As a follow up a previous post, I found the following article very interesting. This was one article from a Wado Ryu perspective which did not claim that Ohtsuka Hironori was a grandmaster of SYR, and so I thought it worth posting as some good food for thought.
I need to look further into this, as this provides some insight into how Karate and Jujutsu can be melded together into a cohesive whole. The interesting aspect is that of striking arts and their usefulness (or lack thereof) on the battlefield against armoured opponents. Clearly this is not the case today, so the usefulness of striking has increase dramatically. But it led me to some further thoughts.
It also raises some questions I have seen around the internet with regards to Aikido's combat efficacy. I recall a video of an Aikidoka going against an MMA fighter. I cannot comment on the skill of either, but I think that the Aikidoka was a black belt by the way he moved and his comfort level with his own techniques. I noticed that the Aikidoka used a lot more striking than I think the art emphasizes in most schools these days. If I recall correctly, there is a quote from Ueshiba Morihei which states "Aikido is 90% striking" or something to that effect.
If I can dig more into the curriculum of Daito Ryu to see what striking was involved, this might answer some questions as well. It is my understanding that Daito Ryu is based to some degree on sumo techniques (as Takeda Sokaku and his father both were considerable sumo fighters). Sumo is known for its considerable "hand slapping" (similar to Teisho Uchi) techniques.
It should also be mentioned that early Karate teachers were also well versed in a knowledge of Okinawan sumo. I recall something from Charles Goodin indicating this, and how this knowledge was assumed with a study of Karate (at the beginning of the previous century, not clearly as much now). Much of karate's unusual techniques would be clearer with a solid grappling understanding.