Hi!
Which books do you consider a great help to understand the history and lineage of a country's MA?.
Lately I have started to feel more interested in some obscure MA's, and I have been reading some books on their history. However, I've found that the path of the scholar of MA is fraught with perils, well, mainly one peril. The "No-Book-or-My-Style-Kicks-Ass-Book" peril, to be precise.
Which books do you consider as "bias-free" as posible, in the history of Martial Arts? I think that there can not exists a biass free book, but there are some good ones. For example, D.Skoss "Koryu Bujutsu: Classical Warrior Traditions of Japan" downplays the chinese connection, I think, but otherwise is fascinating.

So, any pointers?

Thanks!!:D

i think all books about the history of martial arts suck ass. especially the ones on any art outside of japan/okinawa.

No one in the REAL academic community studies MA as a subject simply because they'll get laughed at by their peers. My prof. studies family culture and lineage in a specific province as his expertise (something about how inter-family bonds are made and maintained and rituals and such). Somehow that's more interesting to them...go figure.

As such, books that we get are written by a bunch of biased quacks trying to either sell you on some unresearched, unsupported stories their teacher told them (or an equally uneducated self-proclaimed expert from whatever country) or on the style the major in. Jenfucius' take on books is very accurate. They suck ass. The only reason the Japanese MA's books are more accurate is that they their recent history is much better documented and their lineages much more clear. But anything going back farther than their current documentation is unsupported either way (CMA = JMA or not).

What we do know is that the Shaolin/Buddhist stories and similar tall tales are incorrect. This is a by-product of detailed study of Buddhism by the academic community. They KNOW what came from India, who came from India and what they did. And Kung-fu ain't one of them.

Originally posted by IronBuddha
No one in the REAL academic community studies MA as a subject simply because they'll get laughed at by their peers. My prof. studies family culture and lineage in a specific province as his expertise (something about how inter-family bonds are made and maintained and rituals and such). Somehow that's more interesting to them...go figure.

As such, books that we get are written by a bunch of biased quacks trying to either sell you on some unresearched, unsupported stories their teacher told them (or an equally uneducated self-proclaimed expert from whatever country) or on the style the major in. Jenfucius' take on books is very accurate. They suck ass. The only reason the Japanese MA's books are more accurate is that they their recent history is much better documented and their lineages much more clear. But anything going back farther than their current documentation is unsupported either way (CMA = JMA or not).

What we do know is that the Shaolin/Buddhist stories and similar tall tales are incorrect. This is a by-product of detailed study of Buddhism by the academic community. They KNOW what came from India, who came from India and what they did. And Kung-fu ain't one of them.

Yes, you put it quite well! :D
It's very difficult to read something which is not propaganda these days...

Ok, I am slightly biased, as I train under Diane and Meik, but the Skoss books are well researched, and they are fairly authoritative in regards to traditional Japanese MA. Karl Friday also has written some excellent stuff, as has William Bodiford. Dave Lowry is an engaging author as well, and he has writtien several pretty decent books.

Donn Dragers books are important, but they are more then a little bit dry, and are very strongly influenced by Drager's tendency to see all things in black and white. There is a lot of authoritative "this is how it is" type things in those works that are not really as easily or strictly defined as Drager would have you think.

Between Skoss and Drager, you will get a very complete picture of JMA. All of these authors have researched the subjects, and spoken with teachers and practicioners of a wide variety of traditions. They don't quote only their own teachers, and they all practiced more then three traditions or arts.

Ellis Amdur has written two excellent books, "Dueling with O Sensei- Grappling with the Myth of the Warrior Sage" and "Old School". The first is an excellent collection of essays, which i find to be some of the highest quality writing about human nature and the martial arts ever; the second deals with the weapons, traditions, and methodologies of koryu martial arts.

I have meet and trained with all three of these folks, and whilse I am biased in their favor, the y are good authors. Ellis is perhaps the most fair, evenhanded and self-honest author of MA books I haev ever read or meet.

Btw, Jenfucious and Iron Buddha are right for the most part(heck, I am recommending you read my teachers stuff- how nuetral am i? ). There is a lot of junk in the MA book world.

The "Journal Of Asian Martial Arts" usually includes hitorical articles in its editions. The authors are required to show their sources. This can help the reader to judge for himself/herself as to the article's validity.

Compared to the more common way of martial art history writing, this is a comparatively new approach, but one that seems to have both merit and potential.

Thanks!!! ;)
I'll check Draeger's books and the Journal!!!

If you're interested in the history of Okinawan karate, I'd recommend George Alexander's book "Okinawa, Island of Karate" from Yamazato Publications. I don't care for Sensei Alexander personally, and his video's are terrible..but I liked this book.

yea the journal is fairly unbiased

Let me second the recommendation for books published by Diane Skoss and Ellis Amdur (but I'm biased because I've trained with them, too, nyah nyah).

Especially "Dueling with O-sensei" for folks that have even a passing interest in aikido, but have issues with the stigma and some of the baggage attached to it.

I think that "Secrets of the Samurai" is a phenominal book if your looking for any type of historical or technical records for any japanese martial arts in Feudal Japan.

Blue Flames, the Secrets of the Samurai is perhaps one of the most poorly researched, vague, inaccurate and misleading books ever written about the samurai. Westbrook and Ratti, whilst able to provide us with truly wonderful illustrations, have NO idea what they are talking about in regards to the ancient warrior arts of Japan. I would strongly recomend avoiding Secrets, and reading Draeger instead.

Just reading the introduction to 'Secrets of the Samurai', it appears that the others did all their research in libraries or Western museums. I would think that a prerequisite for writing such an expose would be to at least spend SOME time in Japan.

I have to disagree with you guys, I found "the secrets of the samurai" a fine book to read and an excellent addition to my library, along with Draegers books and a few from Skoss.
I think a combination of books, from different points of views are excellent, IF you keep an open mind.
Martial Musings from Robert Smith was a interesting book also.

I found Smith's book to be interesting from the standpoint of someone that was there and saw it all -- but the man's CMA nutriding and fogeyish attitude towards MMA competitions is a real turnoff. He actually uses Akebono (someone that recently got creamed by Bob Sapp) as an example of a guy that would easily defeat everyone in the MMA world.

My main problems with 'Secrets of the Samurai' are the innacuracies (e.g. in its attempts to catalogue various Japanese ryu by weapon studied, it makes the mistake of overlooking ryu that train more than one weapon it their curriculum -- if there's an addendum admitting that such research is not comprehensive, I've yet to see it). I don't consider myself close-minded, either, which is why the book's semi-aiki-centric point of view (see the section on samurai aiki-jujutsu to get an explicit example of this) rubs me the wrong way, and I'm an aikidoka. Although these folks also wrote 'Aikido and the Dynamic Sphere', so this is not much of a surprise.

But I think there are enough aikidoka out there already pimping their art as the end-all be-all.

Indeed their bias towards all thing Aiki is well documented.
But, in general I did like the book and the way it explored things like the Haragei.
As for Robert Smith, his over indulgence in all things Chinese and his "CMA Nutriding", as you so eloquently put it, gets a bit tired after a while, but his anecdotes about Draeger and Blumming and some of the old time neija guys was very enjoyable.