Talk:Korean sword
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Where are the sources of the text?
Swords under occupied Korea, 1890s to 1945
>The "firearms and explosives control" law by the Japanese occupiers was passed in August of 1907 by Japanese military and police law.
Korea became a protectorate of Japan on 1905 with a Protectorate Treaty. In 1907, Korea government signed to dismantle its army. There is no relation with "Korean sword". Additionally, there is no refernce that Korean army had so many Korean swrods. Does anyone have a reference? see above 'Joseon dynasty swords'.
> Swords were secondary weapons in the battle, with the mainly used weapons being bows and firearms. Actual sword battles were rare. As Koreans were superstitious about sharp-edged objects, the art of the sword did not take root in Korea as it did in Japan.
There is a clear contradiction. Don't you think so?
>While it is difficult to assess the situation, there are a great many mislabelled swords in Japan that are actually Korean swords or blades that have been rehandled and reworked.Little is known of this, and for obvious reasons, authentication of alleged Japanese swords by Korean swordsmiths is both prevented and proscribed. Scholars hope at some point for this diffulty to be solved, in addition to surfacing ancient Korean swords for modern study...In 1945, with the unconditional surrender of Japan, and the freeing of Korea into allied hands, ceremonial swords once again began to be made both in the south, and the north, and by the 1960s, sword-making had again begun, but with much tradition and techniques lost. Few swordmakers or swordmaking families survived, and since 1900 the shops, equipment, and traditional metallurgy were obliterated. Reconstruction of swordmaking began in the 1950s, and has only by the mid 1990s come back to expert levels as before.
No refernce. No source. It's just a imagine, less than POV. There is no clear source that japanese government bunned records odf korean swrods. If it's true, why there are still so many historical records of pre-WW2 korea in Seoul National University, heritor of 'Seoul imperial university'.
- Because the assertion that "japanese government bunned records" is absurd claim. Wikipedia exists to satifsy Koreans. Gegesongs 13:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Here's your Answer
--Actually, Old Korean swords were used very often. They just weren't used after the Confucian eras that only took over the Koryo kingdoms. Baekje, Shilla, and Gaya were still unaffected at the time and were still using swords until buddhism became the official religion of the universal korea.
--The Original Korean terms are "Mu Sool" and "Bup". Do and "the way" are recent and modernistic asian terms from japan, korea AND china. Most original names of Korean martial arts and sword arts don't have the term DO in them. Hapkimusool is a good example. The name Hapkido is now used so randomly and excessivly, that many practitionars question the credibility of the history of Hapkido. They just practice JiuJutsu and Aikido to feed that.
--"New Korean swords. Began after 1945 and has much similarity with Japanese sword. It's craftmen go to japan to learn the way to make "new korean swords".Poo-T 06:27, 17 October 2005 (UTC)"
Correction, new korean swords were made after 1950. 5 years is a big difference in history. Korean swords has had much similarity with japanese swords in the first place. The way to make korean swords is different from Japanese techniques so they CANT go to japan to make new korean swords. Korean sword making requires molding and a slow cooling process with clay rather than hammering it and cooling it by dipping it in water like most other swordsmithing out there in europe, china, japan and other generic countries.
In Conclusion: You really need to study yourself instead of criticizing others of their lack of study. You don't know the information yourself. Instead of making a counter statement, all you said was that there is no references out there. The problem with that is, with the internet and other history books, there is no real "korean history" for people didn't really have interest in Korea. It all comes down to this; History and documents = Political power. Whoever has more political power can write and rewrite history. Whoever doesn't, has no such ability.
[edit] Judo?
The word DO came before JUDO. In Korean language, Do means Sword or a weapon, or a type of study like Mudo, Jang do Hyung, etc. Jigoro Kano (Founder of Judo) made Judo from Jujutsu. Ju, meaning soft; Do, Meaning the Principle of, or the way. Do was already used before the presence of Judo. Its just that Do was used less. Jutsu was the main suffix to describe martial arts of Japan. MuSool and Bup is the main of korea, and Chinese used qian, Gongfu and Cheun.
- There is no question that 刀 and 道 are very old words. In the sense of this article, you're right, 刀 is the "do" being referenced and has been used for a long time in martial arts contexts. But he is also correct that "-do (-道)" names for martial arts (including hapgido, taekwondo, and geomdo) are a recent phenomenon. — AKADriver ☎ 21:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dahn Wol Do
This weapon's name is only partially translated: the entry cuts off at "'Great", as though only a fragment had been inserted. Ergative rlt 03:47, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fixed it
I fixed it. The weapon's name is translated as "The Great Moon Blade".
