous for his amazing skills with weapons before? Even if Hoshina is not THE man, can not we consider that somebody close to Hoshina or bound to him had very valuable things to teach?

Saigo, undoubtedly a young genius, on a par with some of the teenage Olympians of recent years, was renown for his yama arashi («!mountain storm!»), an allegedly lost technique allegedly derived from Daito-ryu, whatever it was called in those days. The problem with this is that if you peruse any old judo book, there are clear instructions and photographs on how to do yama-arashi, a technique has been largely abandoned in recent years, but not because it was esoteric or secret. As the general skill level of judoka became higher, it, along with many other methods in the total judo curriculum, was abandoned as less effective than many others.

Some researchers, (we also have researchers in Europe) have recently pointed out that the word Yama arashi could be a description of Saigo’s technique, a theory which tends to match quite well with Mr Arima’s description. However, it is true that there is a technique called Yama arashi in judo as well as in many other schools. The great Kyuzo Mifune (a student of Sakujiro Yokayama, one more coincidence probably) displayed his amazing skills in a video which is viewable at google videos. Kyuzo Mifune is a judo legend and the techniques he shows on the video are simply beautiful but sadly belong to judo’s golden past. I invite anybody to watch the video, Yama arashi is displayed in the ashi waza section just after………. Tai otoshi, please take the time to watch the whole video and you will find out that despite his level, Kyuzo Mifune performs a rather unconvincing Yama arashi and that his uke takes a beautiful fall. Coming from a man of the stature of Kyuzo Mifune, this does speak volumes to me, even Kyuzo Mifune is unable to make the technique look efficient, exactly like many Daito-ryu students are unable to make their techniques work effectively against a fully resisting opponent. This is what happens when a very specific skill is not or can not be handed down correctly, people tend to imitate the technique but desperately need their partner’s cooperation to make it work. I believe that this is exactly what happened with Yama arashi, if we consider this name to correspond to one specific technique.

http://video.google.fr/videoplay?doc...q=kyuzo+mifune




How can you say that Yama arashi was abandoned because it was less effective than tai otoshi and harai goshi? If we accept the theory that Yama arashi is a technique, and knowing that Saigo used it to defeated prominent exponents of various Jujutsu schools, how can we objectively explain that Yama arashi is less effective than a very basic and simple5th Kyu technique? You could spend one life in watching all the Judo matches which were ever played but you will find no track of somebody knocking out an opponent by using a throw which could look like Yama arashi. As for the description of Yama arashi, I invite anybody to read it carefully, to practice it and then to apply it successfully on a fully resisting opponent which defends himself. If by simply reading a description on a book, one could learn techniques, most Dojo would probably be closed today. To take a more modern exemple, I feel that I should cite somebody I truly admire: Andy Hug. Hug was a Kyokushin Karate fighter who, by the way was 16 or 17 when he became Swiss champion in the adult category. For those not familiar with Karate, Kyokushin Karate was founded by a Corean, Masutatsu (Mas) Oyama and belongs to the so called “Jissen Karate”, competitions are rather rough and allow full blows and thus Kos. Andy Hug was the first one to use successfully the Kakato geri or axe kick to knock his opponents out. He knocked out many opponents by using this technique, nobody did that so easily before him, and so far, nobody ever did as well as Andy Hug despite the fact that many tried. As a matter of fact many teachers will say that this technique can potentially create some damage but that there are other technique like the gedan mawashi geri or low kick which are much more effective.

It also true that many early judo techniques are not taught anymore, but not because they are less effective, rather much more prosaically because they were not suitable for competition. Sadly, today, judo is almost entirely a matter of competition, one tends to wonder if there is a life in judo after competition!!!! 50 years ago, when a student was promoted black belt, he had access to the famous Kappo or resuscitation methods which were very helpful when somebody was chocked out for instance. Today, this knowledge has almost disappeared and most of the modern instructors do not even know that those methods exist. Why were they abandoned? I do not think that we can say that this is because they were not effective!!!!

