Ancient Martial Arts

Whenever people hear the word 'Martial Arts' (in most cases) they automatically think of Asian fighting styles: Tae-Kwondo, Karate, Kung-Fu, etc etc. You name it, it's asian. This of course can lead to the false impression (and even some idiotic comments) that Asia invented and perfected hand-to-hand combat.

Now, if anyone thinks for more than a minute and looks past the hype (which isn't hard to do) it's easy to see that this is a false assumption. It doesn't take a genius, or someone who's found inner peace, to invent a spinning kick or a good punch, and it certainly doesn't take hours of spiritual nursing to perfect any given fighting technique. Although Asian martial arts are certainly formidable, and certifiably ancient, the fact that they are so well-known today is due to two things: Their creators writing down the techniques, and those writings surviving to nowadays.

It's downright naive to think that Europe and the Middle East (the area of the EB map), which have a history of human civilization at least as old as that of Asia, would not invent hand-to-hand fighting techniques for civilians and military personnel, and that these were not in widespread use in EB's timeframe. The logical reason, I think, that not much is known about them nowadays is mainly because any written records, if there were any of them, (considering that Celtic, and other, civilizations had a strong tradition of oral history) have not survived to the present-day.

So, who here can name, or hypothesize, at least one martial art technique that would be taught to soldiers (and maybe civilians) if they had to deal in un-armed combat? Faction or area doesn't matter.

Here's my theory concerning one: Wrestling (apparently it counts as a martial art). I imagine that Roman, Greek, or any other soldier that carried around a dagger as a secondary weapon, would be taught how to grapple with their enemy if they should find themselves disarmed. Teach a soldier how to get past his opponent's weapon and either wrestle him to the ground or hinder the enemy long enough to use the dagger. It's an easy-to-remember, effective, and quick-to-teach technique, that I imagine would be standard military training at the time, since most armies nowadays include firearms training and CQB courses.

An interesting thought. I've wondered that myself and wish I knew. Though it seems to me that martial arts aren't exactly a war winning advantage. They may be cool and all, but I don't think a Roman legionare being able to perform a spinning star kick if he loses his gladius would be all that great of an advantage, especially if his enemy is still armed. But I too would like to know if any grappling techniques were regimented in any of the classical period armies. Though I would think it would be a needless waste of training for all but the most elite soldiers. Maybe EB historians can comment.

Not a war winning advantage?! If Bruce Lee was fighting for the romans at the battle
of Cannae, Hannibal would flee at the very sight!

I've read that the Spartans trained their youths in Pankration, which has been theorized as the ancestor of all the Asian martial arts.

Pankration was also an event at the Greek Olympics, so Greek nobility most likely would have known it too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maximus Aurelius

Not a war winning advantage?! If Bruce Lee was fighting for the romans at the battle
of Cannae, Hannibal would flee at the very sight!

---

I acquiesce.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maximus Aurelius

Not a war winning advantage?! If Bruce Lee was fighting for the romans at the battle
of Cannae, Hannibal would flee at the very sight!

---

no,cause the carthaginians had Chuck Norris!

...and that was the moment another great historical discussion escalated into a chat about Chuck Norris.

this is a sign from GOD!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gebeleisis

no,cause the carthaginians had Chuck Norris!

---

lies

i can prove!

All combat systems are martial arts ,armed as well as unarmed .
Modern fighter pilots are martial artists as are motarmen , though most don't think it through to realise it .

All sensible combat systems for warriors include grappling techniques . Even laundry staff are taught some basics in bootcamp in todays' military .
Knights in the medieval period learned a good deal of wrestling lore , the Gauls had their wrestling styles , the Greeks certainly included theirs' in Hoplomachia . Almost everyone else had something similar though the degree of emphasis differed .
As a fight drags out , it tends to get ever more desperate , and at its' most primative a fight devolves into two combatants rolling around grappling each other .

Chuck Norris is the only man on Earth who can slam a revolving door .

Firstly, I´d just like to note that everytime Chuck and Bruce meet Bruce won, so the Carthies would still have fled. Then I´d just like to point out that for all their martial prowess and cool stares they are nothing compared to the Man, Clint Eastwood. Of course he wouldn´t just join a side out of charity, he might join the Carthies for their large treasury and their reputation of paying mercenaries, or he´d joined someone smaller, like the Massilians. Yeah, he´d joined the Massilians, and then blowed the brains out of Hannibal and steal the entire Carthaginian treasury, whereafter he´d go to Rome and torch the temple of Jupiter Optimus with the entire Senate inside. Then he´d ride away towards the setting sun, leaving behind him a trail of misery, death, despair, abandoned women, stray dogs, used patrons and a overwhelming sense of awe and wonder.

Anyway, back on topic. Though it would undoubtely be a nice thing to have, I´d doubt martial arts would make much of a difference in a real battle.

Well, it's not really ancient in that particular meaning of the word, but TheArma has a nice selection of free European martial arts manuals, both armed (main treatises on the longsword and the dagger) and unarmed (mostly wrestling).

The word "martial arts" AFAIK etymologically originates in a term/concept along the lines of "arts of Mars", ie. of war. In other words, fighting skills. Which people have been refining one way or another since Og figured out bashing Thag's head in with an antilope femur was a good career move.

Anyways, nobody in their right minds employs striking techniques (except perhaps of the elbow-to-the-face level as a distraction) in a mortal combat if far more effective tools, ie. weapons, are available. The human body is after all manifestly ill-armed for killing large animals (like other humans) that way without assistance or extreme effort.

And breaking fists on helmets isn't a terribly effective tactic anyway. Neither is getting your arm chopped off with a sword.

Anyway, this ARMA article, although it primarly discusses the Middle Ages and later, also helpfully goes over the reasons striking techniques aren't a dreadfully useful thing for a warrior expecting to do battle armed to spend too much effort on. Long story short, grappling fills most of the same needs as well and is much better suited for emergency battlefield use against armed opponents, and is easier to dafely train in too.

Umm, that link is all to Renaissance martial arts. I wonder about Antiquity...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

...although it primarly discusses the Middle Ages and later, also helpfully goes over the reasons striking techniques aren't a dreadfully useful thing for a warrior expecting to do battle armed to spend too much effort on. Long story short, grappling fills most of the same needs as well and is much better suited for emergency battlefield use against armed opponents, and is easier to dafely train in too.

---

:dizzy2:
And everbody knows about Pankration, not that it had much in the way of rpactical military application far as I know. Indeed, didn't some critics diss it specifically because it took fit mens' time and attention away from worthier pursuits, such as training in combat skills useful for defending the polis ?

Thing to remember is that martial arts aren't all spinning kicks or the like. They're just as easily techniques which could be taught for use in a battle-line, and I'd be rather surprised if they didn't exist - it'd be far more dangerous if you couldn't predict how your neighbour was going to use his weapon.