📖This article is written for researchers of karate and the martial arts working outside Japan, as well as for advanced enthusiasts with roughly graduate-level training. It offers a systematic guide to the classic works of karate that were produced and accumulated within Japan.
Introduction — Why Introduce the “Japanese Classics” to an International Readership?
When we survey the research literature on karate from an international perspective, an asymmetry becomes immediately apparent. In English, book-length studies and articles by Patrick McCarthy, Andreas Quast, Mark Bishop, Joe Svinth, and Raúl Sánchez García are relatively easy to access. By contrast, the primary sources and foundational works written in Japanese — even those that have attained the status of acknowledged classics — remain difficult for overseas researchers to consult. This imbalance has persisted for a long time.
This asymmetry cannot be reduced to a simple matter of language. First, the karate books published in prewar Okinawa and mainland Japan were issued in small print runs, and surviving original copies are extremely rare after the destruction of the war years and the general dispersal of private libraries. Second, even the reprinted and re-typeset editions produced after the war circulate only within Japan’s specialized antiquarian book market and a limited number of research institutions, and digitization has progressed only partially. Third, the prose style — a blend of modern Japanese (especially the prewar literary written language), the Okinawan dialect, and Sino-Japanese scholarly diction — is difficult even for present-day Japanese readers, and presents an even greater barrier to researchers abroad.
As a result, overseas research on karate history is structurally prone to several biases: (a) relying on secondary citations of prewar Japanese sources; (b) depending too heavily on the limited number of works translated into English after the war (such as Gichin Funakoshi’s Karate-Dō: My Way of Life); and (c) leaning on indirect accounts mediated through the oral traditions of Okinawan karate.
Against this backdrop, the purpose of this article is to provide “a map that allows overseas researchers to return to the primary sources.” For each work, it describes the author’s biographical background, the structure and content of the book, its value for the study of karate history, the intellectual history of karate, and the history of the martial arts, and — as far as possible — how the work can be obtained today and which editions are available for consultation. Even works that do not take karate itself as their direct subject (such as Okinawan studies, martial-arts thought, and theories of the body) are included where they are judged indispensable as a foundation for karate research.
The article proceeds from the following premise: karate is not a single competitive sport but a layered, composite cultural phenomenon with a multi-stranded history — (i) the Okinawan body culture rooted in the ti (te, “hand”) of the Ryukyu Kingdom period; (ii) its transplantation to mainland Japan and modernization as a martial art from the 1920s onward; (iii) its postwar global diffusion and sportization; and (iv) its development into an Olympic sport in the twenty-first century. In selecting the classics, priority was given to works that bear witness, as primary sources, to one or another of these layers.
Editorial Conventions
<aside>
🔖
- Bibliographic information is given in the order “Author, Title, Publisher, Year of First Edition.” Where reprints or re-typeset editions exist, they are noted separately.
- The notation used at the time of publication is respected as written, including “唐手” (tōde / karate, “Tang hand”), “空手” (karate, “empty hand”), “唐手術” (tōde-jutsu), and “琉球拳法” (Ryūkyū kenpō). As a rule, works predating the standardization of notation agreed upon at the gathering of senior Okinawan karate masters held in Naha on 25 October 1936 use “唐手,” and works from that date onward use “空手.”
- Quotations preserve the original characters and historical kana orthography, but where readability has required conversion to standard modern characters and orthography, this is noted.
- For the English rendering of school (ryūha) and personal names, Hepburn romanization is used, with the common English form of the school name given in parentheses (e.g., Shōtōkan, Gōjū-ryū).
- For the convenience of overseas readers, where a major English-language article or book has dealt with a given source, it is noted for reference.
</aside>
Part 1: From Okinawa to the Mainland — The 1920s–1930s, When Karate Became a “Book”
In the history of karate, the decade and a half from the 1920s into the 1930s was the decisive period in which the Okinawan ti (te) — until then transmitted at the core through oral teaching and bodily practice — was translated into the modern medium of print. The books published in this period were not merely technical manuals. They served a threefold function: (a) as devices for translating Okinawan body culture into the discourse of modern mainland martial arts; (b) as public declarations by which schools and lineages defined themselves; and (c) as political documents that promoted the institutionalization of karate within school physical education, military training, and social physical culture. For the overseas researcher, reading the works of this period as primary sources is equivalent to observing from the inside how the modernity of karate was constructed.
Funakoshi Gichin, Ryūkyū Kenpō: Tōde (Bukyōsha, 1922)
The author
Funakoshi Gichin (1868–1957) was born in Shuri. His family name was originally written with the characters 富名腰; he himself later adopted the more familiar characters 船越 (both read “Funakoshi”). He studied under Itosu Ankō and Asato Ankō. After performing at the First Physical Education Exhibition sponsored by the Ministry of Education (held in May 1922 at Ochanomizu, Tokyo, at the Tokyo Women’s Higher Normal School), he relocated to the mainland and organized karate study groups at universities such as Keiō, Takushoku, and the University of Tokyo. In later years he came to be revered as the founder of the Shōtōkan school.
Content and structure
This work occupies a monumental position as the first karate book published as a single-volume monograph on the Japanese mainland. It is an expanded and revised version of an earlier manuscript that had served as an appendix to the Okinawa Prefecture Education Survey compiled by the prefecture’s education section.
Its structure comprises: (1) the history and significance of tōde; (2) the basics of tōde (stances, punches, kicks); (3) kata (centered on the Itosu-lineage forms such as Kūshankū and Passai); (4) a comparison of tōde with other martial arts; and (5) precepts for tōde practice. Containing numerous photographs and diagrams, the book is itself a primary visual source documenting the bodily techniques and kata of Okinawan karate at the time.
Value for the overseas researcher
First, it is a historical source that reveals the starting point of the process by which Okinawan karate defined itself within the framework of mainland modern martial-arts discourse (jūdō and kendō). Following the model of Kanō Jigorō’s jūdō and the kendō of figures such as Naitō Takaharu, karate too was reorganized around a rhetoric emphasizing the “Way” (dō), “courtesy” (rei), and “self-cultivation” (shūyō); the moment of that reorganization is inscribed here.
Second, the photographs and diagrams of the kata included here are indispensable as a point of comparison — for contrast with the later Karate-Dō Kyōhan (1935) and with the postwar manuals of the various schools — for observing the state of the Itosu Ankō–lineage kata before they were standardized.
Third, the book retains many Okinawan-dialect and Sino-Japanese scholarly expressions, and is rich in lexical information that was lost in the standardized Japanese karate books of the postwar period. It holds primary-source value for overseas researchers tracing the terminological history of karate.
Editions and availability
The first edition is rare. Reprints were issued by several publishers in the 1980s–90s, and some editions can be viewed through the National Diet Library Digital Collections. A partial English translation by Patrick McCarthy and others exists, but it is not a complete translation.
Funakoshi Gichin, Rentan Goshin: Tōde-jutsu (Kōbundō Shoten, 1925)
The author
Also by Funakoshi Gichin. Published just three years after Ryūkyū Kenpō: Tōde (1922), this work symbolizes the process by which Funakoshi, after his move to the mainland, increased his presence within the Tokyo publishing world.
Content and structure
As the title Rentan Goshin (“Tempering the Spirit, Self-Defense”) indicates, the book clearly sets out two orientations: “spiritual discipline” and “practical self-defense.” This was a strategy that positioned tōde less as a competitive sport than as a moral practice of youth self-cultivation — an editorial approach conscious of its appeal to the mainland’s educated classes, military figures, and educators of the day.
In addition to explanations of kata, it systematically records applied methods close to kumite and prearranged sparring (yakusoku-kumite), discussions of vital points (kyūsho), and precepts for training. Compared with the previous book, its expanded treatment of educational and self-cultivation themes is a distinguishing feature.
Value for the overseas researcher
This book is an excellent source for observing how, in the mainland Japan of the 1920s, karate sought to be translated into a “legitimate modern martial art.” For example, it contains self-cultivation maxims thought to be the prototype of the “Twenty Articles of Tōde,” allowing the reader to discern the matrix of the image of karate as the “martial art of the gentleman” (kunshi no bu) that Funakoshi would later formalize.
The book also predates the standardization of “唐手 → 空手” notation agreed at the 1936 gathering of senior Okinawan masters in Naha, and is therefore a valuable testimony to the terminological fluidity of the mainland-transplantation period.
Editions and availability
The first edition is a rare item even on the antiquarian market. Postwar reprints exist but circulate in small numbers. It is sometimes accessible as digitized material through the National Diet Library.
Funakoshi Gichin, Karate-Dō Kyōhan (Ōkura Kōbundō, 1935)
The author
Also by Funakoshi Gichin. By the time of this book’s publication, Funakoshi had already organized karate study groups at major mainland universities and had built up bodies of disciples at Keiō, Takushoku, Waseda, the University of Tokyo, and elsewhere.
Content and structure
This is one of the earliest systematic manuals to bear the term “karate-dō” (空手道) in its title. The very change of the title’s wording from “唐手術” (tōde-jutsu) to “空手道” (karate-dō) is an event symbolizing karate’s full entry into the world of mainland modern martial arts.
Its structure — (1) the history and significance of karate-dō; (2) basic movements; (3) Pinan first through fifth; (4) Tekki (Naifanchi); (5) Passai (Bassai); (6) Kankū (Kūshankū); (7) the remaining kata — Enpi, Gankaku (the renamed Chintō), Hangetsu, Jitte, and Jion; (8) a guide to prearranged and free sparring; and (9) the spiritual philosophy of karate-dō — lays the foundation for the standard curriculum of later Shōtōkan-lineage karate.
Value for the overseas researcher
First, as the culmination of prewar karate books, this work brings together in a single volume the kata systems of the Itosu, Matsumura, and Shuri-te lineages. It provides a reference point for the comparative study of the later branching of schools (Shōtōkan, Wadō-ryū, Shitō-ryū, Gōjū-ryū).
Second, its value as photographic documentation is high. The demonstration photographs of Funakoshi himself (and of his son, Funakoshi Gigō) are among the few primary sources that visually convey the bodily techniques of Okinawan karate immediately after its transplantation to the mainland.
Third, it is noteworthy that the set of maxims later circulated internationally as the “20 Precepts of Karate” (空手二十訓) is presented here in a still-fluid form. For the overseas researcher, this serves as a starting point for tracing the process by which the moral discourse of karate became fixed.