At any rate, there is nothing to indicate that Saigo was anything more than a brilliant teenager who flared incandescent at the dawn of judo history, and for unknown reasons (one could speculate endlessly from the mundane to the lurid) suddenly left the Kodokan and broke off all contact with the art and his friends. Accounts of his matches describe a young man of cat-like agility who flipped out of throws with a pivot to land on his hands-and-feet rather than his back, who also possessed magnificent throwing abilities in typical judo rather than someone who dropped people in their tracks with subtle indefinable techniques such as Takeda is described as executing.

Once again, I think that there are many facts which clearly show that Saigo was much more than a excellent fighter who did a very good work at some point of the Kodokan history. Of course, we will never know, and I’m not trying to rewrite history here, but what would have happened if Saigo had lost the first challenges he was issued? The reasons of Saigo’s departure from the Kodokan are now well accepted, Saigo did not suddenly leave, he was expelled by Jigoro Kano like many years later Maeda Mitsuyo (better known as Conde Koma in Brasil) will be expelled.

About the difference between Takeda and Saigo’s techniques, we should consider that accounts of matches are not reliable sources. Here comes an example showing how accounts are unreliable. The great Motobu “Saru” Choki defeated in 1921 in Osaka a large foreigner in what would be called today a no hold barred match. There are many accounts of this fight, but every account is very different when compared. Some say that Motobu knocked out his opponent with the palm pf the hand, other say with a knuckle fist, some say the bout lasted two rounds, other say a couple of minutes, according to some sources, the foreigner was Russian, or German, or Pole, or may be he came from Estonia!!!!!!!!!! Some say that the guy was two meters tall, when other say that he hardly reached 180 cm. Some say he died because of the power of the strike, other say that he survived but was never able to recover from the amazing blow. According to the magazine King which published an article in 1925!!!!! The large foreigner was a boxing world champion, but he could as well have been a wrestler. Some researchers have checked and could not find any track of any world champion in Osaka in 1921 losing a bout. Well, the only common point between all those accounts is that Motobu won and the foreigner lost.

We shall also not forget that Takeda was much older than Saigo when he started to show in public his skills to the people, so it is extremely uneasy to make any kind of comparison between the two. Anyway, it is unfair to say that Saigo was a shooting star, he was much more than that, probably one of the best judo player ever, not to say the best and his contribution are invaluable.


I would like to apologize for my terrible English especially considering the very high standard used in this site.

[bwhite33]

Mr. Deutsch,

Lots of information there, hopefully it will spark more conversation from the boards luminaries, thank you.

I rarely speak for any group, but I don't think you need to apologize for your english in any way, shape or form.

[George Kohler]

Of course, we will never know, and I’m not trying to rewrite history here, but what would have happened if Saigo had lost the first challenges he was issued? The reasons of Saigo’s departure from the Kodokan are now well accepted, Saigo did not suddenly leave, he was expelled by Jigoro Kano like many years later Maeda Mitsuyo (better known as Conde Koma in Brasil) will be expelled.

Mr. Duetsch,

This is the first I have heard Saigo was expelled. Can you give us a source for this?

[Ellis Amdur]

