Regional koryu

[nicojo]

So, Japan being the country it is, various regions developed over time a sense of shared cultural identity, in some part because of the relative isolation of each part. In other words, certain places in Japan today define themselves as having a local specialty--this kind of ramen (Hakata) or that kind of working class attitude (Osaka) or whatever. Some of this is no doubt played up by local tourism bureaus but some of it has a sort of truth--the various regional dialects certainly show the effect of isolation.

And of course other countries have the same thing going on.

But my question is whether this can be seen in koryu. I have heard of certain koryu like Maniwa Nen-ryu being relatively famous in their district, even though they are so localized. And Jigen-ryu as well. And Kage-ryu seems to be a very local expression according to their particular regional history--their use of long swords is something that probably couldn't have been retained in other regions.

What I'm specifically wondering is if on a larger scale this is possible: do people draw conclusions on various ryu according to the region they are from? Many of our treasured koryu correspondents seem to be tied to Narita, Chiba, and certain other Tokyo-area ryu. Others are Nagoya. Perhaps there are common characteristics because of the region? And what are they? So what about a ryu from Tottori? Is there a sort of general characteristic from that prefecture? Are the Okayama ryu like Takenouchi similar in attitude to each other, but different from next door in Osaka? Or can we even talk about it because we don't know of any such characteristics? Or we are still unable to move from reduction to abstraction, then back again.

Well hopefully it is interesting to talk about.

[kabutoki]

Hi,
I really like that question. I think one part of the answer in the case of Tokyo is the attraction Edo/Tokyo had eversince it rose from being a fishing village to being the "navel" of Japan. I speculate that some people moved to that area, taking their locally flavored schools with them. Another question would then be, did the schools lose some flavor or were they able to retain most of it.

Realizing I posed a question rather than answering one,

Karsten

[wmuromoto]

Interesting question.

If at all, the koryu world is so small that the amount of people doing it and studying it in the West isn't all that many, so matters of opinion, research and classifications may stir up a hornet's nest in a relatively small pond. So who cares, really? That said, I haven't formally tried to classify all the koryu that I've seen or read about, but generally, when sometimes talking with my peers here or in Japan, we sometimes make comments about this and that a koryu. In lots of older koryu, they have a specific location, perhaps even a specific shrine, and domain connected to them, like the Maniwa Nen-ryu. Even some teachers in the TSKSR, from what I heard, were rather dubious about the notion of being able to transmit their ryu outside of Japan due to its localization and specific connections to certain deities, politics, etc. So yes, perhaps way, way back, one could say that Mimasaka, for example, had Takeuchi-ryu. Kyushu had Jigen-ryu. Then came the enlargement and urbanization of Osaka, Kyoto and Edo, which pulled samurai from various provinces together into large cities where dojo of ryu from their provinces were opened and interchanges and development happened at a rapid pace.

So we have to take into consideration the changes that time and social changes bring to the koryu. They're not necessarily unchanging edifices. Looking at some ryu, sometimes some of my peers will say, "Oh, such and such a ryu is an inaka budo," i.e., it's got some characteristics of being a rustic, "unpolished" style. This is in comparison to many ryu that went to the big city lights of Edo, Osaka or Kyoto,where they interacted with other ryu and developed a more "graceful" overlay, a more sophisticated approach than just the "whack them upside the head as hard as you can" techniques. And some ryu, whether from an outlying province or not, were developed by well-traveled samurai who already, in the beginning of their ryu, had a more polished approach. Certainly, when you look at the final incarnation of Musashi's techniques in the Niten Ichi-ryu, after years of his working to refine his theories, you see a more polished style even though he introduced it in Kyushu, far from the center of government and Edo life.

One can compare, then, the Maniwa Nen-ryu, which pretty much remains a localized provincial ryuha to Ono-ha Itto-ryu, which had its greatest developments in big-city Edo, and see the influence of social interactions and city stimulations on a koryu as compared to keeping a ryuha in its outlying locale and keeping out a lot of outside influences.

The problem with openly discussing categorizing a koryu according to this "inaka budo" term is that it can be regarded as derisive, as "dem dere country hicks" kind of prejudice. And it's not always applicable, as the Niten Ichi-ryu demonstrates. Or how do you describe the Yagyu Shinkage-ryu, which was developed in a quiet little town in Yamato, but then probably changed and got much more sophisticated when it opened dojo in Edo and Nagoya and elsewhere, and served the higher class of samurai? And how to describe the Shinto (Shindo) Muso-ryu jo? When Shimizu Takaji went to Tokyo, he realized he had to develop kihon and other practise methods to teach non-samurai moderns. He brought his concepts back and Otafuji and other sensei in Kyushu adopted his ideas because they were good ideas. But even now, you will see stylistic differences between the "Kyushu" sensei and those who studied in Tokyo, in the big city.

