Talk:Seven-Branched Sword

message: What an excellent beginning for this article.  Thanks, Tortfeasor! -- Visviva 06:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great start 

message: Let me have some further information (sorry, I have no English sources, but these are based on Japanese version of the article) and introduction of arguments, which can be added to this article.
===Transcription===
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 parantheses are ambiguous. Italic letters are argued on decoding. Letters in black block are entirely undecodable.
===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 objection that it is a local era of Baekje. However, the idea is generally denied since no other archeological discovery reveals the existance of Baekje's unique era name. On the other hand, as Baekje generally uses sexagenary cycles to record date, that the date was recorded in Chinese era brought argument that the sword might be made in China.
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.
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.
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 some king of Buddhism or Taoism nuance, that presenter has "lived under august(holy) sounds". Latter decoding indicates that the phrase means "born coincidently 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.
Mahal Aly 10:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mahal Aly:  This is really great stuff.  If you look at some of the citations in the actual article they touch over most of what you have written and so if you're worried about sources, they are already there.  Good job.  Tortfeasor 23:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note 

message: 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 objection that it is a local era of Baekje. However, the idea is generally denied since no other archeological discovery reveals the existance of Baekje's unique era name. On the other hand, as Baekje generally uses sexagenary cycles to record date, that the date was recorded in Chinese era brought argument that the sword might be made in China.
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.
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.
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 some king of Buddhism or Taoism nuance, that presenter has "lived under august(holy) sounds". Latter decoding indicates that the phrase means "born coincidently 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.
Mahal Aly 10:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mahal Aly:  This is really great stuff.  If you look at some of the citations in the actual article they touch over most of what you have written and so if you're worried about sources, they are already there.  Good job.  Tortfeasor 23:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Some Arguments on Decoding and Interpretation

message: I propose this page to be moved to the Seven-Branched Sword because this is the English term used in the referenced books. --Kusunose 00:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me, per Wikipedia:Use English.  -- Visviva 01:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Appleby:  Maybe try hypenating it?  (Seven-branched sword).  Moving it is fine with me, I made this page b/c it was a red link.  Tortfeasor 02:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

text: then sounds good. i just haven't gotten into the habit of checking google scholar yet... Appleby 04:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page name 

message: I came across this Britannica citation while doing some research and it refers to the sword as the "Seven-pronged Sword."  .  Should we move the page to that name?  Any input on an issue that's not very critical at the moment would be appreciated.  Tortfeasor 16:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page name II 

message: If I'm not mistaken, there's a similar sword in the NES game "Demon Sword".  It looks almost like the Seven Branched Sword when it is fully completed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.223.39.218 (talk) 20:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video game similarity 

message: Chinese origin to : Korean origin 
Odst 00:09, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  change 

message: "A seven branched sword also appears in the third installment of the Phoenix Wright series as a major clue." I recently linked a friend of mine to this page while he was playing this particular game - this is a spoiler and should be removed. 90.212.51.202 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:51, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phoenix Wright spoilers 

message: The article says that the original is not shown to the public. On the other hand, being a National Treasure it should be regularly displayed AFAIK. Which is correct? bamse (talk) 23:30, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  On display? 

message: First Side: 泰■四年十(一)月十六日丙午正陽造百錬(銕)七支刀(出)辟百兵宜供供候王■■■■ (作 or 祥) 
Second Side: 先世以來未有此刀百濟王世(子)奇生聖音故爲倭王旨造傳示後世 
There is not explanation of "vassal state". 60.39.39.91 (talk) 05:28, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:   vassal state Japan.　There is not it in a original source of information. 

message: The Playstation 3 version of Tales of Vesperia has a weapon called the Nanatsusaya, which is a reference to this artifact.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.55.37.148 (talk) 04:16, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video Games 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Seven-Branched Sword. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070205053536/http://gias.snu.ac.kr/wthong/publication/paekche/eng/paekch_e.html to http://gias.snu.ac.kr/wthong/publication/paekche/eng/paekch_e.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081030200803/http://www.jkcf.or.jp/history/1/1-01-hamada_j.pdf to http://www.jkcf.or.jp/history/1/1-01-hamada_j.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:42, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified