# Korean Arts Huh!



## terryl965 (Dec 23, 2010)

I was having a converstation today over what is truely a Korean Art and what made it solely a Korean Art? So my question is simple what was the first of Korean Arts and what do you considered to be a true Korean art?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 8, 2011)

Any art developed by Koreans in Korea I suppose would be a Korean art.  

As for the first?  I'm not sure that anyone could really answer that one.  Keep in mind that most of the arts that we think of as Korean today are structured very differently from Korean arts prior to Japan's annexation of the Korean peninsula.  And they weren't called by names that we are familiar with either.  A great deal of effort has been made to connect modern KMA with ancient KMA, but most modern KMA are modern arts with no real connection to prewar KMA.  That doesn't make them any less Korean, however.

Daniel


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 8, 2011)

Some of the traditional Korean arts would be Kungdo (archery) Ssirum (Korean Wrestling) & Taekkyon.  They have survived even during Japanese occupation, though not widely practiced during that time, naturally.


----------



## Tanaka (Feb 8, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Some of the traditional Korean arts would be Kungdo (archery) Ssirum (Korean Wrestling) & Taekkyon.  They have survived even during Japanese occupation, though not widely practiced during that time, naturally.


Ssireum is not really a "Martial art"  just a sport of wrestling. It has been made more systematic in its approach I guess in modern times.

Taekkyon was considered just a game were you kick each other. It wasn't really a martial art either. Although in modern times it has been changed into one.


The only traditional Korean martial arts would be their archery. Although I have heard of traditional sword martial arts that aren't known anymore. So that is not really verified. Koreans were more of cosmetic, and kind of looked down on Martial arts.


----------



## puunui (Feb 8, 2011)

Tanaka said:


> Ssireum is not really a "Martial art"  just a sport of wrestling. It has been made more systematic in its approach I guess in modern times.
> 
> Taekkyon was considered just a game were you kick each other. It wasn't really a martial art either. Although in modern times it has been changed into one.
> 
> ...




The statements above would depend on how one defined "martial art", whether inclusively and therefore broadly, or narrowly and rigidly.


----------



## Tanaka (Feb 9, 2011)

puunui said:


> The statements above would depend on how one defined "martial art", whether inclusively and therefore broadly, or narrowly and rigidly.



Well in eastern culture a martial art normally tends to follow a philosophy. In which techniques exist to express that philosophy. For example I will use Korean martial art of "Tae Kwon Do." Which seems to follow the philosophy that the kick of a weaker man is as strong(or stronger) as a punch from a stronger man. And that the kick can be trained to be as fast as a punch. So you see techniques that represent this philosophy. 
I guess one could say it's a systematic approach to win a physical struggle of some sort. Whether it's upfront combat or a strategic way that isn't so upfront.

But I would not call something that was made solely for traditional folk game as "martial art"
Nor would I call "NAGA" a martial art.
but it's a place where many martial artist go to grapple.


----------



## puunui (Feb 9, 2011)

Tanaka said:


> Well in eastern culture a martial art normally tends to follow a philosophy. In which techniques exist to express that philosophy. For example I will use Korean martial art of "Tae Kwon Do." Which seems to follow the philosophy that the kick of a weaker man is as strong(or stronger) as a punch from a stronger man. And that the kick can be trained to be as fast as a punch. So you see techniques that represent this philosophy.




For me, Taekwondo's philosophy is summed up in the calligraphy of GM LEE Won Kuk, the founder of the Chung Do Kwan, which reads "Hwal In Taekwondo", meaning Taekwondo for long life, or life giving Taekwondo.


----------



## Rumy73 (Feb 10, 2011)

The early modern Koreans did have a guide to the art war called Muyedobotongji that described in detail Korea's martial arts of which an unarmed combat style of kicking and punching is extensively illustrated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muyedobotongji


----------



## Tanaka (Feb 10, 2011)

Rumy73 said:


> The early modern Koreans did have a guide to the art war called Muyedobotongji that described in detail Korea's martial arts of which an unarmed combat style of kicking and punching is extensively illustrated.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muyedobotongji


Based on Chinese martial arts systems... correct?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 11, 2011)

Tanaka said:


> Based on Chinese martial arts systems... correct?


At least one was Japanese, as the Muyedobotongji includes a section regarding the use of the wae geom; the Japanese sword.

I was always under the impression that the Muyedobotongji was a military manual and not a comprehensive MA manual.  As such, it probably would not include whatever civilian MA existed at the time.  I don't believe that folk arts such as Taekkyeon or Ssirum would have been included.  Not an authority, so I certainly could be wrong in that regard.

