What rank was Kano shihan?

I found the answer.

Sort of.

https://www.facebook.com/usejc/posts/2084485714914612?notif_id=1530281216040779&notif_t=page_wall

Assuming the author of this book was an authority on the subject of judo rank.
Considering that the judo kyu/dan system was still in evolution at this point.

Assuming that no exceptions might exist to such a rule, with respect not only to the founder of a particular school, but with respect to the person who devised the entire of notion of a kyu/dan ranking system to begin with.

NBK wrote:I found the answer.

Too bad I can't reach FB.

Care for a quote, maybe ?

From Facebook :
Lance Gatling > ‎Embassy Judo Club 大使館柔道道場
Scanning an early 1900's judo book, I found an explanation of Kano shihan's rank in response to a question, what rank is he?
In so many words, only someone 10th dan and over can be called 'shihan'. As there are no others (at the time) of that rank, Kano shihan is the only one. (with the implication: he is 10th dan or higher.)
June 29 at 2:06 PM · Public
ENDQUOTE

Y-Chromosome wrote:Lance Gatling > ‎Embassy Judo Club 大使館柔道道場
Scanning an early 1900's judo book, I found an explanation of Kano shihan's rank in response to a question, what rank is he?
In so many words, only someone 10th dan and over can be called 'shihan'. As there are no others (at the time) of that rank, Kano shihan is the only one. (with the implication: he is 10th dan or higher.)

Thanks.

Jihef wrote:

Y-Chromosome wrote:Lance Gatling > ‎Embassy Judo Club 大使館柔道道場
Scanning an early 1900's judo book, I found an explanation of Kano shihan's rank in response to a question, what rank is he?
In so many words, only someone 10th dan and over can be called 'shihan'. As there are no others (at the time) of that rank, Kano shihan is the only one. (with the implication: he is 10th dan or higher.)

Thanks.

You're welcome.

The explanation was authoritative, and from the mid 1910s.

At the time the highest ranking judoka was Yamashita sensei, IIRC a 7th dan.

I have no idea when the Kodokan changed its certificates from 6dan and above to include the word 'shihan'.

Why would you say the explanation was authoritative? What exactly was this book and who was the author?

Y-Chromosome wrote:Why would you say the explanation was authoritative? What exactly was this book and who was the author?

I write that the source is among the most authoritative in judo because it is. I know it to be one of a very few sources used in official Kodokan histories.

(In reality, perhaps there is one arguably more authoritative, but I am pretty sure that one doesn't address the issue, so there you are.)

But, meanwhile....

Why do you care?
How about I quote it for you - would that be helpful?
Can your computer display pre-WWII kanji, and if it did, could you read it?
Is someone you know entitled 'shihan' in error and now you're worried you have to justify that complete bs?

PS - Your bedside manner leaves much to be desired.

NBK wrote:

Y-Chromosome wrote:Why would you say the explanation was authoritative? What exactly was this book and who was the author?

I write that the source is among the most authoritative in judo because it is. I know it to be one of a very few sources used in official Kodokan histories.

(In reality, perhaps there is one arguably more authoritative, but I am pretty sure that one doesn't address the issue, so there you are.)  

But, meanwhile....

Why do you care?
How about I quote it for you -  would that be helpful?
Can your computer display pre-WWII kanji, and if it did, could you read it?
Is someone you know entitled 'shihan' in error and now you're worried you have to justify that complete bs?

PS - Your bedside manner leaves much to be desired.

I care because I have a love of Judo coupled with an inquisitive mind and an aversion to the spread of misinformation.  We see all kinds of nonsense spread around, but it's hard to fact check and correct or disprove without authoritative sources.
The situation is made worse when disinformation is actually published which then becomes a citeable source.
In the case of Kano's rank, I've seen it written that he was 12th dan, and also that he held a doctoral degree in judo.
It's the kind of thing I would love to correct but I lack the language skills and access to materials.

So it would useful to me, when faced with nonsense that my own club colleagues want to write in our handbook on our website to be able to cite a source.  Likewise, not that I doubt you, but it would be nice to be able to make up my own mind as to how credible the source is.  Maybe it will turn out that I'm in no position to make any such judgement, but it's at least courteous in a collegial atmosphere to give one the benefit of the doubt in that regard.

