Seven-Branched Sword
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Seven-Branched Sword | |
|---|---|
 |
|
| Japanese name | |
| Kanji: | 七支刀 |
| Hepburn Romaji: | shichishitō or nanatsusaya no tachi |
| Korean name | |
| Hangul: | 칠지도 |
| Hanja: | 七支刀 |
| McCune-Reischauer: | ch'iljido |
| Revised Romanization: | chiljido |
The Seven-Branched Sword is one of the national treasures of Japan and numerous replicas are displayed in museums throughout Korea. It is also known as the Seven-Branched Knife or Seven-Pronged Spear or Seven-Pronged Sword. It was probably made in Korea but some sources advocate a Chinese origin. [1] [2]
The sword is made of iron and has six branch-like protrusions on the sides with the tip of the sword counting as the seventh branch. [3] The seven branches of the sword suggests a tree-motif connected with the Shamanistic traditions of Korea. [1] [4] [5] [6] It is 74.9 centimeters in length. [3] The sword is a highlight of the metal-working skills of the Baekje. [7]
The sword is currently housed in the Isonokami Shrine in Japan and has an inscribed date of Taiwa 4 which corresponds to year 369 CE. [8] The date on the sword is close enough that it corroborates with a story in the Nihon Shoki of a sword sent by the Baekje King Geunchogo in 372 CE by the Korean envoy Kutei to the Empress Regent Jingu. However, one must add a requisite 120 years (two sexagenary cycles) to the dates mentioned in the Nihon Shoki to corroborate the date of the story with the true date of the sword's manufacture. [8]
Contents |
[edit] Inscription on the sword
There is a two-sided inscription on the sword which is inlaid in gold. The inscription is the cause of much controversy between Korean and Japanese historians. The inscription states (brackets showing unreadable words):
In English:
- First Side: "This seven-branched sword was made of [], refined many times, at noon on the eleventh (?) day of the [] month, fourth year of Taihe (?) era. [] repels the enemy and is fit for a king or a duke (?). Made by []."
- Second Side: "Never before has there been such a blade. The [] of Baekje [], who owes his life to august Jin, had this sword made for King 'Shi' of Wa in the hope that it might be passed on to later generations." [3]
In Chinese characters:
- First Side: 泰(和)四年十■月十六日丙午正陽造百錬■七支刀(出?)辟百兵(宜)供供(候王)■■■■ (作 or 祥)
- Second Side: 先世(以)来未有此刀百濟(王)世(子)奇生聖 (音 or 晋) 故為(倭)王(旨)造(伝示後)世
(Letters in parentheses are ambiguous. Italic letters are argued on decoding. Letters in black block are entirely undecodable.)
[edit] Some Arguments on Decoding and Interpretation
2nd Letter on the first side, and when the sword was made: The first four letters are generally decoded as "4th year of Taiwa (the Chinese era)", but since the second letter is ambiguous, there is a theory that the character refers to a local era name of Baekje. However, the theory is generally rejected since no other archeological discovery reveals the existence of Baekje's unique era name. As Baekje generally uses sexagenary cycles to record date, the date recorded in Chinese era brought argument that the sword was presumably made in China. [2]
End of the first side: although four of the five last letters are undecodable, the last letter indicates that the previous letters were either the name of author or a prayer phrase such as "永年大吉祥"(Have Great Fortunes Forever"). In both cases, the phrase should generally indicate the end of inscription, and not synchronized with the fact that inscription is continued to the other side. There is also a theory that the second side is written by different person, or at different time.
11th and 13th letter on the second side, and who presented the sword: 11th to 13th letters seem to be decodable to "王世子"(Crown Prince of King), and some scholars regards that it was presented from the Crown Prince of Baekje, eventually ascended as King Geungusu. However, as it includes ambiguous letters, it is not entirely clear whether who of Baekje did present the sword.