Mr. Deutsch – I will try to respond to your very thought provoking post.
1. I am far from even an amateur on judo history. I do recall that Kano was given a menkyo in Kito-ryu when he defeated Iikubo in randori practice. I do recall, as well, that Kano did do some “fights” in the very first days of judo, but that he quickly “graduated” to headmaster status, so to speak.
2. Honestly, Kano was either a master of men or a master on the mat – or both. Japan was an enormously pragmatic country at that time – and if you did not have skills, you would not draw and keep the young and hot blooded.
3. I trained at Tokai University’s 5th High school judo team, which was the feeder school for the top university judo team in Japan (probably now, but at least in the 1980’s) and they had young men who had less than three years training who were able to beat their 6th dan instructor (who was an ex-champion). You give a young kid who is talented, exemplary information and that, plus passion, youth and resilience will beat the old pro at judo. That Saigo blossomed in such a short time does not mean he had to have learned earlier. I recall the player, but not the name – one of the most brilliant light-weight judoka of recent times who was still a teenager at the Olympics.
4. Kano did take complete beginners and turn them into the best of all time.
5. That Saigo could “beat” Kano (BTW – I don’t know if that is true or not – there are no accounts of that – you have to rely on assumption and inference – AND, Angelo Dundee taught Muhammad Ali how to box).
6. As for Saigo beating the two Tenjin Shinyo-ryu men (Yokoyama and Tobari), honestly this is similar to BJJ blue belts beating judo nidan or sandan. When a clearly superior art comes along (and I’m talking about ground work in BJJ – let’s not get sidetracked in an argument between judo vs. BJJ, please), the art will win. The problem with Tenjin Shinyo-ryu is that the study is “divided” – there are a LOT of kata to learn and a LOT are with/against weapons. Saigo had the “benefit” of concentration on one thing only – body skills. It is possible that, even at his young age, he actually had more hours spent in unarmed, freestyle than either of his challengers.
7. What is known of Musashi’s “duel” at age thirteen is that he was a brawny kid and challenged Arima at an inn, who was astonished at the kid in his face, thinking it a joke. Musashi attacked him suddenly, smashing him with a bo, knocked him down and then beat him to death. It is fair to say that Arima should have been prepared, and once you throw down the gauntlet, the game is on, but this is not the same as the shiai of Saigo or any of the others, which were “fair” fights.
8. As for Tokimune Takeda, I’ve not read independent accounts that he was unbeatable – AND, there is no doubt that he learned Daito-ryu, not only from his father, but also his mother, who also taught. Takeda Tokimune was around it from birth.
9. Your point about Arima’s account is well-taken. Was that an eye-witness account? Saigo’s life has been so fictionalized that I’m asking just to be clear if Arima is “reconstructing” things or actually saw this. It DOES sound like “aiki” stuff nonetheless.
10. My next essay is going to take up WHAT jujutsu ryu Aizu youth could have actually learned. I do NOT believe that Takeda learned from Hoshina – I definitely believe (know) he had a teacher and he, too, developed his skills from a very young age. Where your surmise is in error (again, I don’t want to reveal my “punchline”) is that Takeda showed his skills BEFORE he met Hoshina. Please bear with me for a month or so, because I am awaiting the results of some contacts in Japan which are, hopefully, going to shed some light on this. But I do agree that Takeda was definitely taught aiki – just not from Hoshina.
11. I have seen a video clip on a French film which shows a teenaged Mifune and someone else (I can’t remember) AND their techniques were among the most beautiful judo I’ve ever seen. They, too, teenagers!
12. As for Yama-arashi, if you look at yama-arashi, it is neither fish nor fowl – not harai-goshi, or tai-otoshi or (what’s the name of it!!!!) the technique when you come up inside the lead leg. I’ve read one claim that says that Saigo could bring the technique off because he had very long, almost prehensile toes that he’d use to grab the ankle/shin of the opponent, thus checking him movement and getting kuzushi (if this is considered outlandish, my jujutsu teacher had the same kind of feet, and he practiced on the legs of low tables for hours while doing his homework as a kid, grabbing the legs of the tables with his feet – so it’s not impossible.)
13. BTW – as for kappo and some other aspects lost to the Kodokan, I’ve been informed that Kubota of Tenjin Shinyo-ryu (also a high ranking judoka) has been requested by the Kodokan to teach these methods, thereby again reimporting them to the Kodokan.
14. I, too, am interested in where you’ve heard Saigo was expelled. Further, Maeda, if he was expelled, would have been thrown out for the same reason Kimura was, for a time – for turning pro. (BTW – the Kodokan considered reinstating him as the only person who could beat Geesink in the 1960 Olympics – wouldn’t that have been something to see!!)
15. Your English is wonderful – but one place you may have misinterpreted me is the “shooting star” comment – that is merely an image to illustrate that he flared wonderfully, and then was gone – for reasons we will, barring finding an old diary, never know. It was not intended as a trivialization of his skills. In his brief time, he was, if not the very best, among the very few.
16. Takeda was not that much older when he started to show his skills in public. I do think this is something I can establish, and will, in my next article.
17. Finally, re Saigo, remember he was a war orphan and from a family related to Hoshina, who had lost his entire family. The reasons for the adoption are simple – that the elder would still have a family line, and that the younger would, in fact, have a lineage. And this adoption happened two years after he was in Tokyo. It is fair to say, however, that his childhood is unknown – and who knows what and from whom he might have learned. I simply assert that it is unlikely that it was Hoshina.

