Ellis Amdur wrote:
Mike - The basic joint lock are, to me, not rocket science. I bet some were due to influence from abroad, and some home-grown. There's some evidence that some of the catch wrestling locks, alleged to have developed independently, were actually "stolen" in the early 20th century from jujutsu practitioners, so it's certainly believable. But I think it's far more likely that the real Chinese influence is transfer of knowledge of the soft martial arts. (Notice I'm coming around to your opinion). NOT - Ueshiba. I'm increasingly of the belief that there were some contacts with Chinese, both mainland and in Nagasaki in the 1600 and 1700's, and that they left a quiet substrate in some jujutsu schools, quite different from the more rough and straightforward jujutsu that is mainstream.
Er.... actually, I think that proper joint-locks really do form a science of sorts. There are general theories that it helps every practitioner to know.
If you look at just techniques, I don't think you'll find a number of joint locks like those that are shared by Japan and China in other places in the world. The "Nikyo" series (if you'll allow me to coin a phrase) is seen by both China and Japan as an approach to a joint, not necessarily a "technique", which seems to be what you're discussing. I'm trying to say something more in a big picture way... and if both countries share the same big picture, it must be due to more than just casual happenstance. For both China and Japan to have a formulated approach to joint attacks with a related series that is the same is not good for the "quiet substrate" theory, IMO. Worse yet, and this is where I would actually make my argument, the whole theory of joint locks is shared by higher-level Japanese and Chinese martial artists. To get a pertinent-to-Aikido look at this theory, I'd recommend you buy (actually, this book is a must-have, IMO, for every martial artist) "PRACTICAL CHIN NA" by Zhao Da Yuan. Once you grasp how joint-locks are viewed as a whole, then go look in Shioda's book (there are other Japanese books, I'm told, but they're not translated) and watch for the places where he discusses the theories of joint-locks. It's the same big-picture approach. Those are not the quiet substrates of casual cultural contact, insofar as I can see.
But, whatever. I think we agree generally.... we're just arguing specifics.