To put it another way, imagine this conversation:
ME "Hey, I think we should correct that paragraph about Kano's rank." (Or whatever subject.)
OTHER GUY "Really, why?"
ME "Well it's not entirely accurate."
OTHER GUY "How do you know?"
ME "Well... A guy who posts under a pseudonym read about it in a book."
OTHER GUY "What book?"
ME "I don't know, but this anonymous poster says its very authoritative."
OTHER GUY "Really, who wrote it?"
ME "I don't know and this guy with the pseudonym got insulted when I asked who the author is."
OTHER GUY "Hmmmnn."

Information is not free. No matter how much you need facts, in traditional Judo, you might not get them until you have earned them. In internet we barter, so do useful stuff and someone will help you if you have helped them.
I trust NBK and his source. In what he says, there is nothing that contradicts the facts as I know.
You can always state that the source for the information is the book by Anders Niehaus as 1) it is in German 2) it is thick so nobody has read it through. And most importantly there are actually two editions of that book so you can ask "what edition you are referring" (If someone is trying to call your bluff) and then state "You know there are two editions with the same name"
In fact why don't you read through it to find about Kodokan belt system. Also you could refer to Chuto Kyoiku, Sakko and Yuko no katsudo for Kano's writings about belt system.
Yokoyama got his 8th dan in 1912.

NBK wrote:

Y-Chromosome wrote:Why would you say the explanation was authoritative? What exactly was this book and who was the author?

I write that the source is among the most authoritative in judo because it is. I know it to be one of a very few sources used in official Kodokan histories.

(In reality, perhaps there is one arguably more authoritative, but I am pretty sure that one doesn't address the issue, so there you are.)  

But, meanwhile....

Why do you care?
How about I quote it for you -  would that be helpful?
Can your computer display pre-WWII kanji, and if it did, could you read it?
Is someone you know entitled 'shihan' in error and now you're worried you have to justify that complete bs?

PS - Your bedside manner leaves much to be desired.

Is there a reason you take offense to his question? I'd also like to know who/what is considered an authoritative source by someone who knows more than me (you). If someone else came here and cited something from an authoritative source, wouldn't you ask? It's a little disappointing, it kind of killed the conversation.

davidn wrote:

NBK wrote:

Y-Chromosome wrote:Why would you say the explanation was authoritative? What exactly was this book and who was the author?

I write that the source is among the most authoritative in judo because it is. I know it to be one of a very few sources used in official Kodokan histories.

(In reality, perhaps there is one arguably more authoritative, but I am pretty sure that one doesn't address the issue, so there you are.)  

But, meanwhile....

Why do you care?
How about I quote it for you -  would that be helpful?
Can your computer display pre-WWII kanji, and if it did, could you read it?
Is someone you know entitled 'shihan' in error and now you're worried you have to justify that complete bs?

PS - Your bedside manner leaves much to be desired.

Is there a reason you take offense to his question? I'd also like to know who/what is considered an authoritative source by someone who knows more than me (you). If someone else came here and cited something from an authoritative source, wouldn't you ask? It's a little disappointing, it kind of killed the conversation.

So far the 'conversation' mostly consists of not particularly polite questions. I did not take offense to the question, a logical one. I did take exception to the way it was asked, then followed by an unapologetic demand for an answer. If I were to ask, I would like to think I'd ask politely enough to get a response.

Judo 'history' is full of distortions and half-truths. This is one of the more innocent ones. I don't know what postdates this info, can't be bothered to look farther. So there could have been a later statement that overcame this - judo policy and 'culture' evolved pretty dramatically over the decades. (Today it's glossed over if not hidden but I have enough info and period pieces to understand the various eras of Kodokan judo. I have to find the right way to frame it as the opposition to and misunderstanding of such a characterization may be intense.)

This one note was buried in a Judo magazine of the mid 1910s, in a section that seems to never be read, heeded or practiced anymore, the Mondô (Questions and Answers, or Dialogue) section. Anyone from across the Empire and overseas could write in and ask anything, and an authoritative member of the Kodokan staff (usually unidentified) would write a short answer. There are scores of fascinating judo tidbits just sitting there in the decades of collections (I've tinkered with indexing them but am not even sure why I'd bother as people will believe and quote any idiot with a keyboard as soon as the truth.)

The question: what rank is Kano shihan?
The answer: see above.

As far as being authoritative, Kodokan research and histories AFAIK have been limited to information in Kodokan publications for decades, and Judo magazine is the primary source for that historic research as it covers such a wide range of topics over decades. Kano shihan was the sole editor until his death in 1938.