Daniel


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 11, 2011)

Tanaka said:


> Ssireum is not really a "Martial art"  just a sport of wrestling. It has been made more systematic in its approach I guess in modern times.
> 
> Taekkyon was considered just a game were you kick each other. It wasn't really a martial art either. Although in modern times it has been changed into one.
> 
> ...



Actually you have it backwards...Taekkyon started out as a martial art  and became a folk game.  As far as ssirum is concern, you would have to  exclude all wrestling out of martial arts based on your view of Ssirum.   For that matter, Kumdo, Judo as well since they are for sport not for "war".  

While it is true that Koreans look towards more scholarly pursuits due to Neo-confucianism, martial arts were not looked down upon as so many would think.  In fact many of the upper caste learned martial arts as part of their education and training.  

Mooyedobotongji was based off of military arts which were basic instructions in weapon work and some unarmed combat.  While you can credit the vast majority on Chinese arts there are some that are also Korean based as well.


----------



## Tanaka (Feb 11, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Actually you have it backwards...Taekkyon started out as a martial art  and became a folk game.  As far as ssirum is concern, you would have to  exclude all wrestling out of martial arts based on your view of Ssirum.   For that matter, Kumdo, Judo as well since they are for sport not for "war".


I really don't, but for sake of argument.
Judo has a systematic approach to combat.

Ssireum approach that you see nowadays is modern creation.
And what evidence do you have of Taekkyon being a martial art? Why would it be a martial art, then become a hacky sack game, and become a martial art again in modern times?


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 14, 2011)

Tanaka said:


> I really don't, but for sake of argument.
> Judo has a systematic approach to combat.
> 
> Ssireum approach that you see nowadays is modern creation.
> And what evidence do you have of Taekkyon being a martial art? Why would it be a martial art, then become a hacky sack game, and become a martial art again in modern times?


It was taught as a fighting system originally.  However, since most training was aimed more towards education and less towards fighting (keep in mind that martial techniques taught to the upper caste members dealt in basic warfare practice for officers such as archery & sword work)  Eventually the vast majority of the people using it were middle to lower caste, where they began to make it more into a game played during festivals or between contests of different villages.

I really wouldn't consider it a "hacky sack" type of game unless you used to throw your opponents or do take downs when you were played hacky sack.

Perhaps you can direct to what Ssirum used to look like prior to it being moderinzed?  There is definitely proof of it existence for some time as seen in much of earlier Joseon Dynasty artwork.


----------



## Tanaka (Feb 14, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> It was taught as a fighting system originally.  However, since most training was aimed more towards education and less towards fighting (keep in mind that martial techniques taught to the upper caste members dealt in basic warfare practice for officers such as archery & sword work)  Eventually the vast majority of the people using it were middle to lower caste, where they began to make it more into a game played during festivals or between contests of different villages.
> 
> I really wouldn't consider it a "hacky sack" type of game unless you used to throw your opponents or do take downs when you were played hacky sack.
> 
> Perhaps you can direct to what Ssirum used to look like prior to it being moderinzed?  There is definitely proof of it existence for some time as seen in much of earlier Joseon Dynasty artwork.


What evidence is there that suggest Taekkyon was more than just a game of kicking each other?
Because as far as I know that is all it was. A game where you used to kick each other.  

And as for Ssireum, I'm looking at the pictures they used to show that it is traditional. And based on the drawings they didn't use Satba.


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 15, 2011)

Tanaka said:


> What evidence is there that suggest Taekkyon was more than just a game of kicking each other?
> Because as far as I know that is all it was. A game where you used to kick each other.



Unfortunately there are no written records that would prove either way.  I am going on what was told to me by Taekkyon people and nothing more.



> And as for Ssireum, I'm looking at the pictures they used to show that it is traditional. And based on the drawings they didn't use Satba.


True...then again Roman Greco Wrestling was done in the nude way back when.  Doesn't mean it was teaching martial skill.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 15, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Unfortunately there are no written records that would prove either way. I am going on what was told to me by Taekkyon people and nothing more.
> 
> 
> True...then again Roman Greco Wrestling was done in the nude way back when. Doesn't mean it was teaching martial skill.


It was as martial as anything we do in martial arts now is.  Near as I can tell, if you have belt rankings or colored sashes, it is a 'martial art', even if it has little martial application.

Most of what we call martial arts now are more accurately called fighting sports/ fighting system or archaic martial arts.  Taekwondo has little, if any martial (as in war) application in either the current century or the century in which it was developed.  Kenjutsu *had* martial application at one time, but does no longer.

