Shastarvidiya video

Lew · 26th June 2009, 09:17 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFHkV...eature=related

Great video on this most interesting fighting system.

Lew

t_c · 26th June 2009, 10:00 PM

Thanks Lew - that's great to see.
I don't know my history very well, but I see a lot of similar movements & tactics to some forms of Silat - it could be personal bias, but it still makes me wonder about the history of the arts and past influences....

katana · 26th June 2009, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t_c

I don't know my history very well, but I see a lot of similar movements & tactics to some forms of Silat - it could be personal bias, but it still makes me wonder about the history of the arts and past influences....

Hi TC
my understanding is that there are several theories of martial arts 'travelling' from India to China (Bodhidharma taught his fighting arts to the Shaolin Monks in the 6th C) . However, I believe that many martial arts originated independently. The mechanics/ abillities and limitations of the human body would dictate the techniques etc would be very similar or the same to other martial arts who's origins were independent and seperate.

Regards David

KuKulzA28 · 27th June 2009, 06:08 AM

That is fascinating!

I think it is bogus for one to assume that there was one fountain of the martial arts for the rest of the world. I would make sense for any society engaged in war to develop better fighting arts and technology to survive. Some say Greek Pankration "inspired" Indian martial arts... a land that had been at war and mobilizing large forces long before Alexander was even born. Some say Kalaripayattu inspired Shaolin fighting. The Shaolin monks weren't different from any other monastery back in the day, and each monastery had to defend itself from brigands, and they were also resting places for travelers and war-weary warriors. Obviously a martial artist earning his keep at a monastery could teach the resident monk-militia how to better defend itself. Yet no fighting is without outside influence. Weapons, technology, and technique spreads. That and the human body moves effectively in only so many ways. Wrestling all looks like wrestling, with some local variations. etc.etc.

To say that Greek fighting, various Indian fighting style, and Chinese fighting styles didn't influence other is wrong... but others knew of and had their own style of fighting before they absorbed outside influences. While Okinawan nobles learned Tang Dynasty Kung Fu, and the Japanese in turn learned from them... doesn't make Okinawan or Japanese fighting a Chinese art. That Filipinos were taught "Kun Tao" by Chinese merchants doesn't mean Filipino fighting arts aren't Filipino. That the kuntaw of the Hoklo taxcollector in Indonesia greatly impressed the local Silat-users, doesn't mean they aren't native Indonesian fighters after they incorporated some Kuntaw...

ariel · 27th June 2009, 05:29 PM

This is absolutely beautiful and, IMHO, quite useless in real war. I am not talking about technological differential ( machine gun vs. spear).
At the battle of Sobraon, British and Gurkha infantry penetrated heavily defended Sikh lines and engaged them in a close combat ( General Gough, as usual, trusted in bayonet only). Despite being outnumbered ( 15,000 vs. 40,000), the Brits prevailed quite easily. Obviously, martial arts expertise and choreography did not help the Khalsa force.
Martial arts of any kind are good only for movies, show-type competition and, occasionally, for one-on-one encounters. Wars require tactics, strategy, discipline, leadership and general fighting spirit of the troops.

kronckew · 27th June 2009, 07:58 PM

warriors fight as individuals, soldiers fight as units. one reason the greeks, brits and the romans tended to beat armies that outnumbered them.

it takes decades to train a warrior like that. it takes months to train a soldier to be able to kill him.

Battara · 27th June 2009, 07:58 PM

I don't know Ariel. While it is true that tactics, strategy, etc are needed in war, the Moro guerillas and PI armies have been fighting using these and FMA. Also don't forget that Lapu Lapu on Mactan dispatched Magellan with superior numbers, strategy, leadership, and some martial arts. Just one example.

kronckew · 27th June 2009, 08:06 PM

the use of the khukuris near the end of the video was cool...

Sikh_soldier · 29th June 2009, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

This is absolutely beautiful and, IMHO, quite useless in real war. I am not talking about technological differential ( machine gun vs. spear).
At the battle of Sobraon, British and Gurkha infantry penetrated heavily defended Sikh lines and engaged them in a close combat ( General Gough, as usual, trusted in bayonet only). Despite being outnumbered ( 15,000 vs. 40,000), the Brits prevailed quite easily. Obviously, martial arts expertise and choreography did not help the Khalsa force.
Martial arts of any kind are good only for movies, show-type competition and, occasionally, for one-on-one encounters. Wars require tactics, strategy, discipline, leadership and general fighting spirit of the troops.

