The Classification and Ethos of
Filipino Martial Traditions

In all human experience there is this confrontation
between public cultural forms and socially informed
but individually reconstructed knowledge
and intuition.
-ROBERT W. HEFNER

Introduction

Researchers investigating martial culture in India, China, and Japan usually analyze family-owned manuscripts (India), classical texts (China) and densho transmission-scrolls (Japan), in order to determine the nature and evolution of various martial practices and techniques. This is a task requiring many years work even if confined to specific texts or particular time periods in history. Unfortunately, as the martial arts later spread into South-east Asia the use of such "recorded documents" disappeared. It is unclear as to why this happened. One may speculate that this may have had something to do with the destruction extending from many invasions in this area (e.g., the Spanish invasion of the Philippines and the subsequent destruction and burning of records, writings, and other cultural artifacts).

As a result, researchers attempting to explore Filipino martial culture may be frustrated by the lack of written documentation to support their investigations. Moreover, the books that the practitioners have written are themselves often transcribed oral history. Much of the information contained in such books is indicative of the characteristic weaknesses of oral historiography: historical dates are often inaccurate; legends are taken at face value; exaggerated claims are made concerning an individual's martial prowess; and the heroic feats of culture-heroes are taken as fact and now recorded in the written word as if they are true. Conversely, through the transmission of oral history one can learn many things: intimate details about a master's life-history; "rites of passage" involved in martial arts training; and the actual events surrounding challenge-matches in contemporary Filipino society, thus dispelling the perpetuation of recent myths.

For these reasons oral historiography is considered a legitimate method of inquiry in researching various aspects of Filipino culture today.¹ Demetrio's position on this is well taken: "oral tradition is concerned not with authorship or the fact.... Most of the time what is handed down as tradition has no author, nor can it be fully established as 'fact' always. Yet the fact that a story, a proverb, a myth is handed down either orally or in writing, whether in its entirety or in part, argues for its value and importance for both the tradition bearers and receivers."²

To illustrate this point even further one may consider the myth associated with Lapulapu with respect to the origin of Filipino martial arts. To consider this creation myth in general, one must consider the position taken by most martial arts practitioners in tracing the origins of their systems. To begin, many martial arts practitioners purport to trace the origins of their systems back to Bodhidharma despite high quality scholarship indicating that there is no connection.³ Related more specifically to a single system of martial arts, many practitioners of tai chi chuan identify its originator as Chang San-feng, again despite evidence to the contrary.⁴ A similar parallel is found in the Filipino martial arts tradition with attempts of Christianized Filipino masters to trace the lineage of their respective martial systems to Lapulapu. Lapulapu became the first national hero of the Philippines for repelling the Spanish conquistadors whose religion and language many of these masters currently embrace. In addition, since the historical legitimacy of Maragtas has been disproven, its account of the Bothoan school of martial arts is, therefore, also untrue.

However, while the connection between Lapulapu, the Bothoan, and these masters' respective martial arts is historically unfounded, their belief in this connection is of great importance. From an anthropologically perspective, the historical accuracy of these accounts is less important than what these practitioners believe and why. It is precisely these creation myths which provide the martial arts practitioner with a sense of meaning, identity, and orientation to world historical events in general. To this end, Rosaldo suggests that the researcher "can learn much about meaningful action by listening to storytellers as they depict their own lives."⁵

For the reasons noted above, the purpose of my research has been to classify Filipino martial arts and explore the ethos of Filipino martial culture by deriving information directly from the contemporary masters who have maintained an oral transmission of information concerning the evolution and development of their respective martial arts systems.

Classification of Filipino Martial Arts

A common misconception with respect to Filipino martial arts is that there is only one indigenous martial art in the Philippines (i.e., kali). Many contemporary instructors and writers assert that the respective terms for the martial arts of kali, eskrima, and arnis (among a shopping list of others) are synonymous and represent one single martial art form.⁶ (This problem is confounded by the fact that instructors of the various arts tend to change the names of their systems from arnis to kali to eskrima, for example, whenever a specific term becomes more popular than anther.) Others claim that the latter two arts are but mere "phases" of kali, the so-called "mother art" of the Philippines.⁷ Contrary to common beliefs, this is simply not the case.