Boxing, prior to the introduction of Queensbury rules, was more than just punching, but nobody calls old boxing a martial art and modern boxing just a sport.  Its all just the sport of boxing as practiced in different eras.  

In pre-modern warfare, unarmed combat was the very last resort, and no, I do not believe or buy the crazy notion that a flying sidekick was developed to unhorse an armored and mounted rider.  Pre-modern military hand to hand combat was likely similar to modern hand to hand combat: smaller technique set that was drilled with enough frequency to maintain the skill, but receiving far less attention than skills in archery and spearmanship.  Most soldiers did not carry swords; these were reserved for officers, and officers, including the samurai, did not use the sword as their primary weapon on the battlefield.

So how are you defining martial art?  Fighting sports, such as wrestling or Taekkyeon, would not have been considered 'martial arts' by any pre-industrial military.

If you mean martial art in the sense of 'fighting systems', which is how the term is used in the modern world, the definition is pretty loose.

Daniel


----------



## Tanaka (Feb 15, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Unfortunately there are no written records that would prove either way.  I am going on what was told to me by Taekkyon people and nothing more.



That is what I was getting too. Taekkyon as a systematic approach to fighting(I'm being more lenient than I normally am on definition martial arts in order to satisfy) is a modern find. As I recall (I would have to go look it up again)... Taekkyon was nothing more than a game that took place where they kicked each other.
Almost like a game of hackysack.


----------



## Tanaka (Feb 15, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> It was as martial as anything we do in martial arts now is.  Near as I can tell, if you have belt rankings or colored sashes, it is a 'martial art', even if it has little martial application.
> 
> Most of what we call martial arts now are more accurately called fighting sports/ fighting system or archaic martial arts.  Taekwondo has little, if any martial (as in war) application in either the current century or the century in which it was developed.  Kenjutsu *had* martial application at one time, but does no longer.
> 
> ...


Kenjutsu is very applicable today(physics and humans are still the same as the time of its creation). It's just that there are better weapons to use in modern times, and a sword is not worn often. So it's not as useful as it once was. But it still has reality combat principles behind it. And a reality martial philosophy behind them. In the sense that it's not just "dancing with swords"
Like you see many people doing on youtube. 

But being that Kenjutsu is really no longer useful. Doesn't take away from being a Martial art. The reason why I don't really see ssireum as martial art. Is because I don't really think there is much of a systematic approach to it. The idea is to use the satba and throw them down. Do they have a systematic approach to it? Are there systematic techniques they are using.  Because I can simply go invent a game where you have to get the other person down. I would never refer to that as martial art. Unless there is an ART form to what they're doing to get the person down. For example of Judo. Judo is a systematic fighting style. There is also Judo Tournaments where you can apply this systematic fighting style.  Is ssireum the same as this? Because then I would call it a martial art.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 15, 2011)

Tanaka said:


> Kenjutsu is very applicable today(physics and humans are still the same as the time of its creation). It's just that there are better weapons to use in modern times, and a sword is not worn often. So it's not as useful as it once was. But it still has reality combat principles behind it. And a reality martial philosophy behind them. In the sense that it's not just "dancing with swords"
> Like you see many people doing on youtube.
> 
> But being that Kenjutsu is really no longer useful. Doesn't take away from being a Martial art.


Reread my post. I never said that it has no value or application or that it is not a martial art. 

I said that kenjutsu had *martial* application at one time, and in the previous sentence, I qualified that by 'martial,' I meant in warfare. Kenjutsu falls into the 'archaic martial arts' category that I mentioned in my post. 

The primary weapon of the modern soldier is the rifle. The primary personal weapon of the modern soldier is either a pistol or a knife. Swords in modern militaries are ceremonial.



Tanaka said:


> The reason why I don't really see ssireum as martial art. Is because I don't really think there is much of a systematic approach to it. The idea is to use the satba and throw them down. Do they have a systematic approach to it? Are there systematic techniques they are using. Because I can simply go invent a game where you have to get the other person down. I would never refer to that as martial art.


I'm not familiar enough with Ssireum to render judgement as to the level of systemization, but as I said, the definition of 'martial art' today is fairly loose, as most are either fighting sports (Ssireum, wrestling, boxing, BJJ, judo, sport karate, kickboxing, sport taekwondo, kendo, fencing, etc.) or fighting systems (taekwondo, karate, hapkido, Aikido, jujutsu, taijutsu, kenpo, etc.), but most all of these are grouped into martial arts in the modern lexicon. 



Tanaka said:


> Unless there is an ART form to what they're doing to get the person down. For example of Judo. Judo is a systematic fighting style. There is also Judo Tournaments where you can apply this systematic fighting style. Is ssireum the same as this? Because then I would call it a martial art.


So by 'art' do you mean science or system?  That is the way that 'art' was used when the term 'martial arts' was coined in Europe in the 15th century.

As for the rest, you'll have to take that up with a Ssireum guy.

Daniel


----------



## puunui (Mar 28, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> The primary weapon of the modern soldier is the rifle. The primary personal weapon of the modern soldier is either a pistol or a knife. Swords in modern militaries are ceremonial.




One of the guys in my office has a samurai sword and scabbard which his father took off a dead Japanese soldier in Iwo Jima I believe. It is framed nicely and still razor sharp. His brother got the Japanese pistol and holster that was taken from the same dead Japanese soldier. But even then I believe that the primary weapons of the Japanese soldier in WWII was his rifle or other firearm, and not that type of sword.


----------



## Indie12 (Mar 29, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Actually you have it backwards...Taekkyon started out as a martial art and became a folk game. As far as ssirum is concern, you would have to exclude all wrestling out of martial arts based on your view of Ssirum. For that matter, Kumdo, Judo as well since they are for sport not for "war".
> 
> While it is true that Koreans look towards more scholarly pursuits due to Neo-confucianism, martial arts were not looked down upon as so many would think. In fact many of the upper caste learned martial arts as part of their education and training.
> 
> Mooyedobotongji was based off of military arts which were basic instructions in weapon work and some unarmed combat. While you can credit the vast majority on Chinese arts there are some that are also Korean based as well.


 
True!! Wrestling itself is a form of Martial Art, Boxing too!

Actually if you know your history, you'll know that many Martial Art systems became sport thereafter in order to 'survive' during the occupations and years... It was a survival mode.


----------



## Indie12 (Mar 29, 2011)

Tanaka said:


> Well in eastern culture a martial art normally tends to follow a philosophy. In which techniques exist to express that philosophy. For example I will use Korean martial art of "Tae Kwon Do." Which seems to follow the philosophy that the kick of a weaker man is as strong(or stronger) as a punch from a stronger man. And that the kick can be trained to be as fast as a punch. So you see techniques that represent this philosophy.
> I guess one could say it's a systematic approach to win a physical struggle of some sort. Whether it's upfront combat or a strategic way that isn't so upfront.
> 
> But I would not call something that was made solely for traditional folk game as "martial art"
> ...


 
If you really wanna get 'technical' the term 'Martial Arts' isn't really eastern, it's western. It was coined as a means of caterizing all Combative Systems under one name. And no Tae Kwon Do actually is the opposite, the idea that the legs themselves are 10x stronger then the arms. Tae Kwon Do comes from a long line of KMA discendents.


----------



## Indie12 (Mar 29, 2011)

Tanaka said:


> What evidence is there that suggest Taekkyon was more than just a game of kicking each other?
> Because as far as I know that is all it was. A game where you used to kick each other.
> 
> And as for Ssireum, I'm looking at the pictures they used to show that it is traditional. And based on the drawings they didn't use Satba.


 
Taekkyon has roots in the Hwarang system of fighting. 

Ssireum is also a form of ground fighting or early wrestling, and yes it was a combat system also. Don't forget many of the combat systems were also used for sport purposes as a means of either hiding it's true intentions, or for spectator purposes!


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Mar 29, 2011)

Indie12 said:


> Taekkyon has roots in the Hwarang system of fighting.


If you don't mind my asking, what sort of documentation do you have to support this?

Daniel


----------



## Indie12 (Mar 30, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> It was as martial as anything we do in martial arts now is. Near as I can tell, if you have belt rankings or colored sashes, it is a 'martial art', even if it has little martial application.
> 
> *Indie:* Sad but true!
> 
> ...


 
It's always easier for me to respond via per quote....

"Haa I just love it when people try to complicate things by saying 'Martial Arts isn't Combat/Warfare but rather something else"


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Mar 30, 2011)

I'm not sure what question you were answering, but it was not the one regarding this:



Indie12 said:


> Taekkyon has roots in the Hwarang system of fighting.


I restate the question: what sort of *documentation* do you have to support this?  I'm not debating whether or not takkyeon is or is not a martial art.  

I am asking you what documentation do you have linking takkyeon to a specific fighting system of the Hwarang? 

Daniel


----------



## puunui (Mar 30, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I am asking you what documentation do you have linking takkyeon to a specific fighting system of the Hwarang?