Fair point, but that is assuming that the Khalsa force were all trained in and deployed this particular martial art.

Also here is another link to the martial art:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvYU0...rom=PL&index=8

katana · 26th June 2009, 10:07 PM

Well found Lew

,
slightly choreographed, ( that's not a negative ...5 fighters and a cameraman in the confines of a boxing ring....it would have to be

) Displays a number of moves that help to explain the form of several of the weapons...especially the axes

Regards David

26th June 2009, 09:17 PM	#1
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	Shastarvidiya video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFHkV...eature=related Great video on this most interesting fighting system. Lew

26th June 2009, 10:00 PM	#2
t_c Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: ca, usa Posts: 92	Thanks Lew - that's great to see. I don't know my history very well, but I see a lot of similar movements & tactics to some forms of Silat - it could be personal bias, but it still makes me wonder about the history of the arts and past influences....

27th June 2009, 06:08 AM	#4
KuKulzA28 Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: between work and sleep Posts: 731	That is fascinating! I think it is bogus for one to assume that there was one fountain of the martial arts for the rest of the world. I would make sense for any society engaged in war to develop better fighting arts and technology to survive. Some say Greek Pankration "inspired" Indian martial arts... a land that had been at war and mobilizing large forces long before Alexander was even born. Some say Kalaripayattu inspired Shaolin fighting. The Shaolin monks weren't different from any other monastery back in the day, and each monastery had to defend itself from brigands, and they were also resting places for travelers and war-weary warriors. Obviously a martial artist earning his keep at a monastery could teach the resident monk-militia how to better defend itself. Yet no fighting is without outside influence. Weapons, technology, and technique spreads. That and the human body moves effectively in only so many ways. Wrestling all looks like wrestling, with some local variations. etc.etc. To say that Greek fighting, various Indian fighting style, and Chinese fighting styles didn't influence other is wrong... but others knew of and had their own style of fighting before they absorbed outside influences. While Okinawan nobles learned Tang Dynasty Kung Fu, and the Japanese in turn learned from them... doesn't make Okinawan or Japanese fighting a Chinese art. That Filipinos were taught "Kun Tao" by Chinese merchants doesn't mean Filipino fighting arts aren't Filipino. That the kuntaw of the Hoklo taxcollector in Indonesia greatly impressed the local Silat-users, doesn't mean they aren't native Indonesian fighters after they incorporated some Kuntaw...

27th June 2009, 05:29 PM	#5
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	This is absolutely beautiful and, IMHO, quite useless in real war. I am not talking about technological differential ( machine gun vs. spear). At the battle of Sobraon, British and Gurkha infantry penetrated heavily defended Sikh lines and engaged them in a close combat ( General Gough, as usual, trusted in bayonet only). Despite being outnumbered ( 15,000 vs. 40,000), the Brits prevailed quite easily. Obviously, martial arts expertise and choreography did not help the Khalsa force. Martial arts of any kind are good only for movies, show-type competition and, occasionally, for one-on-one encounters. Wars require tactics, strategy, discipline, leadership and general fighting spirit of the troops.

27th June 2009, 07:58 PM	#6
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,182	warriors fight as individuals, soldiers fight as units. one reason the greeks, brits and the romans tended to beat armies that outnumbered them. it takes decades to train a warrior like that. it takes months to train a soldier to be able to kill him.

27th June 2009, 07:58 PM	#7
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,219	I don't know Ariel. While it is true that tactics, strategy, etc are needed in war, the Moro guerillas and PI armies have been fighting using these and FMA. Also don't forget that Lapu Lapu on Mactan dispatched Magellan with superior numbers, strategy, leadership, and some martial arts. Just one example.

27th June 2009, 08:06 PM	#8
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,182	the use of the khukuris near the end of the video was cool...

26th June 2009, 10:07 PM	#10
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,653	Well found Lew , slightly choreographed, ( that's not a negative ...5 fighters and a cameraman in the confines of a boxing ring....it would have to be ) Displays a number of moves that help to explain the form of several of the weapons...especially the axes Regards David