Another term, which could also be considered derisive, unfortunately, is that you could look at a koryu and figure out its level, i.e., if the koryu was meant for lower-ranking samurai or higher ranking samurai. A koryu like Yagyu Shingan-ryu could thus possibly be thought of as an "ashigaru budo," i.e., a fighting art for footsoldiers and therefore carried with it the thinking and strategems appropriate for that class of warriors, because of certain stylistic tendencies, whereas certainly the YSR may be thought of as a ryuha for the higher ranked samurai: officers and leaders, etc.

The problem is that this, too, is not a definition that you cannot set in ice for any koryu. Take the Muso Jikiden Eishin-ryu, for example. It has so many strains and stylistic differences between teacher to teacher and even a cousin ryuha in the Muso Shinden-ryu that to describe and categorize it in is entirety would be pretty hard. Within the ryu itself are different social levels once represented by the Shimomuraha and Tanimuraha, and there were changes of headmasters between the two factions, and different current strains are mixtures of the two, and within the Eishin-ryu itself, you have a stylistic difference brought on by social status due to the influence of Yamanouchi Hougen (Toyotake? not at my notes right now...), who came from a daimyo family. Yamanouchi's influence on the ryu led to his stylistic differences being called Tonosama No Iai; the daimyo lord's style of iai, which is still taught by some teachers. It's also mentioned in Iwata's book Iai No Hondo. Okay, that doesn't work all the time, either.

One of my teachers claims that there's another way to classify koryu. Ryu that have a lineage to the Kage system; such as the Kage-ryu, Shinkage-ryu, Takeuchi-ryu, Kyo Hachi-ryu, and their offshoots, etc. are all subsumed under the larger family type of the Kage-ryu, so we have a classification that is not geographic but lineal, i.e., stylistically and historically related, and even perhaps familial. He theorized that the Kage-ryu have mikkyo and okuden concepts through Aisu Ikosai, Kuramadera, and other sources, and that it is also connected to the shigojin (guardian deities) of Marishiten and Hachiman. Therefore, a Kage-related ryu is a Genji (Minamoto) ryu, because Marishiten and Hachiman were the shigojin of the Genji. Such ryu may have different methodologies but may share not only similar philosophies but also esoteric notions and approaches to strategies, as well as family connections. You could therefore say that even a school of etiquette, such as the Ogasawara-ryu, is a Genji ryuha because the Ogasawara are related to the Genji.

Other ryu may be classified then as being non-Genji, or apolitical as far as family lines go. But then you run far afield from trying to classify ryuha based on similarities that you can see, can't you? There's not much similarity between the Ogasawara-ryu and the Takeuchi-ryu in terms of techniques or emphasis, for example.

Classification by a ryu's chronology may be another way to demarcate koryu from each other. When did they start? Pre-Edo, Edo, or post-Edo? In many cases, you can get a pretty good guess on a ryuha's age by looking at their techniques. For example, from a koryu jujutsu person's eyes, Daito-ryu techniques look to be around mid-Edo, at the earliest, and probably Meiji or Post-Meiji. That corresponds to the controversy surrounding the true date of the origins of Daito-ryu. Many of its adherents claim that it goes way, way back, but many outsiders look at the dearth of the ryu's internal documentation and lack of external references, and then look at the waza and reach similar conclusions. Not that it's the final one, and I certainly could be wrong, but as I said, it's only my ignorant opinion. But that says nothing about the style, techniques or viability, does it? Or should it?

In a similar vein, going slightly abroad, you can also look at all the variations of Daito-ryu, judo and Hakko-ryu found in the States and place them as being post-1800s, such as BJJ and Danzan-ryu, not only by their stated history, but by their stylistic tendencies. The Gracie style and Danzan-ryu are legitimate ryu that make no bones about their provenance. They are what they are. But in a similar way, people who have seen a lot of koryu can therefore look at photos or videos of bogus made-up suddenly-ancient ryu and most of the time figure out rather quickly that despite what their adherents are claiming, these guys made up their stuff in their garage on a slow summer day with too much time on their hands and a bottle of Thunderbird warmed over on the table.

