1) The golden age of martial arts was before the popularifation of the gun

I don't think this is likely. It's based on an assumption that the need for the martial arts was erased by the gun. However, fights still happen, assaults still happen without guns being involved, people beat up people quite often. Therefore, it's not the lack of fist fights that's the "problem".

Guns knocked out swords as an effective weapon, but fists will always be the weapon you always have with you, so their pertinence was not taken away by guns. And the fact that swords, or traditional weapons, for that matter, became obsolete, does not relate to their technical advancement as an art.

Look at western swordsmanship. It is my understanding that western sword techniques reached their most advanced level AFTER the gun took over warfare. Before that, it was heavy armor and horse, if you were on the ground in full plate, well, good luck to you. Once guns came into play, sword work became more systematized, and crossed over into an art. Yet it was not in use on the battlefield, at least by the winners.

So there is an example of a martial art that was far more directly affected by the advent of the gun than unarmed fighting, yet peaked after the gun. So the argument that the golden age was before the gun is, IMO, not necessarily true.

In addition, the information we get from the past is often pretty spotty. For instance, the idea that wing chun was developed to teach troops fast. OK, I can buy that. All except starting with hand forms. No general would stand for it. They will fight with swords, they will train primarily with swords. It doesn't make sense on any level. The goal wasn't to create good fist fighters, but good swordsmen, and fast. But I digress.

2) People were tougher back then

Like the many nobles who practiced and helped develop the martial arts. Yes, they were able to develop a certain mental toughness while their servants were cleaning out their spittoons, wiping their bottoms, and, of course, doing whatever was required.

My point is that civilization is many centuries from a time where everyone had it hard. There has been nobles throughout recorded history. In fact, I would venture to say that as long as we have been recording our history, there have been humans with time management issues. Or is sloth a recent term?

There are still tough people, but tough and smart can sometimes meet half way in the willful individual, if that makes any sense. The smart person sees their shortcomings and addresses them.


In my opinion, this is the golden age of martial arts, but it is not a perfect time, just a time where the best will have better opportunities than the best of any previous age we know of.