[edit] Swordsmiths
Does anyone know any ancient swordsmiths that korea has? I heard that most of the swordsmiths are unknown becuase each swordsman made their own sword as a mandatory thing and that all the other stuff was mass produced for foot soldiers. Something about the sword reflecting the warrior's true spirit.
[edit] A reply
Alot of those Documents are lost, and yes, each swordsman had their own unique kind of sword. Swords were generally crafted for the High ranked Generals and Kings so everyone pretty much had their own kind of sword. There was no Mass production of it so There is no real categorization of these different kind of swords... Only generalization.
[edit] Korean spears
Why is this under the article "Korean Swords?" Can we cut this out and put it in its own article? And, incidentally, this section is in need of some serious editing. It sounds as though it was taken verbatim from a bad translation of a Korean book. Not trying to sound mean-spirited, but I read it and cringed. --12.154.39.254 17:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Let me try that signature again--thought I was logged in.--Raulpascal 17:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- My thoughts exactly, either give it its own article or retitle this one traditional Korean weapons.KTo288 14:34, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] about that...
Korean spears were considered "swords" as well in Korea. There were no real bias about Spears and swords because the only difference between them in the country was the size of the blade and the size of the handle. Technically, they would pronounce them as a type of sword.
[edit] Since prehistoric times
Is there proof for the particular dates of 600BC or 2333 BC?? The last seems to precise for a prehistoric date to me. I think that if you want to connect a date there, you will need a good source/reference. --Kbarends 08:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] yup
Not too sure about the 2333 BC but there were a large amount of tribes in the korean peninsula before it became an actual country. It used to be a Nomad's Land before TanGun came to the country to "civilise" them. Like most asian stories begin, there's always some kind of myth or a legend tied into the birth of a country. Something about Tangun being born from the father of the moon and the mother of the sun, and married the Daughter of the stars in order to obtain power to MAKE the korean peninsula. I'm not sure how it goes specifically, but thats when the myths date back to.
[edit] Altering and trimming large amounts of the article
Someone keeps on altering the Article on the History of Korean swords more accuratly the Rai Sword-smiths of Japan were orginally Korean and its later followers mainly of Korean decsent and also in general taking large amounts of the article away. >_< —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Easternknight (talk • contribs) 23:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] wha...?
What are you saying. I don't understand... You just had one huge run-on. Are you saying that someone keeps on altering the article about the Korean swordsmiths? And that these "Rai Sword Smiths" of Japan were originally of korean descent? Which leaves out a huge part in history? If that's what you are saying... I suggest you link a reference leading to it or something. Japanese sword origins are a bit of a mystery since there's a big jump from their original straight double edged swords which were similar to the chinese Jian to their katana. Whether your information is correct or not is going to be according to politics whether you like it or not. That's just how documentations of history works. The people that have more political power have the ability to write history in whatever fashion or form they wish. Those that don't have no such ability. I mean, how many people know more about the documentations of the Mohicans than the history of the French Revolution? No one. That's because no one had the ability to make the history an official documentation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.148.86.122 (talk) 02:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC).
[edit] =response
Here is your reference. You probably won't believe any of the information on it as you are most likely a wapanese.
[edit] eh
Not sure what a WAPANESE is, but I'm not Japanese or White. I don't even care much about japanese history. Heck, I don't like Katanas very much nor do I think they are the "greatest weapon on the face of the planet". I really don't. That sword does look like a katana and there were a few documents of korean swordsmiths travelling to Korea. There are different stories though, Some people say that the artisans were kidnapped, others say that they went on their own. Either way, neither countries had any hate for each other until around the late 1400's - early 1500's. There were complications, little fights and a full fledged war during this time. So I don't know. You can claim that to a Japanese guy and I'm pretty sure they'll deny it. If you claim that to a korean guy, He'll probably approve of it. but to me, I don't really care. I mostly don't care because I don't want to side with either one of them.
[edit] Bad link?
I am at a computer in Korea with a high-speed connection, but (using IE), I get an error message for the video link http://www.kybc.org/kybc_new2002/channel/gokybc/view/20021128.asp , 08:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC)~