Thanks for posting a bit more info about your system. This allows me to actually give some insight on the matter.
The problem with a lot of rare martial arts is that they lack credability. In order for a martial art to have any credability, it has to have been combat tested at some point. The traditional martial arts have a level of credability because you can trace back most traditional arts to a time where it was actually used by real people in real battles. MMA have a level of credability because they use their mma to actually fight, even if it is tournament style fighting. Neo-combative martial arts have credability because modern day soldiers use these systems as part of their "survival kit" on the battle feild.
Now, contemporary people may take martial arts for reasons other then combat; health, stress relief, etc. There is nothing wrong with this. However, the for the system to be credable as a martial art, it has to have been somehow combat tested, even if the practitioners aren't studing the art to use it in combat today.
The problem with the art you describe is that there is no history or origin to lend a referance point to back up your claims. Without this history as a point of referance, there is no way for anyone, including yourself, to seperate your art that you believe is legit from another made-up, bullcrap art. The fact that your instructors didn't "concern themselves" with the history of your art, and that they made up forms, titles, and techniques is not something that is impressive; rather this is something that should be a major point of concern for you. Without any historicle point of referance, how do you know that you weren't being scammed into believing that an illegitamite art is legitamite? You don't, unfortunatily. Emotion is no indicator. How you "feel" or what seems real to you is not credable. People who join religious cults, for instance, "feel" like they are doing the right thing. Everything they see and experience will seem very real to them, yet it is nothing but a false reality. Please do not take offence to this comparison, for I am just trying to state the truth, and I am not trying to offend.
I think that you know that origin can = legitamicy already, and that is why you are trying to find the origin of the art you learned. This is commendable, and good luck with your search. However, be careful not to get caught up in "false" points of credability, or credability traps. Here are some examples of credability traps that people get caught in:
"I once saw master so-and-so perform this amazing feat, or beat up 10 people, or [fill in the blank with whatever], so that was when I knew I had to learn this art."
Your own experiences is not proof of anything. Even if you are being honest, your experiences are subject to error or deception. So to others, this doesn't lend credability.
"When I study this art, I feel the power of my technique"
How you feel is not proof of anything. Just like experience, your feelings are subject to error. When I was 4 yrs old, I used to pretend that I was the incredable hulk, and believe me, I felt like I could lift anything. Just because I felt this way at age 4, this doesn't mean that my feelings were a reality.
"The Norse berserkers did this "thing". My teacher was American/european. The descriptions of the norse beserker "thing" is the same description I was given for the "thing" I do in my art. Therefore, my art MUST trace back to the norse berserkers."
One does not = the other. You can't just assume that an art traces to an origin because the descriptions are similar. This is not enough evidence to prove that your art traces back to that culture. There has to be some sort of imperical method of tracing your art to a specific origin, such as : "so and so learned from so and so who was the teacher of so and so and blahblah bla, who was a norse warrior." Something like that, but you get the idea, I'm sure. There has to be a more imperical method of tracing an origin other then just connecting coincidences.
"The Shaolin monks have been noted for doing this, so why is it so hard to believe that my art does this similar thing."
Just because another credible source does something that you say is similar to what you do, this doesn't make what you do credible. First of all it's only hersay. Secondly, if there is no real connection between your art and that other source, then one cannot validate the other.
"I learned from master blah who trained with the mysterious master so-and-so. It was rumored that master so-and-so learned from an ancient tribe of people hidden in siberia, and then meditated in a cave for 10 years. Upon leaving the cave he decided to teach the world of his discoveries. This is what we believe, but master so-and-so is so mysterious, that none of us know his true origin."
The man of mystery claim doesn't lend credability either. If the buck stops at one person with a mystery background with no real evidence to back up this mystery background, then there is no real evidence that this art is credable, either.
These are just some credability traps to look for. Don't allow yourself to get caught in these. Also, don't get too emotionally involved. If you find the origin of your art, then great! If you find that you have been lied too or decieved, then this is too bad, but it is better to admit it and move on to something credible, then to try to defend something that you know isn't real.
Good luck with your search on trying to find some history behind your art. I'm sorry that I couldn't be more of a help then this. If you uncover anything in your search, please let us all know. I hope that you are able to find legitamicy in your art. If you aren't, then I just hope that you don't remain attached to something that has no legitamicy.
Peace,
PAUL
:asian: