Style of the Week VI: Gladiator Combat

OK, so this isn't so much a style as a category. The gladiators were among the first warriors trained exclusively for sport fighting, albeit of a particularly brutal nature. The word gladiator means "one who wields a sword", so not surprisingly the training of gladiators often involved sword training. But other weapons and methods were used, for example the type of gladiator known as a retarius used a trident and a net to capture opponents' weapons.

There doesn't seem to be a lot of information about exactly what the combat style of a typical gladiator might have looked like, but there is evidence that gladiators were often trained in set of choreographed routines and that they would fight according to these sometimes in gladiatorial contests. Some archaeologists have even suggested that gladiatorial events were a sort of ancient WWE-style spectacle, although it's clear that combatants did in fact sometimes die in these contests.

Gladiators were trained in schools called ludi, the best known being the ludus magnus that was connected directly to the Roman Colosseum. There were also schools in which combatants were trained specifically to fight animals. Gladiators were owned by men called lanista, who were sort of the Don King/Dana White equivalents of their time. Sources including Epictetus and Cicero indicate that gladiatorial training was also like modern fight training in the sense that it included conditioning and dietary restrictions.

True gladiatorial spectacles, called munera, are mercifully a thing of the past. But apparently, you can still engage in the training of the gladiator.

Style of the Week V: Glima

I was trying to find a martial arts style from the traditions of Western Europe. I expected to find information on various types of sword fighting, pugilism, and wrestling. However, I was a bit surprised to find Glima, a style of wrestling originating in Iceland (yes, you read that correctly).

Glima is an old art, dating at least to the 12 century. Points are scored when one of the participants is thrown to the ground, so the wrestling does not continue on the ground. The rules stress sportsmanship and fair play, and there's an odd dance-like quality to the initiation of a match. For example, check out this video from a Glima competition in 1932:




Glima is still practiced today, and seems to have retained much of its original character unlike other arts that have taken aspects from other systems. It's interesting to me that while arts involving striking, kicking, or weapon handling are widespread, wrestling arts seem to be almost universal among populations of human beings, no matter how isolated.

What Is Warrior Culture?

I came across an article recently in which the LAPD was criticized for having a "warrior culture". The term was used pejoratively to mean a subculture that considers itself separate from mainstream society and which will resort to violent means to assert control even if other means are available. In reality, I assume that all major police departments have a warrior mindset given that we provide them with a variety of tools clearly meant to do battle: guns, special vehicles, armor, etc.

The idea of a warrior culture could encompass everything from ancient Sparta, the nomads of the Eurasian steppes, the Samurai, various branches of the modern military, police departments, and probably even certain criminal organizations if the idea is stretched thin enough. The characteristics of the warrior culture seem to include

• There is a warrior caste that is clearly distinct from the rest of the society
• There is a code to which the warrior is expected to adhere
• The group takes precedence over the individual
• The warrior has tools or techniques that are not available to the general population, because of lack of expertise or legal restriction

Although the warrior code will often contain concepts of honor and morality, i would think that the idea of a warrior culture is morally neutral. However, the idea seems to be interpreted through a political lens. Conservatives seem to view warrior culture as a generally honorable and worthy thing, while liberals see a dangerous, use-violence-first mentality. Contrast for example, this essay at the military site BlackFive with this essay by Barbara Ehrenreich from Time magazine.

My personal view is that a warrior culture is not either a morally superior subset of society, or a cultural trait that emphasizes revenge, honor, and glory. Rather a warrior culture is a society or subculture that focuses on the practice and refinement of martial methods to achieve some end for that society. This might manifest itself in a nation that wants to aggressively expand its boundaries and resources, or it might result in an organization that is more cautious about the use of force than society in general. I think the latter is often true of the American military. Whether it's Iraq or Darfur or Bosnia, the educated warrior in the military usually understands the consequences of his or her actions better than the people calling on them to perform those actions.

The world of sport fighting and martial arts training can't really be considered a warrior culture even though a contribution is ostensibly made to the evolution of martial arts, because the focus is on the individual. I can't blame commentators when they describe a fighter, or even a football player, as a "warrior", but the other key distinction of a warrior culture is that of course its members often die, sometimes anonymously and without much reward.