So...well, I wasted half an hour and haven't really answered your question, have I? I just raised more questions. Oh well.

--Wayne Muromoto

[nicojo]

Most of the time I ask questions like that only to hear people smarter than me talk. Less from a need for a solid answer than to get a sense of the various puzzle pieces at hand, and still missing. Thank you very much for the indulgence. I don't approach this sort of thing with the idea that there's a best classification or research strategy, but that various lenses of study overlap and help get a person to understand what they are doing.

I had thought that the edict to travel to Edo might be a factor--since then, I think many people approach Japan-studies from a Tokyo-lens. Perhaps many ryu adopted YSR or Itto-ryu things, subsuming or absorbing them, changing them to meet their ryu's needs. For me I don't really care about evaluative judgements like "It's no longer pure! It's no longer effective!" I just like hearing about it. One person's "citified degradation" is another's "refinement" anyhow.

Also interesting is the idea of ichi koku, ichi den per Ellis Amdur's Araki ryu. And that some ryu like TSKSR were simply able to stay tied to one place because of the founding history. How has it influenced surrounding ryu given its centrality? And so on...

It would be interesting to look at any period documents that talk about ryu: "To the governor of Tottori--Watch out for those city folk in XXX ryu!" Or: "The lord of blabbity-ken has officially adopted blabbity-ryu as his prefecture's ryu because it is fearsome." Or whatever.

Well if e-budo were a bar, I'd start ordering rounds.

[nicojo]

For me I don't really care about evaluative judgements like "It's no longer pure! It's no longer effective!" I just like hearing about it. One person's "citified degradation" is another's "refinement" anyhow.

Already I dislike what I write. Always a disclaimer at hand.

I should say that these types of evaluations are necessary in certain circumstances, say, when one is choosing what sort of martial art one studies. But here I am talking about culture and history, and I don't think such judgements are quite apropos--these judgements may be essential in defining a particular ryu or looking at an individual ryu's style, but maybe they can be elided when dealing with history.

[ZealUK]

From my limited experience down here in Kagoshima I would say Kagoshima people in particular have a very strong sense of local identity. They seem to be known for walking very slowly and talking quickly.

When I spoke to people in Tokyo about Kagoshima they always mentioned 'inaka' and sweet potatoes. There seems to be a preconception that people here love their prefecture a bit too much. The Shimazu 'maru-ju' kamon is still everywhere, and the citys new logo is very similar.

Historically this prefecture has always been a bit different to the rest of Japan. Towards the end of the Edo period, Satsuma was the richest province in Japan. They even appeared at the Paris World Fair in the 1800's as an independant state, seperate from the Japanese nation. How audacious to do such a thing despite being under the rule of the Tokugawa bakufu!

Now Kagoshima is one of the poorest prefectures. Perhaps this fall from economic power further strengthened the resolve that Kagoshima is 'different'?

With regard to Jigen Ryu I think its still very much Kagoshima budo. Many people here know of Jigen Ryu, even if they don't really know what it is. There are also a lot of young people practicing, which is pretty unusual for koryu in Japan I believe. I can perhaps think of 10 people in their early/mid 20's who practice on a very regular basis. Of course there is also Yakumaru Jigen Ryu which has a large number of young practitioners.

It has been here for 450 years, passed down by generations of the Togo family, so one would pretty much expect some local pride. Having said that Jigen Ryu was kind of brought from Kyoto by Togo Chuui after he learned from the monk Zenkichi. So perhaps the genus of the style comes from Honshu, but the roots of Jigen Ryu are only in Kagoshima.

As for 'inaka' budo, there is certainly an element of 'walk/run up to them and hit them very hard and fast'. Having said this there is also a strong spiritual element in Jigen Ryu. Many styles were tied with mikkyo or other esoteric religious practice, but I think maybe Jigen Ryu has a more simplistic approach.

They mention two things on occasion:

1. A sword is a sword, not a sheild.
2. Practice few techniques very hard, so the level is very high.

[renfield_kuroda]

From a practical point of view, travel in Japan was very limited for centuries.
Until the late 1800's, Japan was less a whole nation than a federation of independent states. You needed gov't permission to move between prefectures, and often you needed permission to move within your own area beyond a certain local limit.
So realistically, you taught those around you, and they didn't move around much.
Folks would go to and from Edo or the nearest big city, but that was about it.
There was some musha shugyo, but I think it was less prevelant than most think.
So arts tended to stay concentrated in specific locales, and of course adapt to the given terrain/socio-political/weather/etc.

Regards,
r e n