Editions and availability
After the war, reprints were issued by publishers in the Kōdansha and Baseball Magazine lineage. As for English translations, the widely circulated Kodansha International edition, Karate-Dō Kyōhan: The Master Text (1973), was translated by Tsutomu Ohshima, and its base text is not the 1935 edition itself but the postwar revised edition (the 1958 Karate-Dō Kyōhan). A separate English translation based on the 1935 edition was made by Harumi Suzuki-Johnston (Neptune Publications, 2005). Overseas researchers should be aware that the very differences between the 1935 and 1958 editions constitute an object of study.
Motobu Chōki, Okinawa Kenpō Tōde-jutsu: Kumite-hen (Tōde-jutsu Fukyūkai [Osaka], 1926)
The author
Motobu Chōki (1870/1871–1944) was born into the Motobu Udun, an aji (noble) family of Shuri. Known as a master of kakedameshi (kakidamishī) — practical, full-contact testing of skill — he incorporated into his techniques not only the transmissions and oral teachings of the Itosu Ankō and Matsumura Sōkon lineages but also his own practical fighting experience in the streets of Naha. Compared with Funakoshi Gichin, his organizational activity on the mainland was limited, but the originality of his technical and practical content stands out.
Content and structure
As the title indicates, the book is distinguished from other prewar karate books by taking “kumite” as its subject. Rather than kata, it presents in detail, with photographs and diagrams, twelve prearranged two-person sparring sequences. Each sequence concretely explains the trajectory of the punch, the parry, the counter, and the footwork, preserving the form of “practical application” as it existed before modern sportization.
Value for the overseas researcher
First, among prewar karate books, it is the source that most fully foregrounds “practical combat,” testifying to the dimension in which karate was transmitted not as a mere demonstrative art but as a responsive system of self-defense.
Second, it serves as a primary source for the later reappraisal of Motobu Chōki in the English-speaking world as a “practical-combat” or “street-fighting” figure. It is a principal base text for the translations and studies by Patrick McCarthy and others.
Third, Motobu’s accounts hold value in social history as well, helping to decipher the geographical environment of Shuri and Naha, the bodily education of the aji families, and the structures of violence and governance in pre-modern Okinawan society.
Editions and availability
The English translation is relatively accessible through works such as McCarthy’s Motobu Chōki: Karate, My Art (IRKRS, 2002). Japanese reprints have been issued by publishers such as Sōshinsha.
Motobu Chōki, Watakushi no Tōde-jutsu (Tōkyō Tōde Fukyūkai, 1932)
The author
Motobu Chōki’s second single-volume work. The year 1932 corresponds to the period when Motobu had moved his base to the mainland and was teaching in a circuit through Kyoto, Osaka, and Tokyo.
Content and structure
As the title (“My Tōde-jutsu”) suggests, this is a work that systematizes Motobu’s personal view of karate, his training history, and his outlook on technique. Among the kata, it places “Naifanchi” at the center, developing Motobu’s distinctive view that positions it as the foundation of karate. Whereas Funakoshi presents many kata comprehensively, Motobu adopted the approach of probing a small number of kata in depth.
The book also includes chapters of oral-historical value — Motobu’s references to teachers such as Itosu Ankō and Matsumura Sōkon, his appraisals of figures in the Okinawan karate world of the time, and accounts of his teaching experience on the mainland.
Value for the overseas researcher
First, Motobu’s view of Naifanchi as the core of Shuri-te strongly influenced the later Okinawan karate revival movements (such as the Okinawa Karate-dō Musō-kai and Shindō-ryū), and is an indispensable point of departure for understanding late-twentieth-century Okinawan karate studies.
Second, the portraits of the pre-modern Okinawan martial figures whom Motobu mentions (Matsumura Sōkon, Itosu Ankō, Sakugawa Kanga, and others) are among the foundational sources repeatedly referenced in present-day Okinawan karate history.
Third, the book strongly retains Motobu’s linguistic characteristics (a mixture of Okinawan dialect and mainland language, with Sino-Japanese scholarly expressions), making it a rare source for observing the linguistic consciousness of a prewar Okinawan-born master.
Editions and availability
Reprints exist from Sōshinsha and Baseball Magazine. The principal portions can be read in English in McCarthy’s edited and translated volumes.
Mabuni Kenwa, Kōbō Jizai Goshin-jutsu Karate Kenpō (1934)
The author
Mabuni Kenwa (1889–1952) was born in Shuri. A rare figure who studied under both Itosu Ankō and Higaonna Kanryō, he later founded “Shitō-ryū” (named from the characters of Itosu and Higaonna). On the mainland he conducted his diffusion activities based in Osaka.
Content and structure
This is Mabuni’s first single-volume work. It presents the kata and techniques of both the Itosu lineage (Shuri-te) and the Higaonna lineage (Naha-te), giving it an exceptional comprehensiveness for a prewar karate book.
Among the kata, in addition to the Shuri-te forms such as Pinan, Naifanchi, Passai, and Kankū, the names of Naha-te forms appear — Sanchin, Tenshō, Saifa, Seienchin, Shisōchin, Sanseirū, Seipai, Kururunfa, and Suparinpei (though it is not a detailed exposition of every kata).
Value for the overseas researcher
First, it is a source that allows one to observe, as a primary document, the process by which Shitō-ryū — which encompasses both Shuri-te and Naha-te — came into being. It is a foundational source for reading how the integration of Okinawa’s two principal lineages was envisioned.
Second, it is one of the early cases in which Naha-te kata names appear in mainland print sources, making it indispensable for tracing the transmission of the Higaonna Kanryō lineage.