Since Indonesian pencak-silat and Malaysian langka-silat predate Filipino kali as martial arts in the Philippines, one naturally concludes that kali cannot be the "mother art" of the Philippines as so many writers suggest. Are we to assume that the hypothesis classifying eskrima and arnis as "phases" of kali holds water just because they evolved from the latter art? If so, would it not follow, then, that the art of kali is but a "phase" of silat, its precursor? If this classification is to be used then it would also follow that silat is at once the "mother art" and only "complete" martial art in the Philippines. Such a contention is at once naive and absurd.

This classification theory is further refuted when one considers the vast number of indigenous grappling arts that survive to this day among various indigenous tribal and ethnic groups in the Philippines. Tribes such as the Ifugao, Samal, Igorot, Ibanag, Manobo, Dumagat, and Maranao practice grappling arts known respectively as bultong, silaga, dama, garong, buteng, purgos, and kapulubod. Various ethnic groups such as the Tagalog, Ilokano, Cebuano, Bicolano, Pampanga, and Pangasinan, practice grappling arts known as gabbo, layung, lampugan, pantok, balsakan, and dumog respectively.⁸ Any attempt to categorize these indigenous grappling arts as one and the same based on their shared unarmed grappling characteristic would do much to deny the Filipino his inherited right of autonomous tribal/ethnic expression. In addition, these grappling arts were practiced in the Philippines prior the spread of the Indonesian and Malaysian silat systems. Therefore, they cannot be a "phase" of kali—an art grounded in the techniques of silat and structured around the use of bladed weapons.

The theory of a single indigenous Filipino martial art is further disproved in its apparent dismissal of the practice of martial arts transplanted and maintained in whole from other Asian countries (e.g., the practice of Chinese kun-tao and Indonesian and Malaysian silat systems by the Samal and Tausug tribes of the Southern Philippines). Furthermore, the contemporary empty-hand systems of sikaran, yaw-yan, sagasa, and hagibis, for example, belong to neither of the weapons-based system classifications of kali, eskrima, or arnis, nor are they related to kun-tao or silat. It is not possible, then, for these arts to be classified as a "phase" of kali.

With regard to the term kali as being the name of a pre-Hispanic Filipino martial art, it is not. There is no historical, anthropological, or literary evidence to support the contention that an art by this name existed during or prior to the sixteenth century. In fact, there is a great deal of speculation as to the original meaning and use of the term in the Philippines. Placido Yambao, for example, equates the shortened term kali as having derived from martial arts terms in various dialects such as pagkalikali (Ibanag), kalirongan (Pangasinan), and kaliradman (Visayan).⁹ Remy Presas posits that the term derives from the Indonesian martial art of tjakalele.¹⁰ Some claim that the term derives from the black and bloody Hindu goddess Kali, consort of the Hindu god Siva.¹¹ Others associate the term kali as deriving from the name of the kalis sword, and reverse spelling of silat (or silak). Still others equate the term with an abbreviation of Kalimantan (North Borneo), the island from which the ten datus fled, eventually establishing the Bothoan on Panay. However, a study of various historical, anthropological, literary, and "popular" sources indicates that the term, as used to identify a martial art, did not exist prior to the twentieth century.

A study of the popular martial arts magazines finds the term originally associated with the martial arts group of the late grandmaster, Floro Villabrille. In fact, the current grandmaster of the system, Ben Largusa, states that the term kali is an acronym derived from the Visayan word roots ka, from kamut (hands) and li, from lihok (movement). Moreover, kali was not the name of Villabrille's system prior to relocating to Hawaii as evidenced by his rank certificate which states that he is a grandmaster of escrima. Again, even within its intended context the term kali is neither used nor mentioned.

The term in fact became popular through the extensive writings on Filipino martial arts by Dan Inosanto. It is Inosanto who has had perhaps the greatest influence on the public's perception of what constitutes the Filipino arts and the history associated with them. To his credit, Inosanto has successfully established the existence of the Filipino fighting systems along side the more popular martial arts of Korea, China, and Japan. However, it is his misunderstanding of the arts, due no doubt from the lack of scholarly material on the subject, which has also misled the public. In presenting the arts, like others before him, Inosanto chose to be over simplistic and lump all of the Filipino martial arts under one category (i.e., kali). While it is indeed this simplicity that allowed the public to construct an understanding of the Filipino martial arts, it also led to a great deal of confusion when attempting to reconstruct the origins and characteristics of the various systems, and hence try to classify them.

