CIVILIAN MARTIAL ARTS?

 By Phillip Starr

In trying to emphasize the validity and worthiness of their chosen martial art, many people use the term, “battle-tested.” Actually, with the exception of a handful of martial disciplines, this is inaccurate. Most martial arts were developed for civilian self-protection although a few would be taught to soldiers for use in war. Some were designed mainly for use on the battlefield.

In China, there exist literally dozens of different forms of gong-fu. These were intended for civilian self-defense. Certainly, ancient military units – especially those led by well-known generals who possessed skill in martial arts – were taught some techniques from various arts, but not the entire system. And they were never taught a standardized method on a large scale (ie., for all military personnel). In past time and even as recently as WWII, recruits (most of whom were trained for a very short time because they were sorely needed on the battlefield immediately) learned basic xingyiquan but they lacked the time to really develop any skill with it.

The legendary “Big Sword (actually, broadsword) Unit” (Dadao Tui) armed most of its troops with a long-handled form of the broadsword. Most of them had previously trained in a form of gong-fu. Many of the troops discarded their rifles, preferring to carry the sword into battle (probably not a very good idea). They were renowned for their ferocity in battle; their shoulder patch, which was rather large, read, “When our rifles are empty, we use our swords, when our sword are broken, we use our fists, when our fists are broken, we bite.”

Japanese martial arts are a different story altogether. Many, if not most, of the “koryu” (old, traditional martial arts) were developed for use on the ancient battlefields. These arts included various forms of swordsmanship as well as use of other weapons such as the naginata (a sort of halberd), spear, the bow and arrow, grappling and striking arts...all to be applied against armored warriors. Jujutsu was taught to new trainees during WWII. Karate was still quite new to Japan and its use had not yet been assimilated by the military.

American recruits received very basic training in what they termed “combat judo” (not knowing that judo, per se, was developed as a sport), jujutsu, and atemi-waza (hitting vital points) as early as WWI and through the whole of WWII.

Taekwondo, which was developed for use in the modern military, was first baptized in battle during the war in Vietnam by the ROK troops, particularly the legendary taekwondo-trained units such as the White Horse, Blue Dragon, and Tiger Divisions. They were renowned for their ferocity in combat- so much so that none of their fire bases were never attacked by the North Vietnamese Army or the Vietcong during the entire conflict!

The fact that a given art or style has never been used on the battlefield certainly doesn't belittle its effectiveness. Not at all. Certainly, “civilian” martial arts have been applied more frequently (for purposes of self-protection) than any of those used in the military. What is more important, in my opinion, is the “test of time.” Those that proved themselves effective have remained with us. Those that didn't...were buried alongside their creators.