Editions and availability
The prewar first edition is rare. Reprints have been issued by successor organizations of the Mabuni lineage (such as the Shitō-kai).
Mabuni Kenwa and Nakasone Genwa, Kōbō Kenpō Karate-Dō Nyūmon (Kyōbunsha Shoten, 1938)
The authors
In addition to Mabuni Kenwa, the co-author Nakasone Genwa (1895–1978) was an Okinawan-born editor and martial-arts researcher who played a major role in the systematization and introduction of Okinawan karate on the mainland.
Content and structure
As the title indicates, it is a systematic introductory text for beginners. It covers historical background, terminology, basic movements, kata, prearranged sparring, applied sparring, self-cultivation theory, and theories of health. It contains abundant photographs of multiple kata, and even among prewar karate books its value as visual documentation is high.
Value for the overseas researcher
First, it is one of the earliest systematic introductory texts to reflect the standardization of “karate” (空手) notation that followed the 1936 gathering of senior Okinawan masters in Naha, and is a work symbolizing the period when modern karate was established.
Second, the editorial viewpoint of the co-author Nakasone Genwa is important for understanding how Okinawan-born intellectuals of the time sought to present Okinawan martial arts to a mainland readership. Nakasone was not a mere transcriber of dictation but functioned as a translator within the discourse of modern Japanese martial arts.
Miyagi Chōjun, “Karate-dō Gaisetsu” (1934, and related essays in Okinawa Prefecture Physical Education Association materials)
The author
Miyagi Chōjun (1888–1953) was born in Naha. A principal disciple of Higaonna Kanryō, he is known as the founder of Gōjū-ryū. Having traveled to Fujian Province, China, to study Chinese boxing, he systematized Gōjū-ryū by adding the study of foreign martial arts to the Naha-te tradition.
Content and structure
This is not a monograph but an essay transmitted in the form of a lecture record, pamphlet, and document collection. It is nonetheless a rare primary source preserving the ideas and historical understanding of the Naha-te lineage in the author’s own words. It discusses the textual source of the school name “Gōjū-ryū” (said to be a quotation from the Bubishi), the theory of the unity of mind and body in karate, and the importance of breathing methods.
Value for the overseas researcher
First, as an original source of the Higaonna Kanryō–Miyagi Chōjun lineage (Gōjū-ryū / Naha-te), it serves as a point of departure for postwar English-language research on Gōjū-ryū.
Second, Miyagi’s account of how he positioned the relationship between Chinese boxing and karate is an important reference point for the comparative martial-arts history that developed from the late twentieth century onward.
Editions and availability
These materials are often included in the Okinawa Prefectural Library’s Miyagi Chōjun–related holdings and in the document collections of organizations in the Gōjū-kai and International Okinawan Gōjū-ryū Karate-dō Federation (IOGKF) lineage.
Nakasone Genwa (ed.), Karate-Dō Taikan (Tōkyō Tosho, 1938)
The author
Nakasone Genwa. Published in the same year as his co-authored Kōbō Kenpō Karate-Dō Nyūmon with Mabuni Kenwa. Though Okinawan-born, Nakasone was a “translator”-like figure active in the mainland’s publishing and martial-arts worlds.
Content and structure
This is the most comprehensive, encyclopedic work among prewar karate books. It treats in an integrated fashion the history of karate, terminology, the lineages and characteristics of each school, explanations of the major kata, a comparison of karate with other martial arts, and the social significance of karate. Noteworthy too is that it includes contributions and remarks by the leading masters of the time — Funakoshi Gichin, Motobu Chōki, Mabuni Kenwa, and Miyagi Chōjun.
Value for the overseas researcher
First, as a collective portrait of the Okinawan-born masters as of 1938, it is a rare source for observing the human networks and intellectual diversity of the prewar karate world.
Second, Nakasone’s editorial stance presents the prototype of the framework of later postwar karate-history narration (the three-stage model of “Okinawan origin — mainland transplantation — globalization”).
Third, it allows one to confirm the understandings publicly expressed at the time by the parties themselves regarding lineage genealogies that remain contested in current overseas research (especially the relationships among Itosu, Matsumura, Higaonna, and Sakugawa).
Editions and availability
The prewar first edition is rare. It has been reprinted since the 1980s by publishers such as Baseball Magazine (and, more recently, in a revised reduced-size edition by Yōju Shorin).
Part 2: Mainland Student Karate and Theorization — The Legacy of University Karate Study Groups
Prewar mainland karate took the university karate study group as its principal seedbed. At Keiō, Takushoku, and the Tokyo Imperial University — where Funakoshi Gichin taught — and at the Kansai universities with which Mabuni was involved, young students were not merely practitioners but also the agents who put karate into writing and theorized it.
Miki Nisaburō and Takada Mizuho, Kenpō Gaisetsu (Tokyo Imperial University Karate Study Group, 1930)
The authors
Miki Nisaburō and Takada Mizuho were student members of the Tokyo Imperial University Karate Study Group. After studying under Funakoshi Gichin, they themselves traveled to China to investigate Chinese boxing. Miki in particular left records of fieldwork in southern China.
Content and structure
This work is one of the earliest high points of karate research by students. The first half is devoted to the history, lineages, and mainland-transplantation process of tōde; the second half, to kata and kumite, and to comparative research with Chinese boxing.