17th letter on the second side: The letter is regarded to be either "音"(Sound) or "晋"(Jin Dynasty). Former decoding indicates that phrase "奇生聖音" has a Buddhism or Taoism nuance, that presenter has "lived under august(holy) sounds". Latter decoding indicates that the phrase means "born coincidentally on august(holy) Jin Dynasty".
18th to 22nd letter on the second side, and the presentee: The phrase, "為倭王旨造", are translated in various ways through different interpretation of the 22nd letter "旨".
- "旨" as a personal name: Regarding the letter as a personal name. Thus translates the phrase as following. "For Shi, the King of Wa, made (the sword)".
- "旨" as "order": Translates "for the order of King of Wa, made (the sword)".
- "旨" as "deliberately": Translates "for King of Wa, deliberately made (the sword)".
- "旨" as "first": Interpreting the letter as abbreviation of "嘗". Translates "for the first time, made (the sword) for King of Wa".
Taking it a personal name leads to the Baekje-centric idea that Baekje's presenter boldly writes the name of the King of Wa, and thus regards him lower. By Taking it "order" leads to the Japan-centric idea that Baekje presented the sword because the King of Wa ordered him to do so. Therefore, the interpretation tend to be controversial.
Most historians agree that the sword was made, or commissioned by, most likely the king of Baekje, or at least a high-ranking member of the court, as a gift to the Wa ruler 'Shi.' [3]
Kim Sok-hyong, a Korean historian, notes that the sword uses the term "koo", translated as "enfeoffed lord", to refer to the Wa king which meant that the Wa king was subservient to the Baekje ruler. [9] Ueda Masaaki, a Japanese historian, also notes that the use of the character "koo" and the commanding tone of the inscription suggests that the sword is being given to a vassal lord. [7] Taking into account that Japanese culture at the time owed much to the civilization of the Three Kingdoms of Korea (especially Baekje) and Gaya, this is a credible claim.
However, most Japanese historians believed that the sword verified the invasion of Korea during the reign of Jingū (if one adds the requisite 120 years to dates in the Nihon Shoki). They also interpret the inscription of the sword to be a "respectful presentation" to the emperor which indicates the vassalage of the Baekje king. [9] [7]
While the inscription of the sword is controversial and is used by many nationalists to support their own agendas, the sword does prove, at the very least, that there were very close ties between the Baekje and the Wa, and the opening of the friendship relations between two countries probably date to the year 372. [10]
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- ^ Hall, John Whitney (1993). in Delmer M. Brown: The Cambridge History of Japan Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press, p. 123. ISBN 0-521-22352-0.
- ^ a b Wagner, Donald B. (1993). Iron and steel in Ancient China. Brill Academic Publishers, p. 283. ISBN 90-04-09632-9.
- ^ a b c d Seeley, Christopher (1991). A History of Writing in Japan. Brill Academic Publishers, pp. 10-11. ISBN 90-04-09081-9.
- ^ Kim, Elaine H.; Choi Chungmoo (1997). Dangerous Women: gender and Korean nationalism. Routledge, p. 19. ISBN 0-415-91506-6.
- ^ Covell, Jon C.; Covell, Alan C. (1984). Korean Impact on Japanese Culture. Hollym International Corp., p. 22. ISBN 0-930878-34-5.
- ^ GIs get crash course in Korean history. Stars and Stripes (2003-12-31).
- ^ a b c Hong, Wontack [1994]. "Chapter 5: Background Materials, 4. The Seven-Branched Sword", Peakche of Korea and the Origin of Yamato Japan (PDF), Seoul: Kudara International, pp. 251-254. ISBN 89-85567-02-0.
- ^ a b Sakamoto, Tarō (1991). The Six National Histories of Japan, trans. John S. Brownlee, UBC Press, pp. 62-63. ISBN 0-7748-0379-7.
- ^ a b Farris, William Wayne (1998). Sacred Texts and Buried Treasures. University of Hawaii Press, pp. 64-66. ISBN 0-8248-2030-4.
- ^ Farris, William Wayne (1998). Sacred Texts and Buried Treasures. University of Hawaii Press, p. 114. ISBN 0-8248-2030-4.