The only more authoritative source I can imagine is his one real book on judo. Since there is an English 'translation', perhaps someone else can check if he addresses rank in a different fashion. But beware the translation is nothing compared to Watson's (below).
https://www.amazon.com/Translation-masterpiece-created-Spanish-English/dp/1364159066/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1530840911&sr=8-8&keywords=kano+judo

The single best English source is Brian Watson's essential translation of the Judo mag serialized interviews with Kano shihan - no one can seriously claim interest in judo history without having a copy and reading it closely and often. Essential. All Kodokan history defers to these interviews. And stupidly cheap on Kindle, $6.

Do you have a copy?

https://www.facebook.com/Brian-N-Watson-113232445507878/

https://www.amazon.com/Judo-Memoirs-Jigoro-Brian-Watson/dp/1425163491

But be aware that the only source therein is Kano shihan himself and his (uncritical) interviewer Ochiai. Kano shihan is like almost all men, subject to failing memory or remembering history in a fashion to enhance his legacy. Mr. Watson, an accomplished judoka and linguist, made no attempt to cross check the text against outside sources.

I have. A couple of people that used to post here have, too, but no longer bother.

For anyone that cares to look I've posted my name herein multiple times.

Lance Gatling
Embassy Judo
Tokyo, Japan
https://www.facebook.com/usejc/

NBK wrote:

davidn wrote:

NBK wrote:

Y-Chromosome wrote:Why would you say the explanation was authoritative? What exactly was this book and who was the author?

I write that the source is among the most authoritative in judo because it is. I know it to be one of a very few sources used in official Kodokan histories.

(In reality, perhaps there is one arguably more authoritative, but I am pretty sure that one doesn't address the issue, so there you are.)  

But, meanwhile....

Why do you care?
How about I quote it for you -  would that be helpful?
Can your computer display pre-WWII kanji, and if it did, could you read it?
Is someone you know entitled 'shihan' in error and now you're worried you have to justify that complete bs?

PS - Your bedside manner leaves much to be desired.

Is there a reason you take offense to his question? I'd also like to know who/what is considered an authoritative source by someone who knows more than me (you). If someone else came here and cited something from an authoritative source, wouldn't you ask? It's a little disappointing, it kind of killed the conversation.

So far the 'conversation' mostly consists of not particularly polite questions. I did not take offense to the question, a logical one. I did take exception to the way it was asked, then followed by an unapologetic demand for an answer. If I were to ask, I would like to think I'd ask politely enough to get a response.

Judo 'history' is full of distortions and half-truths. This is one of the more innocent ones. I don't know what postdates this info, can't be bothered to look farther. So there could have been a later statement that overcame this - judo policy and 'culture' evolved pretty dramatically over the decades. (Today it's glossed over if not hidden but I have enough info and period pieces to understand the various eras of Kodokan judo.  I have to find the right way to frame it as the opposition to and misunderstanding of such a characterization may be intense.)  

This one note was buried in a Judo magazine of the mid 1910s, in a section that seems to never be read, heeded or practiced anymore, the Mondô (Questions and Answers, or Dialogue) section. Anyone from across the Empire and overseas could write in and ask anything, and an authoritative member of the Kodokan staff (usually unidentified) would write a short answer. There are scores of fascinating judo tidbits just sitting there in the decades of collections (I've tinkered with indexing them but am not even sure why I'd bother as people will believe and quote any idiot with a keyboard as soon as the truth.)  

The question: what rank is Kano shihan?
The answer: see above.

As far as being authoritative, Kodokan research and histories AFAIK have been limited to information in Kodokan publications for decades, and Judo magazine is the primary source for that historic research as it covers such a wide range of topics over decades. Kano shihan was the sole editor until his death in 1938.

The only more authoritative source I can imagine is his one real book on judo. Since there is an English 'translation', perhaps someone else can check if he addresses rank in a different fashion. But beware the translation is nothing compared to Watson's (below).
https://www.amazon.com/Translation-masterpiece-created-Spanish-English/dp/1364159066/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1530840911&sr=8-8&keywords=kano+judo

The single best English source is Brian Watson's essential translation of the Judo mag serialized interviews with Kano shihan - no one can seriously claim interest in judo history without having a copy and reading it closely and often. Essential. All Kodokan history defers to these interviews. And stupidly cheap on Kindle, $6.