The records of on-site martial-arts investigation in Fujian, Shanghai, Beijing, and elsewhere are also extremely valuable as prewar Japanese reportage on Chinese martial arts.
Value for the overseas researcher
First, it is the first mainland-side source to examine the karate–Chinese-boxing relationship empirically, and can be positioned as a point of origin for present-day comparative martial-arts history.
Second, it is a valuable record showing the process by which the question of how karate might become a “discipline” was explored within the academic heart of modern Japan — the Tokyo Imperial University. It may be called a distant point of origin for the late-twentieth-century studies of physical education and martial arts (budō-gaku).
Third, Miki’s records of his visit to China are useful for martial-arts history in general, as a rare contemporaneous account in Japanese of the state of the early-twentieth-century Chinese martial-arts world (the Shaolin lineage, the southern-fist lineages, Hung Gar, Ngo Cho Kun, and so on).
Editions and availability
The prewar first edition was close to a privately printed publication of the Tokyo Imperial University Karate Study Group and is a rare item. Later reprints are limited.
Wadō-ryū–related works — Ōtsuka Hironori’s Karate-Dō and its context
Ōtsuka Hironori (1892–1982) came from a background in Shindō Yōshin-ryū jūjutsu; after learning karate from Funakoshi Gichin, he independently founded Wadō-ryū. Although the prewar single-volume works authored by Ōtsuka alone are limited, his postwar Karate-Dō (Tsuru Shobō, 1970) and the journals and manuals of the Wadō-kai are important works that transmit the philosophy of Wadō-ryū as a fusion of jūjutsu and karate.
For the overseas researcher, the very existence of Wadō-ryū is important as a concrete example for considering: (a) that karate is not a tradition descending from a single lineage but a modern martial art of multiple origins; (b) the process by which karate was reorganized through its intersection with jūjutsu and swordsmanship; and (c) the relationship between Shintō thought and martial-arts self-cultivation.
Part 3: Postwar Autobiographies, Memoirs, and Systematizations
Postwar karate experienced great upheavals: recovery from the mainland’s devastated condition, the resumption of martial arts under the Occupation, globalization, and sportization. Many of the primary sources written in this period were dictated by masters who had lived through prewar Okinawa and the mainland, weaving their personal histories together with the history of karate; these works occupy an indispensable place for an internal understanding of karate’s modern history.
Funakoshi Gichin, Karate-Dō Ichiro (Sangyō Keizai Shinbunsha, 1956)
The author
Funakoshi Gichin’s autobiography. Published when he was nearly 88, this is his last sustained work.
Content and structure
In a reminiscent style, it recounts his childhood in Okinawa, his apprenticeship under Itosu Ankō and Asato Ankō, the circumstances of his move to the mainland, his teaching at the various universities, the upheavals of wartime and the postwar period, the wartime death of his son Funakoshi Gigō, and the postwar rebuilding of Shōtōkan.
Value for the overseas researcher
This book has been widely circulated around the world as the English-language Karate-Dō: My Way of Life (Kodansha International, 1975), and is the foremost original source for the Western image of Funakoshi — and, by extension, of Shōtōkan. However, there are subtle differences in nuance, rhetoric, and religious connotation between the Japanese original and the English translation, and those very differences become an object of study in translation theory and reception history. Overseas researchers need to return to the Japanese original and not rely on the English translation alone.
Nakayama Masatoshi, Best Karate, 11 vols. (Kodansha International, 1977–1989)
The author
Nakayama Masatoshi (1913–1987) was the central figure in the founding and operation of the Japan Karate Association (JKA). A direct disciple of Funakoshi Gichin, he led the global diffusion of Shōtōkan karate in the postwar period.
Content and structure
A large work in eleven volumes that systematically explains basic movements, kata, kumite, applied techniques, and competition rules. Each volume is rich in photographs and diagrams, and it is the work that visually fixed the standardized technical system of postwar Shōtōkan.
Value for the overseas researcher
First, this work is the decisive text that internationally standardized the bodily techniques of postwar competitive karate (the JKA lineage). Most of the world’s karate practitioners since the late twentieth century are, directly or indirectly, under its influence.
Second, by being published in English as the Best Karate series by Kodansha International, it established the very field of translated karate-book publishing. It is a decisive case for considering the publishing and translation history of karate.
The works of Ōyama Masutatsu — in Japanese, Hiden Kyokushin Karate, Waga Karate Shugyō, etc.; in English, What Is Karate?, This Is Karate, etc. (1958–1980s)
The author
Ōyama Masutatsu (birth name Choi Yeong-eui, 1923–1994) was born on the Korean Peninsula. After moving to mainland Japan, he studied karate within a lineage connected to Funakoshi Gichin, Yamaguchi Gōgen (Gōjū-kai), and So Nei Chu, and later founded the Kyokushin Kaikan.
Content and structure
Ōyama’s body of work is known for a style that strongly foregrounds autobiography, theories of training, and theories of practical combat, and it occupies a singular position rarely seen among other schools of the same period in that it developed publications in parallel across both Japanese and English.