My very best regards – a wonderful dialogue. My apologies that my research (if that’s what my speculations can be called) is not finished – they will, I hope further the discussions and hopefully, some real researchers who can dig up the sources.

With respect

[Joseph Svinth]

Regarding unusually talented young fellows, consider Russel Vis and Robin Reed. Both won Olympic gold medals in wrestling in 1924. Their coach in high school was a former AAU national champion. Vis is on record as saying that beating the coach, at age 14, on his first day in training, was way too easy, so that's why he started ignoring the coach and wrestling with Reed, who was about a year older, instead.

In other words, in the absence of documentation, it may be as Glynn Leyshon (the former coach of the Canadian Olympic wrestling team) has written about Canadian Olympic wrestlers: "The older we get, the better we were."

[Joseph Svinth]

(NOTE: Much of what follows is -- or should be -- old hat, as whole paragraphs of the text are verbatim lifts from "Martial Arts in the Modern World," ed. by Thomas A. Green and Joseph R. Svinth, 2003.)

THREAD DRIFT, SO BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT:

The story about the Kodokan expelling Maeda is most kindly described as a crock.

SOME BACKGROUND TO THIS HERESY, IF YOU CARE TO READ ALONG; OTHERWISE, SKIP THE REST OF THIS POST.

In 1903, Maeda was promoted to fourth dan.

In late 1904, Maeda went with Tomita to New York City.

During 1905, Maeda and Tomita gave assorted demos. Demonstration locations include the US Military Academy and assorted Ivy League schools.

During 1906, Maeda began wrestling professionally in New York (state and city). Early opponents include John Piening ("the Butcher Boy") in July 1906.

In 1907, Maeda went to London. In England, he taught judo and wrestled professionally. The judo school went out of business, but he did well in the wrestling. For example, in February 1908, he reached the finals of a wrestling tournament held in London (he lost to the heavyweight champion, Jimmy Esson) (Health and Strength, February 15, 1908: 152). In March 1908, he defeated middleweight wrestler Henry Irslinger in a match that Health and Strength (March 14, 1908: 257) described as "one of the squarest, straightest wrestling matches... seen in England for many years."

During 1908, Maeda also wrestled professionally in Belgium, Scotland, and Spain. The angles employed in those days would hardly seem out of place today. For example, when Maeda and Ono went to Spain in June 1908, their partners included Phoebe Roberts, a Welsh woman billed as the female judo champion of the world. (Svinth, 2001a). The wrestlers also admitted whispering directions to one another during matches (Watt, 1995-2002, Part 8: 3).

While in Spain, Maeda adopted the stage name Maeda Komaru. The name meant "Troubled Maeda," and was an ironic allusion to his financial troubles. In time, the name was changed to Conde Koma, or Count Koma.

In December 1908, Maeda went to Cuba, and during the next seven months, he allegedly gave 400 public demonstrations.

In 1910, Maeda was wrestling in bullfighting rings in Leon, Mexico (near Guadalajara). Perhaps to escape the tensions of the incipient Mexican Revolution, he then returned to Cuba, where he had matches in Havana and Guantanamo.

During late 1911 and early 1912, Ono Akitaro, Satake Shinjiro, and Ito Tokugoro joined Maeda in Havana. All three men were very good wrestlers, and with Maeda, they became known as the Four Kings of Cuba.

In July 1909 and January 1910, Maeda went to Mexico City. As usual, he worked arranged matches designed to impress the crowds (Lundin, 1937, 93; Watt, 1995-2002, Part 15: 3). Subsequently, the Mexican promoters imported European champions to challenge the Foreign Menace. In other words, this was standard professional wrestling ballyhoo (Lundin, 1937, 93-94).