Any attempt at classifying the Filipino martial arts based on the names which practitioners have ascribed to them, is necessarily confounded by the interchangeability of many Filipino terms. The inherent problem with trying to distinguish between the plethora of names which are ascribed to the Filipino martial arts, is that without an understanding of what the terms connotes it may appear that all of the different terms refer to the same art.

After closely analyzing the "systems" of the contemporary masters, and as a result of having an intimate understanding of the arts through eighteen years of participant observation, I was able to construct the following organization of the terms into specific categories relating to Filipino martial arts in general. From this analysis, I have determined that there are four categories into which all of the terms fall, thus enabling an understand of what, specifically, they refer to. First, there are over twenty-five generic terms that refer to "the Filipino art of weaponry," (e.g., eskrima, kabaroan, pananandata). Second, there are over thirty-five "styles" of Filipino fighting techniques, (i.e., abaniko, doblete, lastiko). Third, there are eight categories by which the masters name their arts (e.g., after the province where they are from, after the names of culture-heroes, after their art's predominant fighting range). And fourth, there are over seventy "systems" of Filipino martial arts, (e.g., Biñas dynamic arnis, kali Ilustrisimo, Giron arnis/escrima). (For detailed lists of these four categories, see Appendixes 1 through 3).

It is therefore easy to see why people assume that the terms kali, eskrima, and arnis represent a single art-form-They are all terms which generically refer to the Filipino art of weaponry, regardless of martial "system." This does not mean, however, that all of the "systems" of Filipino weaponry are the same: they are not. Next, we must distinguish between a martial arts "style" and "system." The term style refers to methods or characteristics of fighting movements, such as the abaniko or "fanning" style. Within each "style" is found a number of fighting "techniques," or arranged sequences of offensive and defensive movements in response to general or specific attacks. So, within the various "styles" of fighting are the "techniques" which comprise the Filipino martial arts. A "system," then, is made up of "techniques" from a variety of "styles," which are intimately connected and taught in a progressive manner. And finally, the name that a master ascribes to his "system" is chosen from one of eight categories.

To exemplify this, while demonstrating his "system" a master might say it is called the abaniko "style" of pananandata. From this, the public might assume that his "system" is called pananandata abaniko. However, this may not be so. As a result of all of these terms coming into play when referring to a Filipino martial art (e.g., the system's name; the name of its fighting "styles" and their respective "techniques"), it is easy to see how a general misunderstanding toward their respective identities has evolved.

What is clear, then, is that the only terms that are interchangeable are those which refer to the "Filipino art of weaponry" in a general sense. With this in mind, the terms kali, eskrima, arnis, kabaroan, and pananandata, for example, are the same insofar as they refer to the Filipino art of weaponry in a global sense (much like the term bujutsu refers to the Japanese martial arts in general and not to the specific systems of karate, judo, or kyudo in particular). The distinction between what constitutes a general term for Filipino arts of weaponry, stylistic fighting techniques, and names of specific systems, then, should now be clear.

With the apparent confusion over the terminology of Filipino martial arts resolved, a general classification of the Filipino martial arts "systems" can be constructed. As indicated by the results of this study, it is clear that the martial arts of the contemporary Filipino masters tend to fall into three classifications: "ancient," "classical," and "modern."¹¹ The martial arts found in twentieth century Philippines are the culmination of an evolutionary process which includes influences from Indonesia, Malaysia, China, Europe, the United States, and Japan. It is therefore impossible to define the "classical" systems of eskrima or the "modern" systems of arnis, for example, as a "phase" of any art which did not evolve during their respective time-periods.