Representative Japanese works include, as technical manuals, Dynamic Karate (Nichibo Shuppansha, 1967), Hiden Kyokushin Karate (Nichibo Shuppansha, 1976), and Zoku: Hiden Kyokushin Karate (Nichibo Shuppansha, 1977); and, as autobiography and training memoir, Waga Karate Shugyō (Tokuma Shoten, 1975). In these, he recounts his solitary mountain training, his matches against outside opponents, the training philosophy of full-contact (direct-strike) sparring, and the self-image of Kyokushin karate. (Note that Chijō Saikyō no Karate circulates as a film/video title of the same name and is therefore not treated here as a book title.)
Worth special note is that before his major Japanese-language monographs, Ōyama published the English-language manual What Is Karate? (Tokyo-News Co., 1958) for an English-speaking readership. This book is positioned as one of the earliest karate books under Ōyama’s name, and it went through successive revisions: a revised 1959 edition, a newly revised 1963 edition, and the 1966 “Completely New Edition” (Japan Publications Trading Co., 176 pp.). Holders’ records describe the early editions as around 98 pages, but the page counts and colophons of the originals ultimately need to be collated. At the very least, the 1966 edition was substantially recomposed from the early editions in its content structure, photographic material, and kata explanations, and should be treated not as a mere expansion but, in effect, as a fully revised edition.
The sequel, This Is Karate (Japan Publications, 1965; first edition 368 pp.), was published as a large work for advanced practitioners; through a 1973 revised edition and a 1980 second revised edition, it became the standard reference work on Kyokushin karate in the English-speaking world. For English-language readers, manuals and systematic works such as Vital Karate (Japan Publications, 1967), Advanced Karate (Japan Publications, 1970; 256 pp.), and Mas Oyama’s Essential Karate (Sterling Publishing, 1978; 256 pp.) were also published.
Value for the overseas researcher
First, as a self-narration of postwar full-contact karate (Kyokushin), it is an indispensable source for narrating the history of late-twentieth-century world combat sports. It became the discursive foundation for Kyokushin’s global diffusion (especially in North America, Eastern Europe, South America, and the Middle East).
Second, the fact that the English editions preceded and ran parallel to the major Japanese monographs is a singular phenomenon in the publishing and diffusion history of postwar karate, providing documentary evidence that Kyokushin explicitly oriented itself toward a world market from an early stage. The comparison among revised editions (especially the substantial rewriting across the 1958, 1959, 1963, and 1966 editions of What Is Karate?) holds scholarly value in itself as material for tracing the changing self-image of the figure of Ōyama Masutatsu and of the Kyokushin school.
Third, the interweaving of Ōyama Masutatsu’s self-mythologization with his historical writing is excellent material for the critical study of martial-arts discourse (critical hagiography). The martial-arts studies of Cynarski and others in Eastern and Central Europe frequently re-examine Ōyama-type discourse critically.
Fourth, Ōyama’s Korean-Peninsula origin and his position within the Japanese martial-arts world is an important theme for understanding the multicultural martial-arts space of postwar Japan.
Yamaguchi Gōgen, Karate-Dō and other Gōjū-kai–lineage works (1960s–1980s)
Yamaguchi Gōgen (1909–1989) served as the central figure of mainland Gōjū-ryū, occupying a position something like that of Miyagi Chōjun’s mainland deputy. Yamaguchi’s body of work became the discursive foundation for the establishment of Gōjū-ryū on the mainland and for its postwar global diffusion (especially in North America, Europe, and South America).
For the overseas researcher, these are important works for observing, as primary sources: (a) the differences between Okinawan Gōjū-ryū and mainland Gōjū-ryū (Gōjū-kai); (b) Yamaguchi’s self-cultivation theories concerning “Shintō,” “Zen,” and “ki”; and (c) the postwar reinterpretation of breathing methods and the concept of ki.
Postwar testimonies from the Okinawan side — works by Higa Seikō, Nagamine Shōshin, Uechi Kanbun and Kan’ei, Yagi Meitoku, and others
The masters of the lineages that remained in Okinawa after the war also each left single-volume works, memoirs, and school manuals. The following in particular are essential reading for the overseas researcher.
- Nagamine Shōshin, Okinawa no Karate-Dō (Shinjinbutsu Ōraisha, 1975) A work in which Nagamine Shōshin (1907–1997) of Okinawan Matsubayashi-ryū re-narrates karate history from a postwar Okinawan perspective. It provides a corrective viewpoint from the Okinawan side against narratives centered on mainland Shōtōkan.
- Nagamine Shōshin, Shijitsu to Kuden ni yoru Okinawa no Karate, Sumō Meijin-den (Shinjinbutsu Ōraisha, 1986) An unusual work that crosses karate history with the history of Okinawan sumō. It presents a viewpoint that does not isolate Okinawan body culture as karate alone.
- Uechi Kan’ei, Seisetsu Okinawa Karate-Dō: Sono Rekishi to Gihō (Uechi-ryū Karate-dō Kyōkai, 1977) An important work transmitting the lineage of Uechi Kanbun and his son Kan’ei of Uechi-ryū (Pangai-noon). It testifies, as a primary source, to a genealogy that includes Uechi Kanbun’s training in Fujian Province, southern China.
- Yagi Meitoku, Okinawa Gōjū-ryū Karate-Dō (multiple editions from the 1970s onward) A systematizing work of the Okinawan-side Gōjū-ryū in the direct Miyagi Chōjun line, by Yagi Meitoku, founder of Okinawan Gōjū-ryū (Meibukan).