Do you have a copy?

https://www.facebook.com/Brian-N-Watson-113232445507878/

https://www.amazon.com/Judo-Memoirs-Jigoro-Brian-Watson/dp/1425163491

But be aware that the only source therein is Kano shihan himself and his (uncritical) interviewer Ochiai. Kano shihan is like almost all men,  subject to failing memory or remembering history in a fashion to enhance his legacy. Mr. Watson, an accomplished judoka and linguist, made no attempt to cross check the text against outside sources.

I have. A couple of people that used to post here have, too, but no longer bother.

For anyone that cares to look I've posted my name herein multiple times.

Lance Gatling
Embassy Judo
Tokyo, Japan
https://www.facebook.com/usejc/

Thanks for your input, this is good stuff. (And great pointer on how cheap that book is!). Sadly Judo isn't much different than other martials arts in the history/mythology aspect. Thanks again.

I would be so bold as to suggest Kano Shihan held NO RANK whatsoever.

He was certified as ""Instructor grade"" in several forms of Koryu (Traditional) Ju Jitsu
and developed JUDO as his own system, logic follows that as the ""inventor"" of the Art
known as Judo, there was nobody of rank above him to ""Grade"" him.

At the time of developing JUDO there was no rank structure, the ""European style""
coloured belt system was made for Non Japanese to have an aim or target to acheive.

Just MHO on this matter...trying to answer in a very simplistic way......

NBK comment please on my theory

Steve Leadbeater wrote:I would be so bold as to suggest Kano Shihan held NO RANK whatsoever.

He was certified as ""Instructor grade"" in several forms of Koryu (Traditional) Ju Jitsu
and developed JUDO as his own system, logic follows that as the ""inventor"" of the Art
known as Judo, there was nobody of rank above him to ""Grade"" him.

At the time of developing JUDO there was no rank structure, the ""European style""
coloured belt system was made for Non Japanese to have an aim or target to acheive.

Just MHO on this matter...trying to answer in a very simplistic way......

NBK comment please on my theory

Steve,

I think you're exactly right. Kano shihan had no rank as such - he was 'shihan', or master.

I wrote
"In so many words, only someone 10th dan and over can be called 'shihan'. As there are no others (at the time) of that rank, Kano shihan is the only one. (with the implication: he is 10th dan or higher.)"

but didn't mean I think that he actually had rank.  Probably could have termed that better .

In the earliest days of judo Kano would randori at exhibits, but one day at school someone cleaned his clock - he broke some ribs. And that was that. I can't find a single instance mentioning his randori after recovering.

One of the funnier things in the old Judo mag etc is the occasional article about old men taking up judo - men in their 50s. Wow. Makes you wonder what they'd think of some of the guys today in their 70s still fighting.

finarashi wrote:Information is not free. No matter how much you need facts, in traditional Judo, you might not get them until you have earned them. In internet we barter, so do useful stuff and someone will help you if you have helped them.
I trust NBK and his source. In what he says, there is nothing that contradicts the facts as I know.
You can always state that the source for the information is the book by Anders Niehaus as 1) it is in German 2) it is thick so nobody has read it through. And most importantly there are actually two editions of that book so you can ask "what edition you are referring" (If someone is trying to call your bluff) and then state "You know there are two editions with the same name"
In fact why don't you read through it to find about Kodokan belt system. Also you could refer to Chuto Kyoiku, Sakko and Yuko no katsudo for Kano's writings about belt system.
Yokoyama got his 8th dan in 1912.

The notice system for this forum is not really good.

Finarashi san mentions Chuto Kyoiku (Secondary Education) - I can only find two of that magazine - in 1897.

Interestingly in that magazine one of Kano shihan's fellow contributors is the father of a 13 yr old named Tojo Hideki who would grow up and become the wartime prime minister later executed for his role in WWII.

actually Niehaus refers to
Chuto Kyoiku 1911, Volume 10 p. 8-9. in KJT 5 pp. 139-146.
Sakko 1930, Volume 9, No 2 in KJT pp. 469-474 and
Yuko no katsudo 1920, Volume 6 No. 6 pp. 2-5 and also
KJT 2, 429-433 and KJT 3, 115-116.

finarashi wrote:actually Niehaus refers to
Chuto Kyoiku 1911, Volume 10 p. 8-9. in KJT 5 pp. 139-146.
Sakko 1930, Volume 9, No 2 in KJT pp. 469-474 and
Yuko no katsudo 1920, Volume 6 No. 6 pp. 2-5 and also
KJT 2, 429-433 and KJT 3, 115-116.