The following are definitions of the "ancient," "classical," and "moderns" systems, visually illustrated with technique photographs. (Since the Filipino martial arts are not based on static postures but ever-changing and fluid movements, the reader is urged not to attend to the esthetic quality of each pose but rather to analyze the more important qualities of body positioning, control of distance, and angles of attack and defense.) Please note that this tripartite classification system is a general way of categorizing the Filipino martial arts, and is by no means the only way. In addition, many of the Filipino martial arts fall into more than one classification because they are composite systems (i.e., made up of several Filipino arts). With this in mind, the martial arts of the eighteen masters presented in Part Four are categorized here by the classification they most effectively fit into. Since fighting techniques are artifacts of a time and place, and the proceeding systems are more than not contemporary "creations" (i.e., founded, developed, or refined during the twentieth century), they are not classified by the date they were "founded," but by their technical fighting characteristics. Therefore, if a martial art was founded twenty years ago, for example, but its techniques are characteristic of the "ancient" systems, it is classified as such.

THE "ANCIENT" SYSTEMS

"Ancient" Filipino martial arts were practiced prior to the arrival of the Spanish in 1521. Generally speaking, the "ancient" arts (often referred to as kali), are structured around the use of Indonesian and Malaysian swords (i.e., kris, barong, kampilan), the use of indigenous projectile weapons (i.e., sumpit, pana), the use of flexible weapons (i.e., kadena, panyo), with footwork patterns structured around elaborate geometric shapes. Preserved in the unconquered Muslim areas of the southern Philippines, these arts did not undergo the same evolutionary process as did eskrima and arnis. Therefore, the "ancient" art of kali could not have possibly maintained eskrima or arnis in its curricular phases—Spain, the United States, and Japan had not, as of the height of this art's popularity in the archipelago (prehistory to A.D. 1521), dominated the Philippines. The following are examples of techniques found in three "ancient" systems of kali Ilustrisimo, lameco eskrima, and Tobosa kali/escrima.

Kali Ilustrisimo

Antonio Ilustrisimo (left) prepares to defend against a backhand stick strike initiated by Edgar Sulite (Fig. 1). As the stick nears, Ilustrisimo steps to diagonally forward to the left while parrying the attacking-arm and thrusting the tip of his stick into the attacker's throat (Fig. 2). Ilustrisimo then maintains the check on his opponent's arm as he brings his own stick around it (Fig. 3). He finishes the technique by switching his lead leg and striking his opponent on the head (Fig. 4).

Lameco Eskrima

Edgar Sulite (left) prepares to engage in a sword and dagger fight (Fig. 1). As the opponent executes a backhand slash with his sword, Sulite blocks it with his own sword, while using his left wrist to slow the momentum of the strike (Fig. 2). Continuing with the momentum of the strike, Sulite repositions his body while thrusting his dagger into the opponent's stomach (Fig. 3). The opponent follows-up with a straight dagger thrust, which Sulite avoids by stepping back with his left leg and simultaneously redirecting the strike while slashing the opponent's neck (Fig. 4).

Tobosa Kali/Escrima

Donald Mendoza (right) blocks an overhead stick strike from Paul Tobosa (Fig. 1), and counters with a stick thrust to his throat (Fig. 2). The opponent initiates a follow-up strike to Mendoza's knee, which is blocked (Fig. 3). Mendoza finishes the technique by thrusting his stick into the opponent's stomach (Fig. 4).

THE "CLASSICAL" SYSTEMS

"Classical" Filipino martial arts evolved during a three-century ban on the "ancient" martial arts (1565-1898). Many of these systems, therefore, encompasses elements of European swordplay which the preserved "ancient" arts do not. Initially, the arts of eskrima, for example, were practiced with long and short sticks-as even the brandishing of the general utility bolo was prohibited. Since Western fencing became a favorite past time among mestizos (Filipinos of Spanish descent) sticks were later replaced by European-style edged weapons such as the estoc. The footwork patterns of the "classical" weapons systems tend to be structured around a triangle set between two parallel lines. Moreover, while the classical systems generally have an elaborate repertoire of hand-to-weapon defenses they have only marginal techniques of hand-to-hand fighting. The following are examples of techniques found in eight "classical" systems of arnis Escorpizo, Biñas dynamic arnis, Cabales serrada escrima, Giron arnis/escrima, lightning scientific arnis, pananandata Mariñas, and Rigonan-Estalilla kabaroan.

Arin Escorpizo

The author (right) prepares to defend against a horizontal stick strick (Fig.1).As the opponent's stick nears, Wiley parries it with his left hand (Fig.2),and counters with a series of strikes to the opponent's hand (Figs.3-5). He finishes the techniques by checking the opponent's arm and striking the his head (Fig.6).