These works should be read as “counter-arguments,” “reinforcements,” and “corrections” from Okinawa against the mainland-centered narration of karate history, and are essential reading also in the sense of preventing overseas researchers from relying on a single historical image.
Part 4: Classics of Martial-Arts Thought and History — Indispensable Works That Constitute the Periphery of Karate
Karate research attains scholarly depth only when it is placed within the broad context of martial-arts thought, martial-arts history, and theories of the body. What overseas researchers tend to overlook is the body of classics that are not karate itself but that have been referenced as a premise of karate research.
The jūdō-related works of Kanō Jigorō
Kanō Jigorō (1860–1938) was the institutional architect of modern Japanese martial arts, and the transplantation of karate to the mainland is unthinkable without Kanō’s cooperation. Funakoshi Gichin’s 1922 demonstration at the Kōdōkan and his subsequent nationwide diffusion activities had Kanō’s institutional backing.
For the overseas researcher, it is impossible to discuss the modernization of karate without understanding: (a) Kanō’s own essays, such as Seiryoku Zen’yō Kokumin Taiiku (“National Physical Education Through the Best Use of Energy”) and “Jūdō Ippan narabi ni Sono Kyōiku-jō no Kachi” (“An Outline of Jūdō and Its Educational Value”), as collected in the Kanō Jigorō Taikei and the Collected Works of Kanō Jigorō; (b) Kanō’s philosophy of “maximum efficient use of energy / mutual welfare and benefit” (seiryoku zen’yō, jita kyōei); and (c) the rank (dan) system, the dōjō system, and the internationalization strategy of martial arts as a modern enterprise.
Useful references include Murata Naoki (ed.), Kanō Jigorō Shihan ni Manabu (Nihon Budōkan), and the Kanō studies of Sakaue Yasuhiro and others.
The aikidō and physical-education works of Tomiki Kenji
Tomiki Kenji (1900–1979) was a jūdōka and aikidōka, a rare figure who studied under both Kanō Jigorō and Ueshiba Morihei. Based at Waseda University, he theoretically examined the sportization and educationalization of aikidō.
For the karate researcher, his body of work (such as Aikidō Nyūmon: Atemi-waza to Kansetsu-waza no Gōriteki Renshūhō and Shin Aikidō Text) holds reference value as a classic for studying the “martial-arts sportization” debate from the jūdō and aikidō side.
Miyamoto Musashi’s Gorin no Sho and early-modern martial-arts treatises
The self-cultivation and philosophical discourse of karate was shaped, throughout the prewar and postwar periods, by the discursive influence of early-modern martial-arts treatises (Gorin no Sho [The Book of Five Rings], Heihō Kadensho, Tengu Geijutsuron, Neko no Myōjutsu, and others). Funakoshi Gichin’s Karate-Dō Ichiro also contains references to Gorin no Sho.
Overseas researchers often encounter these works indirectly through (a) English translations of these early-modern treatises (the translations by William Scott Wilson, Thomas Cleary, and others), but (b) by consulting the Japanese originals and the major annotated editions (Kamiko Tadashi, Watanabe Ichirō, Uozumi Takashi, and others) they can understand the intellectual background of karate more precisely.
Part 5: Classics of Okinawan Studies and Historical Background — Toward Understanding the Matrix of Karate
Okinawan karate cannot be understood without the prehistory of karate’s history. The following are listed as classics for overseas researchers to supplement their knowledge of Japanese and Okinawan history.
Iha Fuyū, Ko-Ryūkyū, Okinawa Rekishi Monogatari, etc.
Iha Fuyū (1876–1947) was a historian and linguist hailed as “the father of Okinawan studies.” His works have been gathered into a postwar collected edition (Heibonsha).
Their value for karate research lies in showing, through both primary-source description and critical examination: (a) the social structure of the Ryukyu Kingdom period; (b) the bodily education of the warrior-aristocrat (aji, uēkata) class; and (c) the 1879 “Ryukyu Disposition” (annexation) and its cultural impact.
The foundation for critically scrutinizing the myths surrounding the origin theories of karate (the Shaolin-origin theory, the aji-origin theory, the warrior-aristocrat-secret-transmission theory, and so on) lies in Iha’s Okinawan studies.
Higaonna Kanjun, Nantō Fudoki, Reimei-ki no Kaigai Kōtsū-shi, etc.
Higaonna Kanjun (1882–1963) was a Naha-born historian. He empirically clarified the history of Ryukyu’s external relations (with China, Korea, Satsuma, and the southern regions).
For karate research, his works are classics for understanding, in accordance with primary sources: (a) the actual state of human and material exchange between Ryukyu and Fujian Province / Fuzhou, China; (b) the cultural role of the Kume Thirty-Six Families; and (c) the transformations of Ryukyuan society after the Satsuma invasion (1609).
This is the most reliable point of departure for historically verifying the theory of karate’s transmission from China (especially its relationship with the Fuzhou-lineage martial arts).
Higa Shunchō, Okinawa no Rekishi, etc.
Higa Shunchō (1883–1977) was an Okinawan-born historian and editor. He had a career as an editor at Iwanami Shoten.
Higa’s narration of Okinawan history carries an editorial stance that presents Okinawa to the postwar mainland readership not as a “periphery within Japanese history” but as an independent historical subject. For karate research too, it offers a perspective that grasps Okinawa not as a mere “birthplace” of karate but as an independent cultural subject.