That refers to a different Chuto Kyoiku magazine that started after 1900.

Thanks!

for those not steeped in these things,
KJT refers to the 15 volume Kano Jirogo Taikei, or Compendium. Perhaps the most complete collection of Kano shihan's writings, grouped by activities: education, sports, ethics, seiryoku zenyo, bio, photos, etc. Edited by a group of senior Kodokan members, almost $1500 new (long out of print).

NBK wrote:

davidn wrote:

NBK wrote:

Y-Chromosome wrote:Why would you say the explanation was authoritative? What exactly was this book and who was the author?

I write that the source is among the most authoritative in judo because it is. I know it to be one of a very few sources used in official Kodokan histories.

(In reality, perhaps there is one arguably more authoritative, but I am pretty sure that one doesn't address the issue, so there you are.)  

But, meanwhile....

Why do you care?
How about I quote it for you -  would that be helpful?
Can your computer display pre-WWII kanji, and if it did, could you read it?
Is someone you know entitled 'shihan' in error and now you're worried you have to justify that complete bs?

PS - Your bedside manner leaves much to be desired.

Is there a reason you take offense to his question? I'd also like to know who/what is considered an authoritative source by someone who knows more than me (you). If someone else came here and cited something from an authoritative source, wouldn't you ask? It's a little disappointing, it kind of killed the conversation.

So far the 'conversation' mostly consists of not particularly polite questions. I did not take offense to the question, a logical one. I did take exception to the way it was asked, then followed by an unapologetic demand for an answer. If I were to ask, I would like to think I'd ask politely enough to get a response.

Judo 'history' is full of distortions and half-truths. This is one of the more innocent ones. I don't know what postdates this info, can't be bothered to look farther. So there could have been a later statement that overcame this - judo policy and 'culture' evolved pretty dramatically over the decades. (Today it's glossed over if not hidden but I have enough info and period pieces to understand the various eras of Kodokan judo.  I have to find the right way to frame it as the opposition to and misunderstanding of such a characterization may be intense.)  

This one note was buried in a Judo magazine of the mid 1910s, in a section that seems to never be read, heeded or practiced anymore, the Mondô (Questions and Answers, or Dialogue) section. Anyone from across the Empire and overseas could write in and ask anything, and an authoritative member of the Kodokan staff (usually unidentified) would write a short answer. There are scores of fascinating judo tidbits just sitting there in the decades of collections (I've tinkered with indexing them but am not even sure why I'd bother as people will believe and quote any idiot with a keyboard as soon as the truth.)  

The question: what rank is Kano shihan?
The answer: see above.

As far as being authoritative, Kodokan research and histories AFAIK have been limited to information in Kodokan publications for decades, and Judo magazine is the primary source for that historic research as it covers such a wide range of topics over decades. Kano shihan was the sole editor until his death in 1938.

The only more authoritative source I can imagine is his one real book on judo. Since there is an English 'translation', perhaps someone else can check if he addresses rank in a different fashion. But beware the translation is nothing compared to Watson's (below).
https://www.amazon.com/Translation-masterpiece-created-Spanish-English/dp/1364159066/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1530840911&sr=8-8&keywords=kano+judo

The single best English source is Brian Watson's essential translation of the Judo mag serialized interviews with Kano shihan - no one can seriously claim interest in judo history without having a copy and reading it closely and often. Essential. All Kodokan history defers to these interviews. And stupidly cheap on Kindle, $6.

Do you have a copy?

https://www.facebook.com/Brian-N-Watson-113232445507878/

https://www.amazon.com/Judo-Memoirs-Jigoro-Brian-Watson/dp/1425163491

But be aware that the only source therein is Kano shihan himself and his (uncritical) interviewer Ochiai. Kano shihan is like almost all men,  subject to failing memory or remembering history in a fashion to enhance his legacy. Mr. Watson, an accomplished judoka and linguist, made no attempt to cross check the text against outside sources.

I have. A couple of people that used to post here have, too, but no longer bother.

For anyone that cares to look I've posted my name herein multiple times.

Lance Gatling
Embassy Judo
Tokyo, Japan
https://www.facebook.com/usejc/

Thanks for the input and for the lead on the book!