Binas Dynamic Arnis

The author (right) prepares to defend against a stick attack (Fig. 1). As the strike nears, Wiley steps on a forward angle with his left foot and redirects the strike with the back of his right hand (Fig. 2). He then grabs the opponent's neck with his left hand and wrist with his right hand (Fig. 3). Wiley then steps forward with his right foot and wraps his opponent's attacking arm around the his head (Fig. 4), and controls the opponent by using his left hand to grab the opponent's right wrist (Fig. 5). The opponent is then thrown to the ground by simultaneously pushing on exposed elbow and pulling on the grabbed wrist (Fig. 6).

Cabales Serrada Escrima

The author (right) prepares to defend against a stick strike (Fig. 1). As the strike nears, Wiley blocks it with his own stick (Fig. 2) and placing his checking-hand under the opponent's attacking-hand (Fig. 3). Next, Wiley steps forward with his left leg, raises the opponent's stick, and strikes him on the knee (Fig. 4). Wiley then repositions himself by stepping back with his right leg and checking the opponent's lead-arm (Fig. 5). He finishes the techniques by delivering a strike the opponent's head (Fig. 6).

Giron Arnis/Eserima

Leo Giron (right) prepares to defend against an attack by Tony Somera (Fig. 1). Giron avoids the strike by stepping to the left, angling his body, and parrying the stick with his own stick (Fig. 2). The parry follows naturally into an upward strike across the opponent's stomach (Figs. 3, 4). Giron finishes the technique by shifting his posture and weight to the right, while delivering a backhand strike to the elbow of the opponent's striking arm (Fig. 5).

Lightning Scientific Arnis

Benjamin Luna-Lema (left) prepares to defend against an attack by Elmer Ybañez (Fig. 1). As the strike nears Lema blocks it and checks the opponent's hand (Fig. 2), en route to tying-up opponent's attacking arm (Fig. 3). Although the opponent is locked, Lema is free to check and block the knife thrust (Fig. 4). Lema finishes the technique by repositioning his body away from the knife (Fig. 5) and locking his opponent's limbs once again (Fig. 6) and taking him down (Fig. 7).

Pananandata Marinas

Amante Mariñas' (left) prepares to defend against a stick-and-dagger attack by his son, Mat (Fig. 1). As the stick strike nears, Mariñas steps to the left, and blocks the stick with his stick while simultaneously cutting his opponent's hand (Fig. 2). The opponent immediately attempts a dagger thrust, which Mariñas simultaneously blocks by simultaneously striking the opponent's hand with his stick, and cutting the opponent's hand with his dagger (Fig. 3). To finish the technique, Mariñas maintains the check on the opponent's attacking hand with his dagger, and thrusts his own stick under the opponent's arm, striking him in the throat (Fig. 4).

Rigonan-Estalilla Kabaroan

Ramiro Estalilla (right) squares-off with his son, Prince (Fig. 1). Estalilla initiates with a sibat thrust, which is blocked (Fig. 2). Estalilla immediately follows up with a thrust with his bangkaw (Fig. 3), which also is blocked. This was s set-up by Estalilla to open the unguarded line of attack on the right side of his opponent's head, for a circular strike (Fig. 4).

THE "MODERN" SYSTEMS

"Modern" Filipino martial arts evolved as a result of Philippine independence from Spain, and subsequent culture contact with the United States and Japan (1898 to the present). These "modern" martial arts generally feature the inclusion of hand-to-hand defensive techniques largely incorporated from any combination of Okinawan, Japanese, Korean, and Chinese sources. Moreover, they tend to lack sophisticated footwork with training essentially centered around modern sport competition. The following are examples of techniques found in seven "modern" systems of arnis Lanada, Balintawak arnis cuentada, hagibis, kuntaw lima-lima, sagasa, sikaran, Tendencia arnis, and Vee arnis jitsu.