Training Like a Warrior

I enjoyed this post at Pencak Silat Blogspot. I think it intelligently discusses one of the aspects of the martial arts that is sometimes hard to come to grips with, which is that while your training might provide enjoyment, exercise, and spiritual insight it also has to be done with a certain violent intent. My Sifu has said in the past that if you're not training with the idea of aggressiveness in mind, you might as well be playing basketball.

Pencak Silat Blogspot: 9/11

Style of the Week IV: Choy Li Fut

Choy Li Fut is a Chinese martial art derived from both Shaolin kung fu and styles of southern China. It was originated by Chan Heung, who gave the system its name in 1836. The name is a tribute to his three teachers. It is also incidentally the style i have trained in for the last five years.

Like many martial arts, the lineage of the style since Chan Heung has fragmented and diversified in the last couple of centuries, but regardless of the particular branch Choy Li Fut has retained certain distinctive characteristics. One is the set of circular "long-arm" strikes that are added to the normal repertoire of straight strikes. In practice, these can be incorporated into sparring at a range somewhat intermediate between boxing range and kicking range, and if you're careful with your footwork they can be surprisingly effective because of the unusual angles at which these strikes arrive. The second characteristic is the footwork. Though Choy Li Fut teaches fairly low, solid stances, the forms also emphasize quite a lot of angular movement and rapid advancement and retreat. In less stylized form, this footwork can also be applied to sparring as a way to transition to a throw, or to chamber a kick while appearing to retreat.

Choy Li Fut is a very comprehensive system, encompassing ground fighting, joint locking, sanda-style kickboxing, and a ridiculous number of forms, especially for traditional Chinese weapons. The school at which i train also teaches modern submission grappling, so it's a style that's evolving in some circles (our students and instructors participate in grappling and pankration tournaments). There's a lot of debate these days in the traditional martial arts world about the applicability of techniques, and that's especially true with CLF because it is a system with a heritage of combat. But it's also true that Choy Li Fut forms, done properly, look really cool. Here's a decent performance of a Choy Li Fut spear set:

Traditional Martial Arts

There's a scene in the 1980s movie Uncommon Valor where Randall "Tex" Cobb is fighting somebody (i think it's Patrick Swayze) and he says something like "don't try that Oriental martial bullshit on me". Then he proceeds to beat up his opponent using a couple of kicks to the body and head (Cobb was once a professional kickboxer). Those kicks look a lot like the kicks that are taught in traditional Asian martial arts.

I think of that scene whenever i hear arguments about the value of traditional martial arts. It's fairly clear to me that the term "traditional" doesn't mean what people think it means. For some people on Internet forums, traditional is just a term used in contrast to MMA styles. So Brazilian jiu-jitsu, even though it has its origins in the warrior tradition of the samurai is part of modern martial arts, while, say, Shaolin kung fu is a traditional art because the the gymnastic movements of wu shu, which was derived from kung fu in modern China, don't figure into cage fighting. I've even seen a comment on a video of an escrima demonstration stating that it looked more like real fighting than those Asian martial arts.

Martial arts have always been used to teach people to fight other human beings. Sparring and other forms of training against live individuals are traditional aspects of martial arts. In many cases the training has been applied in real combat situations, enough so that its practitioners have learned what works and doesn't work. As others have have noted more forcefully than i could, any place that doesn't provide training against live opponents is more of a fitness club than a martial arts school.

On the other hand, arguments over the relative effectiveness of various styles are still pretty ridiculous even in the UFC era. If i were to meet Randy Couture's evil twin in a dark alley, would i rather know karate, muy thai, or jiu jitsu? No, frankly i'd rather have a gun. All styles of human combat, whether hand-to-hand or stick-fighting or sword-fighting, are essentially pre-industrial relics. You've got to appreciate them for the art, and for the discipline, and for the transformation they can effect on a human being. The term kung fu means roughly "achievement through effort". In that spirit, one can admire a great martial artist just as one can admire a virtuoso musician or a skillful artisan, but that might still leave them unequal to a thug with a gun.

Arguments about, and research into, the most practical forms of combat are a part of the martial arts. Elements of the military continue to train in techniques of hand-to-hand combat, so it's certainly regarded as valuable even in modern warfare. But that doesn't mean that I won't get irritated when some half-trained doofus without the conditioning to last a 2-minute round disrespects traditional martial arts because he or she learned how to do an arm-bar on a cooperative training partner.