Classics of postwar Okinawan historical studies by Nakahara Zenchū, Shinzato Keiji, Takara Kurayoshi, and others
Postwar Okinawan historical studies develop through works such as Nakahara Zenchū, Ryūkyū no Rekishi (1952); Shinzato Keiji, Okinawa-shi o Kangaeru (Keisō Shobō, 1970); and Takara Kurayoshi, Ryūkyū no Jidai (Chikuma Shobō, 1980). Strictly speaking these stand on the border between “classics” and “contemporary research,” but they are indispensable as the historiographical foundation for narrating karate history.
Part 6: Prewar and Wartime Physical-Education and Martial-Arts Administrative Documents — Karate as Institutional History
The modern history of karate cannot be told without the official documents of the Ministry of Education, the Army, the Navy, and various educational institutions. Though overseas researchers tend to overlook them, these are an extremely important body of primary sources.
Materials related to the Dai Nippon Butoku-kai
The Dai Nippon Butoku-kai (1895–1946) was a martial-arts governing organization established in the Meiji period that determined the institutional positioning of prewar jūdō, kendō, and karate. Centered on the Butokuden in Kyoto, it advanced the awarding of ranks, the training of instructors, and the integration of schools.
Karate was formally recognized by the Butoku-kai as a “martial art” (budō) in 1933, and this became the institutional background for the standardization of “唐手 → 空手” notation. The essays and reports published in the Butoku-kai journals Butokushi and Dai Nippon Budō are primary sources allowing an internal observation of the institutionalization process of karate.
Official documents of the Okinawa Prefecture education section
In early-1900s Okinawa Prefecture, several official documents and reports were produced in the process of introducing karate (tōde) as school physical education. Itosu Ankō’s “Ten Articles of Tōde” (1908) is a representative example, and can be positioned as a declaration of the modern educationalization of karate.
Part 7: Prewar and Postwar Journals and Magazine Articles
The primary sources of karate history are not limited to monographs. The essays published in the following magazines and journals are extremely valuable information sources for the overseas researcher.
- Okinawa newspapers such as the Okinawa Asahi Shinbun, Ryūkyū Shinpō, and Okinawa Mainichi Shinbun: karate-related articles published in prewar Okinawa’s local press.
- Prewar martial-arts organization journals such as Butokushi and Dai Nippon Budō.
- Prewar general-interest magazines such as King, Gendai, and Hi no De: karate-introduction articles, to which Funakoshi Gichin, Motobu Chōki, and others frequently contributed.
- The monthly Gekkan Karate-dō (Fukushōdō): a leading postwar karate specialty magazine. Its serials and special features from the 1970s onward hold high value as primary sources for postwar karate history.
- Specialty magazines such as JKFan and Full-Contact KARATE.
These bodies of primary sources can be consulted in Japan’s major libraries, university libraries, and martial-arts organization archives, but their digitization is still in progress. For overseas researchers, access is often difficult except through intensive examination during a research stay.
Conclusion — On Reading the Classics
The foregoing has introduced, across twenty-five items, the classic works produced and accumulated within Japan, for the benefit of overseas karate researchers. In closing, I would like to state three perspectives to keep in mind when reading these classics.
First, the classics are not merely “sources of fact.” The prewar karate books are themselves strategic discourse — bearing the character of how the Okinawan-born masters and mainland students of the time sought to translate and legitimate their own body culture within the institutional and discursive space of modern Japan. Using the classics merely to confirm matters of fact captures not even half of their rich implications.
Second, the classics must not be read in isolation. When reading Funakoshi Gichin, one must always consult Motobu Chōki and Mabuni Kenwa in parallel; when reading mainland discourse, the Okinawan discourse; and when reading the self-narration of the male masters, the critical descriptions by Okinawan scholars and historians. Without reading polyphonically, it is impossible to understand karate’s modernity in three dimensions.
Third, the classics cannot be separated from contemporary research. The doctoral dissertation of Kadekaru Tōru, the general history by Kusahara Katsuhide, the chronology by Hokama Tetsuhiro, the survey reports of Okinawa Prefecture, and the body of scholarly articles in martial-arts studies, theories of the body, and sports history — all to be treated in the second article (on the latest research) — attempt a more rigorous and critical reconstruction using the classics introduced here as their material. The overseas researcher will go back and forth between the classics and contemporary research, building a map of reading suited to their own research interests.
It is the author’s hope that this article may serve as a small signpost for overseas karate researchers venturing into the uncharted territory of the Japanese karate classics.
Principal References and Supporting Resources
For confirming the locations and bibliographic details of the works mentioned in this article, the following are useful.
- National Diet Library (ndl.go.jp): Many prewar publications can be viewed through the Digital Collections.
- Okinawa Prefectural Library (library.pref.okinawa.jp): The largest accumulation of Okinawa-related materials.
- Okinawa Karate Kaikan Reference Room: A comprehensive access point for both primary sources and contemporary research on Okinawan karate.
- CiNii Research (cir.nii.ac.jp): A search engine for Japanese scholarly articles.
- J-STAGE (jstage.jst.go.jp): Provides many articles from major academic journals, including those of the Japanese Academy of Budo, in open access.
- Hawaii Karate Museum / Charles Goodin Collection: One of the largest collections of prewar karate books in the English-speaking world.
- IRKRS (International Ryukyu Karate Research Society): An English-translation and research project on the major classics, led by Patrick McCarthy and others.