Arnis Lanada

Porferio Lanada (left) prepares to defend against an attack by Alex Ngoi (Fig. 1). As the attacker's stick nears, Lanada pivots to the right as he maneuvers his stick behind the opponent's (Fig. 2), thus directing it down and avoiding impact (Fig. 3). With his own stick already in position, Lanada immediately grabs the opponent's wrist (Fig. 4), and disarms him by moving his own hands in opposite directions (Fig, 5). Using the momentum of the disarm, Lanada finishes the technique by striking the opponent and taking him down with a stick-lock (Fig. 6).

Balintawak Arnis Cuentada

Bobby Taboada (right) prepares to defend against his opponent's stick strike and punch combination (Fig. 1). Taboada pivots to the left while deflecting the thrust with his stick (Fig. 2). As the opponent initiates the left follow-up punch, Taboada immediately parries it with his free hand, and counters with a horizontal stick strike to his ribs (Figs. 3, 4). The opponent attempts a stick strike to the face, which Taboada blocks with his stick (Fig. 5). Taboada completes the technique by raising his stick arm, while maintaining control of his opponent's attacking arm (Fig. 6), checking it with his left hand (Fig. 7), and finishing with a backhand blow to the opponent's head (Fig. 8).

Hagibis

Ray Galang (left) prepares to defend against a punch (Fig. 1). As the strike nears, Galang deflects it with his left arm (Fig. 2), lowers his center of gravity, and wraps his right arm around his opponent's neck (Fig. 3). This position allows Galang to kick his leg through the opponent's and drop to the ground (Fig. 4), throwing the opponent head-over-heals (Fig. 5).

Kuntaw Lima-Lima

Carlito Lañada (left) prepares to defend against a spinning kick (Fig. 1). As the kick nears, Lañada pivots 90 degrees to the right and scoops the on-coming leg (Fig. 2), then kicks-out the opponent's supporting leg (Fig. 3). Lañada then sweeps the opponent while maintaining control of his right arm (Fig. 4), and finished with a reverse punch to his throat (Fig. 5).

Sagasa

Christopher Ricketts (right) prepares to defend against an attack by Ronnie Ricketts (Fig. 1). As the opponent attacks, Ricketts shifts his body to the left while parrying the attack with his left hand (Fig. 2). He then steps forward and places his right leg behind his opponent's left leg, places his right arm over his opponent's ribs while keeping his left arm in a ready position, thus breaking his opponent's balance (Fig. 3). To finish the technique, Ricketts pivots his body to the right and extends his right arm which causes his opponent to be thrown to the ground (Fig. 4).

Sikaran

Jimmy Geronimo (left) squares off with his opponent (Fig. 1). As the opponent executes an inward crescent kick, Geronimo parries it (Fig. 2). He then simultaneously grabs the opponent's extended leg to offset his balance, angles his body to the outside of the kicks direction of force, and counters with a roundhouse kick to the opponent's sternum (Fig. 3). As the opponent falls to the ground, Geronimo retracts his kicking leg to maintain the distance between him and his opponent, to avoid being attacked by ground-fighting techniques (Fig. 4).

Tendencia Arnis

Sam Tendencia (left) prepare to block the opponent's overhand stick strike (Fig. 1). Immediately upon blocking the strike, Tendencia redirects it downward and inserts his stick around the opponent's while striking him (Fig. 2). Tendencia, with his left hand, turns the opponent's stick clockwise and, with the butt of his stick, immobilizes the opponent's hand (Fig. 3). To complete the technique, Tendencia pulls his stick to the side to disarm the opponent, while maintaining ahold of the opponent's wrist (Fig. 4).

Vee Arnis Jitsu

Fiorendo Visitacion (left) prepares for an attack by the author (Fig. 1). Opponent initiates a forehand strike which is blocked (Fig. 2) and immediately countered with a strike to opponent's wrist (Fig. 3). After striking opponent's wrist Visitacion checks it for safety while assuming a thrusting posture (Fig. 4), used to distract the opponent from the intended backhand strike to the jaw (Fig. 5). This is followed with a simultaneous wrist- lock and stick thrust to the neck (Fig. 6), finishing with a combination takedown/ arm-break/choking controlling maneuver (Fig. 7).

One may suspect that every martial art which has survived the plague of time is effective in combat. This is not necessarily so. A number of martial arts, Filipino and otherwise, have maintained their status through tradition although their techniques have become largely antiquated. A number of other systems are contemporary creations and have yet to be "proven" in an actual confrontation. Thus, many martial arts are more theoretical than practical.