And, where all this is leading: On January 8, 1912, the Kodokan promoted Maeda to fifth dan. There was some resistance to this by a faction in Japan that did not approve of professional wrestling. Nonetheless, many Japanese viewed Maeda's pioneering efforts with pride. "The Cubans are taking fancy to our jujutsu," said Japan Times on November 1, 1912. "Indeed, this peculiar martial art of Nippon has become such a great fad among the islanders that three Japanese experts of jujutsu, all graduates of the Ko-do-kan of Tokyo, are at present in Cuba teaching the art to the wealthy classes of Cubans."

THE KODOKAN'S OFFICIAL POSITION ON PROFESSIONAL WRESTLING

For the Kodokan's official position on professional wrestling, see the commentary on Maeda's compatriot Ito Tokugoro at http://ejmas.com/jalt/2006jalt/jcsart_Svinth_0906.html -- it's a couple pages from the Japanese-language publication "Judo," 1916, Volume 5, pp. 85-86. The English-language summary of that article reads:

"A person has questioned the use of Kodokan judo during competitions against American boxers and/or wrestlers. The questioner brought up the recent match between Tokugoro Ito, a fifth degree judoist, and the American professional wrestler Ad Santel. [Ed. Note: This match took place in San Francisco on February 5, 1916.] The questioner said that Mr. Ito's defeat during such mixed matches reflected negatively on Kodokan judo. To prevent this, the questioner recommended the prohibition of such matches."

"The Kodokan replied that it permits mixed bouts with boxers and wrestlers for research purposes, but prohibits such bouts when they are employed for personal monetary gain. Regarding this match, the Kodokan noted that Mr. Ito had been away from Japan for number of years, and the lack of opportunity to train with stronger opponents may have contributed to his lack of judo ability. In addition, his fifth degree judo rank did not mean that his knowledge represented the ultimate in judo technique. In fact, fifth degree was the mid-point in ranking between first to tenth degrees. Therefore, the Kodokan concluded that Mr. Ito's loss did not reflect negatively on the efficacy of judo techniques, but instead on the poor showing of Mr. Ito."

BACK TO MAEDA

Maeda's promotion to seventh dan in judo was dated November 27, 1941, so the certificate arrived after his death. However, the Kodokan did not forget Maeda's contributions to spreading judo to Brazil, and in May 1956, it dedicated a stone memorial to him in Hirosaki City. Notables present at the dedication included Kano Risei, president of the Kodokan, and Samura Kaichiro, tenth dan.

[John Driscoll]

Nathan –

The picture Ellis referenced in his article, “Genesis a Speculative History of Daito-ryu - Part II, The Wind in the Willows,” is on page 24 of Aikido Journal, #117, Volume 26, No. 2, 1999. The photograph appears in the article, “Interview with Yukiyoshi Takamura.”

Ellis in his discussion of Shiro Saigo references Saigo’s use of Yama Arashi to defeat a number of opponents. [For anyone not familiar with Yama Arashi as performed by Shiro Saigo, the technique is described in detail by Kyuzo Mifune in the Cannon of Judo, see page 202, and by Toshiro Daigo in Kodokan Judo Throwing Techniques, see pages 76 – 78. (NOTE: Daigo states Yama Arashi is a technique adopted by Kodokan Judo from Sekiguchi-ryu, where the technique was referred to as Yama Otoshi.) Illustrations of Yama Arashi is available at JudoInfo.com (http://www.judoinfo.com/images/nauta/yamaaras.gif) and http://www.judoinfo.com/images/anima...maarashi.htm.]

I have attempted to determine if this Yama Arashi appears in the repertoire of Daito-ryu without success. Can you provide any insight regarding this Yama Arashi and Daito-ryu?

Lastly, Stan Pranin indicated Hoshina Chikanori’s name appeared multiple times in Takeda’s eimeiroku in response to my question fielded in the Aikido Journal Forum. Since it appears you have access to a copy of Sokaku Takeda’s emereioku, can you very the existence of multiple entries of Hoshina Chikanori’s name in the emereioku. Thanks in advance for your thoughts. Regards, JED.

