stitution of subtlety for strength. This method of parrying or delivering an attack has now begun to attract attention in Europe, and is enthusiastically studied in Japan under the name of ju-jutsu or ju-dō, a term of which the nearest English equivalent is the "art of pliancy." Ju-jutsu does not appear to have been familiar to the Japanese in ancient eras. At any rate, they were not acquainted with it in the elaborate form that it assumed during the seventeenth century. According to the view of some historians, its methods were first taught by a Chinese immigrant at that time. But nothing of the kind has ever been known to exist in China. The probability, if not the certainty, is that what ju-jutsu received from China was merely some new plans for disabling an adversary by striking or kicking; and that, since this happened at a time when the art had passed out of vogue, its professors tried to bring about a renaissance by magnifying the value of the Chinese innovations. In point of fact, such innovations were discordant with the true spirit of the system, which aimed, not at breaking down force by force, nor yet at initiating assaults, but at utilising an enemy's strength for his own destruction, and at rendering his attacks suicidal. It may be supposed, on superficial reflection, that to set up a distinction between such an art and wrestling is pedantic. In a sense that is true. If by "wrestling" is understood every possible device for overthrowing an
82