The contemporary masters of the Filipino martial arts unanimously assert that their respective systems are the most effective in the world. In addition, many claim to be undefeated in "death-matches" which, of course, leads one to believe that they never fought one another in such contests. It is not possible that every master possesses the most effective techniques. If this were the case then a form of martial Darwinism would have taken place, leaving only the most effective martial art to exist in contemporary society. What we find in the Philippines and the United States, rather, is quite a diverse strata of Filipino martial arts. Each of these systems and their subsequent styles are certainly more effective in certain areas than others. Thus, many martial arts flourish, each effective in their own right. These systems, moreover, are better suited to certain individuals than others based on their general movement characteristics. To this end, the different personalities of these masters have contributed greatly to the diversity of Filipino martial arts. The prevalence of so many ethnic groups in the Philippines further adds to the uniqueness of its martial arts masters and the diversity, structure, and characteristic of their martial arts systems. Thus, there appears to be no simple blending, no unified art, no unified philosophy, but the three classifications of "ancient," "classical," and "modern." Given these observations, it is now appropriate to examine the ethos of Filipino martial culture in relation to that of other Asian countries.

Ethos of Filipino Martial Culture

As the martial arts in the Philippines have moved from "ancient" to "classical" to "modern," its practitioners have attempted to emulate what they perceive as "higher" forms of martial culture (e.g., the adoption of training uniforms, colored belt ranking, and structured group classes). This emulation began as a result of martial-culture contact with Spain. However, while the martial cultures of these countries have become more passive through time, the Filipinos have apparently been unable to shed their warrior ethos. This is evidenced in the continuation of legal "death-matches" until 1945, and their existence in private today—an event compounded by Filipino culture itself. One does not find this kind of combative ethos present in India, China, or Japan. And while the Filipinos have attempted to emulate the evolution of martial arts as it is understood in these three countries, they have thus far been unsuccessful in doing so. However, unlike India, China, or Japan, the Filipino has been able to maintain the martial rigor of true fighting disciplines.

Essentially, it is postulated that the Filipinos have been unsuccessful in emulating "higher" martial arts forms as a result of the prevalent intensity of their warrior ethic. Whatever the impinging factor in Filipino culture-perhaps the self-concept of inferiority from being invaded and colonized by so many countries, or constant warring factions between islands-it is similar to Japan's pre-Tokugawa period. During Japan's seventeenth century Tokugawa period (1603-1868) the bakufu (military government) organized the various warrior factions into a single unit.¹³ This has not taken place in the Philippines. As a result, there is still no single martial arts organization, political faction, ethnic or social integration. In essence, it can be said that the Philippines is faced with having no essential original national character.

In contemporary Indian society, martial arts have become so diluted that they are virtually found only expressed in dance forms. Even the classic writing by Draeger and Smith merely focuses on its sport-oriented wrestling traditions.¹⁴ Phillip Zarrilli is the first Westerner to "rediscover" the existence of the ancient Indian martial art of kalarippayattu. But even his analysis of the combat form is in terms of physical fighting techniques as dance movements, and as an internal alchemy used to improve one's health-not to fight off warring factions or other martial practitioners.¹⁵ Therefore, not only has India's martial culture become diluted but it is virtually extinct.

On the contrary, China has maintained it martial culture as a national treasure. This was done as a political vehicle to project the essence of their culture to the world. In the past twenty to thirty years since the Cultural Revolution, members of China's politburo have investigated their martial traditions. This was effected by insisting (against the will of the masters) that practitioners demonstrate in public and allow video taping of their skills. This permitted the Chinese government to make a catalog of its broad martial culture.¹⁶ As a result, the Chinese government took archaic forms of combat and diluted them into a single, unified martial form known as wu shu.¹⁷ Wu shu combines elements of martial arts, dance and opera with gymnastic overtones, into the formation of a single expression of Chinese culture. Thus, as wu shu, Chinese martial culture is at once more accessible and more easily comprehended by the outside world. One finds little effort made on behalf of the Philippine government in an attempt to preserve their martial culture.