[Brian Griffin]

I wish Mr Holmes also had done some research on Jigoro Kano’s actual fighting abilities when the latter founded the Kodokan in 1882 after barely 5 years of study under three different masters. Kano started his journey in Jujutsu in 1877 (at the age of 17), studying with Fukuda Hachinosuke of the Tenjin shin’yo ryu. Unfortunately, Fukuda died in 1879 at the age of 52 forcing Kano to seek out for a new teacher. His new teacher, Iso Masachi, also from the Tenjin shi’yo ryu was alredy 62 years old and died shortly after Kano’s entrance in 1881. After Iso’s death, Kano met another master: Iikubo Tsunetochi of the kito ryu, a style famous for its nage waza. In 1882, Professor Jigoro Kano decided to establish officially the Kodokan at the Eisho-ji temple where he is said to have wait several months prior seeing finally a first student, Tomita Tsunejiro, crossing the door of his Dojo. We also know that Iikubo helped Kano a lot by teaching at the recently founded Kodokan until his death in 1888 and that Iikubo was far superior to Kano in randori.

Some time ago I made this post that should help dispel a couple of misconceptions.

Briefly:
-Kano is known to have studied with three or four other teachers during his teenage years, before he went to Tokyo in 1877
-Kano may have studied longer with Fukuda than commonly thought, and did lots of hard randori while training under him and serving as his representative, often teaching and training daily, instructing kata and then doing randori with everyone in a class of 20 or 30.
-Kano's Tenjin-Shin'yo qualifications include a menkyo from Fukuda and a shihan license from Iso (then head of the Ryu)
-Saigo was a young teenager studying Tenjin-Shin'yo when Kano met him.
-The 16yr old Saigo followed the young Tenjin-Shin'yo shihan when he opened his new dojo, named Kodokan. Saigo proved to be a formidable technician and fighter some years later when he was 18-23yrs old.
-Iikubo (then head of Kito Ryu) had always dominated Kano in randori until Kano had his revelation about the principle of kuzushi. Afterward Kano began throwing his teacher. Upon explaining his insight, Iikubo granted Kano menkyo kaiden in Kito Ryu.


No one has ever really demonstrated that Saigo ever learned any Daito Ryu at all, and in fact it seems unlikely. If he was exposed to any back in Aizu, it had to have been before he reached puberty. It seems more likely that his fighting skill came from the training he undertook in his 'teens and early-20s in Tenjin-Shin'yo, Kito, and Kodokan--almost all of it under the supervision of a guy named Kano.

[Scott Harrington]

I certainly think that Ellis has more research material available from his many sources, but sometimes the conclusion can still be wrong. His article includes the following lines:

Takeda Tokimune has an apparent trump card in his account ….

In essence, Takeda Tokimune seems to be superimposing a shadow history …

Tokimune asserts …

Tokimune then asserts …

Tokimune claims ….

According to Tokimune…

He (Tokimune) is, I believe, trying to make history conform to Daito-ryu…


The beginning of the article seems to be about the shifty Takeda Tokimune, ex-police officer, making up his family art lineage (not that that hasn’t been done before, with a host of Tengu, divine lights, 100 days of meditation, perhaps some bad sushi the night before…). I am wondering if he did make this up, did it then backward distribute to all the various spin-off Daito-ryu branches from his father’s instruction? Was it a “Hey, great marketing stuff – use it or lose it” type of thing? I don’t know.

I have seen a lineage chart, from one of these branches, back to the very roots of time (or nearly so) that pretty much mirrors the party line. Cross-contaminants? Did they ALL jump on the supposed false history? Unlikely.

