I've written a brief history of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

Those interested in reading the article will find the link on the Shenwu.com homepage.

Thanks to JP Shankle for his help in putting the information online.

Thanx Tim!

Very accurate!

Thanks!

Good article. I like that you note that the Kodokan emphasized randori versus invented in - MANY classical JJ schools at the time did randori. Kano was doing it with his Kito-ryu and Tenjin Shinyo ryu teachers.

I realize I'm picking nits, but there is no indication that the Fusen-ryu itself is a ground fighting system. More properly Tanabe was a groundfighting expert. Present day Fusen-ryu practice does not contain any overt emphasis on groundwork and certainly not of the judo/BJJ kind. It is pretty similar to many other classical JJ schools.

Bushinjuku has some good links to Fusen-ryu info on their forum:

http://bushinjuku.com/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewforum.php?f=13&sid=fea0ec5466b7ca5 5ec707530203b598f

And their Fusen-ryu page (w/link to vids):

http://www.bushinjuku.com/arts/bushinarts/fusen/index.htm

Tactical Grappler,

Thanks for the links.

I've read before that most likely Tanabe emphasized the groundfighting and it wasn't necessarily the focus of the Fusen Ryu in general.

But he had to have learned the fundamental techniques of newaza somewhere. And since, as far as I can tell from the available information, all Tanabe ever studied was the Fusen Ryu, I'm assuming his basic ground skills came from there. It is hard to imagine Tanabe somehow spontaneously became an expert at groundfighting without ever having practiced it.

Is there evidence that Tanabe learned newaza outside the Fusen Ryu?

Tim-
You make a good point.

I have no idea what else Tanabe may have learned, if anything. I think there is a lot of research that needs done in Japan, in Japanese, about just what Tanabe was all about. I am sure it exists - people just have not yet pursued it. The life of the Fusen-ryu founder is well documented, and considering that the "Tanabe line" produced Yukio Tani and Taro Miyake (both famous challenge match fighters that came to the West and competed against all comers) there is a story there that needs to be told.


Talking with a practitioner of Fusen-ryu he said that they apply the same principles from their standing methods in their ground stuff, and that they have a strong element of randori in their practice. He said their randori also included striking.

However, reading turn of the century accounts of jujutsu in the US and Japan, we see that other schools did do groundwork, in training and in competitive matches. EJ Harrison noted that he originally learned JJ from a Tenjin Shinyo-ryu instructor before going to the Kodokan. Harrison pointed out that they did a lot of randori, and said that his teacher, while no match for Kodokan yudansha (black belts) in standing was very good on the ground.

Considering Kano was a TSR man , as was one of early Judo's greatest exponents Yokoyama Sakujiro (a highly touted challenge fighter himself), there was no doubt an awareness of groundwork within the Kodokan from TSR - but Kano did not emphasize it and preferred standup.

From reading accounts of the inter-dojo challenge matches that often occurred during their heyday, matches were not ended by throws, but by pins and submissions. This would mean more groundwork found in the schools that were commonly fighting in these matches.

Now some complained that the 1886 police matches favored the Kodokan because of different "rules," and there might be something to that when you consider Kano preferred standup and the Kodokan seemed to give more credence to winning by ippon throws versus submissions. Install rules like that for a while and clearly groundwork will suffer - perhaps until someone familiar with what the older schools are doing in their challenge matches came along and demonstrated that you can beat the throwers with a ground game if the rules are different...

Conjecturing myself, I know. There is SO much misinformation and half-information out there on judo/JJ history that I think it is best to be circumspect about it until further evidence is in. As it is, some folks are drawing a direct comparison between BJJ and Fusen-ryu without benefit of having seen any Fusen-ryu or knowing its history. They can't be blamed for not knowing the history, as so little is available in English. But filling in the blanks is where the trouble starts.

TG,

Interesting. I assume there are several "lines" of Fusen Ryu in existence. Is there a direct Tanabe line, or was his version completely swallowed up by the Kodokan?

Maybe different branches had different emphasis in technique, with Tanabe's preferring mat work. Are there no surviving teachers from a direct Tanabe line of transmission? As famous as he was after defeating the Kodokan fighters, it's hard to believe he didn't have enough students to carry on his lineage. And yet, stranger things have happened.

Those are all good questions that I have asked my acquaintance in Fusen-ryu about. So far, his teachers either didn't know, or didn't much care about it. He did say there was some pride that they had "beaten the Kodokan" but that may be the extent of it.