Historically, the classical martial arts of Japan were relatively unknown even to Japanese citizens. To this day the Japanese have been cited as having little knowledge of their true martial heritage.¹⁸ In fact, the samurai tradition disappeared over 300 years ago. Draeger and Smith note that the bujutsu (martial arts) forms have been superseded by the budo (martial way) forms. Furthermore, even though specific fighting techniques of the bujutsu tradition were practiced in a clandestine fashion in Japan.¹⁹ Moreover, while various martial arts are still practiced in Japan today, the actual intensity of feeling a need to kill somebody in a "death-match" as part of a routine test of skills is not found. While this warrior ethos was present in Japan during medieval times it clearly does not exist in contemporary Japanese society.

Indian, Chinese, and Japanese cultures are able to maintain a consistency of information concerning their martial disciplines through the existence of "preserved" textual writings. The Filipinos have no such body of literature. What is found, rather, are a number of writings which have paraphrased common sources which, themselves, are largely inaccurate. Perhaps due to a heightened sense of cultural value placed on scholarship in other Asian countries their martial arts are viewed in a more favorable light.²⁰ Conversely, as a result of invasion and constant repression of their indigenous beliefs, a general lack of literacy, and a general poor third-world image, Filipinos at large tend to look with disfavor upon their own cultural (and martial) heritage.²¹

It is a positive attitude toward martial culture which has led other Asian countries to further develop and refine their martial arts. This can be seen in the standardization of rank and its corresponding colored-belt designation, the opening of formal martial arts schools for public instruction, and recommended reading of indigenous philosophical works. These elements have further heightened the Indian, Chinese, and Japanese understanding of the warrior worldview which at once involves an intimate synthesis of Eastern philosophy and religion. In the Philippines, however, there is no unified or generally accepted martial arts ranking structure or formal schools of instruction. There is also no major or singular indigenous religious tradition or philosophical ideology that embodies ancient and contemporary Filipino beliefs. What is found, rather, are various syncretic forms of endemic animistic beliefs, Islam, and Catholicism.

Moreover, in the Philippines the individual personal beliefs of an instructor may in fact have no direct relationship, correlation, or extension of a particular system or of the teacher his system is supposedly based upon. Conversely, in countries like India, China, and Japan one finds the imparting of knowledge of an art to generally embrace an entire system of physical skills, philosophy, and in some cases supernatural practices and healing traditions. In these countries the whole of a system is transmitted from teacher to student-the student molding himself to the art-through established ritualistic practices. This is not the case in the Philippines where the individual is often looked upon as greater than the art, as evidenced by the vast number of systems named after contemporary masters. Such ideographic belief patterns and practices are precisely why there is so much disunity among the various ethnic groups in the Philippines and why the central and northern regions were successfully colonized by way of the "divide-and-conquer" strategy employed by the Spanish conquistadors in the sixteenth century.

The Philippine Archipelago is a melting pot of peoples and cultures. While the evolution of Filipino martial arts may be interpreted by some in terms of ideas assimilated from its Asian neighbors, to do so solely in such terms is naive. As Harding suggests: "When acted upon by external forces a culture will, if necessary, undergo specific changes only to the extent of and with the effect of preserving unchanged its fundamental structure and character."²² There is presently no single martial arts organization, political faction, ethnic or social integration in the Philippines. However, it is precisely the Filipinos' ability to absorb other cultural traditions without being absorbed that has crafted their martial arts into something essentially and uniquely Filipino.

It can therefore be concluded that while three classifications of Filipino martial arts exists today (i.e., "ancient," "classical," and "modern"), their contemporary practitioners appear to be moving toward completely embracing the "modern" form. The intent of these practitioners to follow the patterns which have unfolded in India, China, and Japan to promote commodified, government sanctioned martial "arts" and sports is apparent in the results of this study. While many of the contemporary masters embody the ethos of the "ancient" Filipino warrior (e.g., the primary use of bladed weapons as opposed to sticks, the possession of amulets and prayers for divine protection in combat, and belief that participation in a "death-match" is the only true indicator of one's skill), the practitioners of the modern systems do not. Therefore, it remains to be seen if the social and political factors in the post modern Philippines will continue to maintain a hold on any evolution of a cohesive unified martial arts ideology which complements its Asian neighbors.