On a side note, some of the history of Takeda Sokaku, propagated by Pranin, has been used to say that early in his training, it was primarily sword related from which he then ‘developed’ his jujutsu and aikijujutsu. [On a side note, if the lineage is bogus, with tons of asserts, then why should other parts be believed and studied]

In a famous story about a young Takeda Sokaku trying to enter a mountain pass unmolested by three brigands, the Pranin version seems quite tame while still lethal. A further look at this from the Daitokan newsletters states:

Sokaku slowly approached them with this plan (to use unarmed tactics because of the narrowness of the pass prevented his sword to be drawn as he entered– my comment, SDH) while the three watched his every move carefully and silently. He raised his right foot high pretending to step over the prone man, but instead stomped on his side breaking his ribs using a killing-art called denko no satsu which he executed in a flash. He then delivered a single blow to the middle of his forehead of the man on the left with his left fist using a technique called uto no satsu (sun and moon killing art) executed with the speed of an arrow. Then, at an unguarded moment, he executed a blow to the cheek of the man on the right with his iron-fan which he had quickly drawn with his right hand (katsumi no satsu: sword art for killing in the mist). The iron-fan that Sokaku used in the surprise attack against the three bandits was made of solid iron into a fan shape and weighed approximately 750 grams. The bandit struck in the cheek fell over on his back. Sokaku used ippondori to pin the bandit on the left who had drawn his broadsword intending to kill him on top of his prone accomplice on the right. He then broke the right arm of the man on his left with his iron-fan. Sokaku next kicked the sides of the three men breaking their ribs and broke their feet with his iron fan.


Conclusions drawn:
1. It could all be made up
2. While sumo was his father’s business, Sokaku knew jiu jitsu.
3. Joint locks (ippon dori / ude osae / ikkyo eg.) were in this art.
4. Atemi (both kicks, punches, and tessen) were a part of this art.
5. Sokaku was a badass.

A later account regarding his meeting a Karate expert is finished with a reverse throw for a pin. Once again – jiu jitsu is used by a young Takeda Sokaku decisively.

On a side note, from observation of the Takuma Hisa branch of Daito-ryu techniques (what I call the ‘pretzel’ line), while technically very complicated, there seems to be a lack of the aiki as seen in the Kodo and Sagawa branch. Takuma Hisa had done sumo, and he, with Takeda Sokaku would play a little after training sessions. Once again, is there a different skill set involving aiki? Just as one could skip the section on divination or spear or kusarigama, perhaps aiki was just a subset (but very important and difficult one).

Scott Harrington
Co-author: “Aiki Toolbox: Exploring the Magic of Aikido”

[Ellis Amdur]

Scott - A few points
1. I never said nor indicated that Takeda Tokimune was "shifty" nor that he made up the family lineage. It's a little more complex than this - Part IV in hopefully a month or so.
2. I definitely didn't said that Takeda Sokaku derived Daito-ryu from the sword. Quite the contrary - I've asserted that I don't believe that whatsoever on numerous occasions. (As far as I can tell, you are stating that S. Pranin has suggested this - I don't think that's so, but I won't speak for him - but on the off-chance I'm associated with the theory, I categorically disagree with it).
3. I'm in the process of tracking down some information to confirm (or at least substantiate) a theory I have of the roots of Daito-ryu in previous jujutsu. Part Two was to debunk the idea that both T. Threadgill and I previously had that it might be Yoshin-ryu. (hence the title of the thread).
4. Finally, the shiai with the karate-expert is uniquely Takeda Tokimune's. In a recent conversation with Stan Pranin, he mused that the great untold part of Takeda Sokaku's life was the nearly twenty years he travelled around Kyushu and other places - before he came back to recorded "sightings." This, he said, may be where some of the truths of Takeda's discoveries lie - but, to date, there are no extant records of his travels, other than that he travelled with a circus, and tried techniques with unnamed karate experts.

Best

[Grant Periott]

[QUOTE=Scott Harrington]
On a side note, from observation of the Takuma Hisa branch of Daito-ryu techniques (what I call the ‘pretzel’ line), while technically very complicated, there seems to be a lack of the aiki as seen in the Kodo and Sagawa branch. Takuma Hisa had done sumo, and he, with Takeda Sokaku would play a little after training sessions. Once again, is there a different skill set involving aiki? Just as one could skip the section on divination or spear or kusarigama, perhaps aiki was just a subset (but very important and difficult one).

Scott, there is definately "aiki" used in the Takumakai. Perhaps the way it is executed / expressed in form varies from your experience. I suggest you take an opportunity to train with a member of Takumakai should the chance arise.

What do you mean by "pretzel line"?

regards

Grant