Talk:Korean sword

message: 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)
replies: text:  LOL, your ignorance is laughable. Now you are going to deny any war crimes committed by Japan and ask me to waste my time citing sources right? Get a life. I am a Korean and I get no satisfaction out of Wikipedia because of the likes of you. Wookie919 (talk) 04:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Where are the sources of the text？

message: --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)
thread_title: Here's your Answer

message: 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)
thread_title: Judo?

message: 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)
thread_title: Dahn Wol Do

message: 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)
replies: text: My thoughts exactly, either give it its own article or retitle this one traditional Korean weapons.KTo288 14:34, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Korean spears 

message: 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)
thread_title: Since prehistoric times

message: 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)
thread_title:  Altering and trimming large amounts of the article 

message: 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)
thread_title:  wha...? 

message: Korean "Rai" Sword
Here is your reference. You probably won't believe any of the information on it as you are most likely a wapanese.
===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.
"Rai Sword" is known as Japanese Sword. The sword made in Japan is a Japanese sword.  (221.185.253.204 (talk) 02:26, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: =response

message: 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.
"Rai Sword" is known as Japanese Sword. The sword made in Japan is a Japanese sword.  (221.185.253.204 (talk) 02:26, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: eh

message: 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)
thread_title: Bad link?

message: This is currently mentioned in the section.
"Korean swords are very scarce, since most surviving examples were confiscated and destroyed during the Japanese colonial occupation. A systematic attempt was made to collect and destroy all Korean swords, coats of armour, and all Korean martial arts equipment. The entire history of Korean swords and armour was almost lost forever, along with much of Korea's culture and traditions"
Now there are three citations added to this information.  However, what do the books really say?  The editor who added the citaions always uses the same books and never give us details, the page number, for example. 
One of the books the editor always uses is Pekche of Korea and the Origin of Yamato Japan, but it seems it does not mention martial arts or the period of Japanese occupation.  I don't think the editor's way of citing sources is proper.  This information may be his "interpretation".
I suggest adding  until details of the source are shown by the editor.--Je suis tres fatigue (talk) 14:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hong probably does address Japanese occupation since his book is about Korean origins of Yamato Japan and that portion of history figured heavily in Japanese interest in occupying Korea and Japan's policies on Korean history, culture, etc..Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 06:04, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Japanese occupation

message: I removed text from the history section regarding Korean swordmakers being Japanese trained(unreferenced) and claims that Japanese swords originated from Shilla and Tang dynasty(probably true but irrelevant for this section).  The section is cleaner without this POV tit for tat.  The referenced information will be moved to a different section.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 06:04, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: POV tit for tat removed

message: The generals and other high-ranking officials of the Korean kingdoms generally wore plate-mail
is it plated mail or something else? (Idot (talk) 17:26, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  plate-mail 

message: It is thought likely that the first iron swords were manufactured in Japan in the fourth century, based on technology imported from China via Korean peninsula.
Such a description is being done by the book. The technology of Silla is not explained. 60.39.35.96 (talk) 19:50, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ozawa, Hiroshi (2006) [2005] (in English, Japanese). Swords in Ancient Japan. Ideas and History of the Sword. 2. Japan: Kendo Academy Press. pp. 1 

message: I would do it but the syntax is so bad in some of these sentences that I can't tell for sure what is meant. If I were to attempt to fix it I would probably change the meaning.65.5.226.135 (talk) 16:18, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  A purpose I had in beginning my editing activities on WIKI was to address exactly the poor scholarship I find here. Apart from the poor syntax I will also state that the information reflects the same sort of unsubstantiated "pop" writing that one can easily find in glossy Martial Arts magazines. I ardently believe we are better than this and invite folks who are like minded to reflect on my thoughts and perhaps visit the work I am doing over on the "Korean Swordsmanship" article. FWIW. --Bruce W Sims (talk) 23:42, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The English really needs cleaning up 

message: For references to Lee Eun-cheul in Yeoju, Kyonggi Province, see either the article  in http://gregorybrundage.tripod.com/koreanswords/koreanswordmanufacturers.html or the swordsmith article in the book Korea up Close.  Since I co-authored both articles,  I am not adding them, due to conflict of interest. Kdammers (talk) 11:53, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lee Eun-cheul 

message: If you'll allow to opine without trammel for a moment:
You know, the lede seems....a  bit abrupt, frankly. It reads as if it's starting in medias res, so to speak. Shouldn't we, at least, append a brief sentence to the beginning of it? A general description? You know, like, 'Korean swords are a type of bladed weapon made for and used during various combative situations throughout most of korean history...', perhaps? To me, that seems a bit more congruent. Ghost Lourde (talk) 05:46, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential improvements regarding the lede 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Korean sword. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051125043140/http://joongangdaily.joins.com:80/200504/03/200504031842211109900091009101.html to http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200504/03/200504031842211109900091009101.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:56, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I can not find in the references that Samjungdo was more like Japanese sword.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catrin00 (talk • contribs) 06:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  samjeongdo 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Korean 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/20070225032214/http://www.swordsofkorea.com/main.htm to http://www.swordsofkorea.com/main.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050217224740/http://museum.kma.ac.kr/kor/museum/spe.htm to http://museum.kma.ac.kr/kor/museum/spe.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070705224438/http://museum.kma.ac.kr/kor/museum/no1.htm to http://museum.kma.ac.kr/kor/museum/no1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070705224717/http://museum.kma.ac.kr/kor/museum/no2.htm to http://museum.kma.ac.kr/kor/museum/no2.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050921054927/http://museum.kma.ac.kr/kor/museum/no3.htm to http://museum.kma.ac.kr/kor/museum/no3.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050218140956/http://museum.kma.ac.kr/kor/museum/no4.htm to http://museum.kma.ac.kr/kor/museum/no4.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060513045119/http://chunghondang.com/sword.htm to http://www.chunghondang.com/sword.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060411191720/http://myhome.shinbiro.com/~kbyon/culture/sword.htm to http://myhome.shinbiro.com/~kbyon/culture/sword.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312110903/http://www.kybc.org/kybc_new2002/channel/gokybc/view/20021128.asp to http://www.kybc.org/kybc_new2002/channel/gokybc/view/20021128.asp
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) 13:03, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Korean 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/20150725012237/http://swordsofhonor.com/swords-blog/swords/swords-in-chosun-kingdom/ to http://swordsofhonor.com/swords-blog/swords/swords-in-chosun-kingdom/
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) 10:17, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified