Master Merin is very much correct. I have made a study of many unarmed martial arts as well as learning the art of the blade, and I see so many similarities between them all. A human body is made basically the same for everyone: two arms, two legs, a head and a torso. In this body, the joints and muscles can only move in certain, predestined directions. After time, there are only so many different ways it can move, and as Master Merin has said, it comes down to the skill of the swordsman over the blade itself. The rest is purpose and philosophy.

JGD

I'd agree, the traditional styles fall well within the description of form II. I know from practical experience that the Ken-Jitsu and Iai-jitsu I've dabbled in certainly do, as does the Judicial Dueling and personal self defense of the middle ages I've been studying for the past 7 yrs. On a side note, you'd never realize how many guards are similar from the eastern and western traditions. The mechanics of the cut differ only in that a Katana requires more of a draw to cut properly, but this is only a result of sword design. Though all cutting has a drawing element to it. The European swords could cut, slice, and stab where the Kats were geared almost exclusively for the cut, yet could still thrust if need be. also the cross on a European longsword was used to not only protect the hands but to collect and bind up an opponents sword. The Ken-Jitsu system rely on voiding to a much greater degree then the European systems, but again voiding existed in both, as did wrestling at the sword, grappling, and disarming. I think the European sword was a little more versatile, but that's due to preference. The we're developed for different circumstances and their designs and uses developed accordingly as those circumstances changed. Like any sword from any style no sword does the cutting for you though, not even a light saber. Your whole body has to move a certain way, a way shared by both systems, to get the sword to preform it's function.

I'm sorry I've been away for a lil while and I'm just freaking tired so I'll be on here sporatically but the student will always learn even if I do have beat my head against the wall to do so... LOL... *bows* FS

I'm between a rock and a hard place this is one of those life trails that tests resolve and spirit and determination... I will not lose! I can't too much to lose... head hung from being tired but I can still hold it up high cuz I just do my job and do for my daughter... may the force be with you all always... *bows* FS

Gamer like I said just study read up look into the books so you can understand the mythos better and trust in the force it will show you the truth if you choose to listen... May the force be with you always... *bows* FS

Master Karen I know!!!! There seems to be a surplus of ignorance going around lately (I dont just mean here)... Master Scythe yeah this sucks because the same problem will plague our jedipedia as well!!! at least we have people looking after it so it might not get as bad... lol

There's something that I want to point out it's just what I can see from at least your self and Masters Scythe and Grayson the way you guys describe your sword techniques all I see from your descriptions is Form II Makashi... Am I wrong in my assertation? which given how old this technique is it makes perfect sense I think we need to focus on the first two styles and then move on accordingly... That being said Shii-Cho, Makashi are the oldest styles the order has Shii-Cho being based on the long sword, wide sword, samurai, ninja, and even a touch of kali-stick I've seen in this style and from what I cansee in makashi is kendo, fencing, fiore, and even wide sword... I'm sure there is more to it but then again at this point in my life it seems that Shii-cho fits me better but I wouldn't mind getting into Makashi later on... Just some thoughts


May the force be with you Master Merin always

amen... Master Merin... amen...

I wasn't aware that wookiepedia was an open source to be edited by anyone? hmmmm that sucks! lol

*bows*

And that is hardly a good source since anyone can edit it. And do you really think we wouldn't know this information? Please, next time you copy this much from a source, explain it and cite where you got it from.