As far as I know, the Bugei Ryuha Daijiten (a compilation of information on various bugei (chinese : wuyi) schools and their lines, lists Fusen-ryu along with a Takeda ryu and Motsugai ryu - which are the sword drawing and other weapons systems of the founder Takeda Motsugai. My own exposure here is very limited, but I do not believe there is a listing of a branch off from Tanabe (i.e. a "Tanabe-ha Fusen ryu.")

Of interest may be that Takeda had a full license in Nanba Ippo ryu, an offshoot of the Takenouchi ryu that may have been practiced primarily by peasants/commoners ( which probably means more unarmed emphasis (and competitive?) than weapons based). Takenouchi ryu has some groundwork but a lot of it is based on being armed with a short blade. They are, however, well known for having been very active and successful at challenge matches in their day. Takeda also studied other jujutsu ryu (including Kito-ryu).

How far removed that is from Tanabe is anyone's guess. It seems there was a lot more mixing of traditions and techniques, and a lot more testing in an open environment (i.e. against others from outside your dojo, or art) until around the time that the Kodokan started its ascent than there is now in much of classical jujutsu.

So much more needs to be specifically researched in this area by folks with the interest and the background before the picture becomes clearer.

Thanks for the info. Too bad there isn't more information available on Tanabe and the Fusen Ryu of his time. It's strange, it was barely 100 years ago.

Again, there probably is, but in Japanese. Recently we have seen that a lot of what we considered "gospel" may not have been so (Draeger, who was an early pioneer of classical Japanese MA study, is far from error - just as Robert Smith was)

Today there are foreigners with the werewithal and knowledge to dig this stuff up, but the classical JJ guys tend not to be that interested in BJJ and vice versa.

We need someone interested in both and willing to put the time in to research Tanabe. There has been interest in Maeda, and as time goes on and BJJ, Judo, and their development get more attention, and as more people look to classical JJ to explore it, we will probably see more.

We need a version of Tim Cartmell who does Japan and koryu as well as BJJ!

Thanks T.G.

If you get any more information I'd be very interested.

I commend both of you. That's for the input.

ooooooooo... look at you, the great commender...

thanks tim, youre the coolest guy ive never met.

robert,
you are very sensitive.
do you adhere to the same dress code as the ancient greeks did when they wrestled. I hope so.

BettyLubed...

Thanks Backarcher.

Thanks robert, it's been a pleasure not knowing you too.

what a class act

I was just going to ask about the Fusen Ryu connection.

Tim, do you have any other references to Fusen Ryu and bjj besides Danaher? While Danaher's book is very well written, there aren't any references given. That's a pet-peeve of many of my Japanese judoka friends, and mine as well. They'd like to believe that bjj comes from another line of jiu-jitsu, unrelated to judo) but there are no references provided.

Every english lang. judo book that I've ever read has sources cited...There is one more judoka that has published some material that I will ask about the Fusen Ryu connection, if it exists.

"The Toughest Man Who Ever Lived" by John Murray and Nori Bunasawa.

The story of Mitsuyo Maeda's life based on his autobiography.

"Classical Fighting Arts of Japan" by Serge Mol.

Good information on the founder of Fusen Ryu and his arts (no reference to BJJ in the book).

Danaher never alludes to BJJ not coming from Judo. He has a fairly exhaustive history of Tanabe and his teaching groundfighting at the Kodokan.

I found the source "Blood on the Sun: The Odyssey of Yukio Tani" by Graham Noble:

" 'We know little about Tani's early training. Apparently his father and grandfather were teachers of jujitsu and he started training at a young age. So this must have been around 1890. Shingo Ohgami told me htat Tani trained with Fusen-ryu groundwork specialists Torajiro Tanabe and/or Mataemon Tanabe. This is supported by information in Takao Marushima's Maoeda Mitsuyo: Conte Koma (1997), where it is said that Mataemon Tanabe was a friend of Tani's father.'"

(Danaher: 29)

I've never heard of a judoka mention Fusen-ryu and judo. I'll go pick the local newaza authority's brain and see what he knows.

"The Toughest Man Who Ever Lived" by John Murray and Nori Bunasawa.


Ugh..... I kind of put that one in the realm of "historical fiction" than anything else.

Ricson vs Rigan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZRcYJ-n07M&feature=related