The Hwarang were I believe some sort of royal court group; Taekkyon was folk game practiced mainly in rural parts of Korea. The two groups don't really mix and so a connection between them would be tenuous at best.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Mar 31, 2011)

puunui said:


> The Hwarang were I believe some sort of royal court group; Taekkyon was folk game practiced mainly in rural parts of Korea. The two groups don't really mix and so a connection between them would be tenuous at best.


Kind of my feeling.  So far as I know, documentation about the Hwarang themselves does not include details of their fighting style.

Daniel


----------



## puunui (Apr 1, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Kind of my feeling.  So far as I know, documentation about the Hwarang themselves does not include details of their fighting style.



Some say that the Hwarang, which some translate to "Flower Boys", may have been some sort of male geisha group.  I have no idea if that is true or not.


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 5, 2011)

Indie said:
			
		

> Taekwondo has links to Taekkyon and some of the older  Korean systems, while the system itself is not an application for  battle, some of the not-so-spectacular techniques do! Also I'll add that  Tae Kwon Do is taught to South and North Korean Military Personnel as  apart of their hand to hand combat training.


Taekwondo has no links to Takkyon at all.  The closest link you would find is roughly through hapkido kicking that was adopted into Taekwondo.  That link comes supposedly through DJN Ji, Han-jae's training in Taekkyon.  Taekwondo, as we know it today, is an evolved art with roots based in karate.



			
				Indie said:
			
		

> The 20th century, when Tae Kwon Do was developed by Gen  Choi had little Martial (War) application, since truly the 1970's when  it became more about Sport, it lost all Martial credibility. The 21st  century is no different.



You have mixed message here.  First you mention "as developed by Gen Choi..." followed by "..it became more about sport..."  TKD was developed by several people not just Gen. Choi.  Gen Choi's version of TKD is not what was developed the sport aspect of what we see in the Olympics.  So to be clear,  when TKD was developed it was developed with martial application, which is why it was required training for Korean military.  One of the branches that sprung from this tree was a sport aspect of the training. 

So my question to you is how did it lose credibility?  Do you feel that because the sport became popular that the rest just became crap?  If so the the dojangs that you visited or trained in just didn't have a balanced curriculum.



			
				Indie said:
			
		

> Not true, actually Boxing is a Martial Art, (I.E  Combat/fighting method) unfortunately it's widely practiced as sport,  but it doesn't mean it's not 'Martial'


Then how can you say TKD has lost credibility as a martial art if boxing is no different?



			
				Indie said:
			
		

> You speak a great deal of Martial application, many of our modern militaries use Boxing as a hand2hand combat training method.


Military may incorporate boxing techniques but what they use for h2h is not boxing. 



			
				Indie said:
			
		

> Which century are we talking about? Hand2Hand combat was  the primary source of war for centuries, followed by the use of weapons  (I.E rocks, sticks, spears,) then (swords, metal spears,) then  (firearms, cannons,) to (tanks, armory, bombs).


If you are talking prehistoric man before his knowledge of tool usage then yes...I agree.  However, once he figured a stick or rock in the hand was a lot easier to use in a fight...weapons became the preferred method of combat.  If not please direct me to specific dates in Korea's history where they only used their hands in combat.



			
				Indie said:
			
		

> Weaponry has been the primary source of War, I'd argue  that the Samurai did indeed use there sword on the battlefield as a  supplement. Prior to the 18th and 19th century there were no firearms,  cannons, or bombs in Japan. Archery, Spears, and Swords were the primary  weapons of that time, along with hand2hand.



Yes h2h training was taught, but as a last resort.  That is why in the Muyeadobotongji you have 3/4 dedicated to weapons training and 1/4 to h2h training.  




			
				Indie said:
			
		

> To answer your question about Taekkyeon and Hwarang, 1)  When I was studying with a Hwarang Instructor, that was part of the  studying, learning Hwarang History. 2) If you go back into Korean  Lineage, you'll find where Hwarang influenced many of the techniques  used in Taekkyeon. I will admit however, that many records were lost and  in the Korean history there aren't accurate records of many systems.



The WHRDA is not the best place to get your Korean history knowledge in dealing with Hwarang.  I suggest reading Korean history books and getting better idea about actual Korean history and its mention of the Hwarang warriors before swallowing the spoon fed history of WHRDA.


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 5, 2011)

puunui said:


> Some say that the Hwarang, which some translate to "Flower Boys", may have been some sort of male geisha group.  I have no idea if that is true or not.


This is not correct. A lot of people have claimed the Hwarang were homosexuals since they would take outings together in the mountains and such.  This breaks down to simple ignorance of Korean culture.  While the literal translation my have been "Flower" I believe there is a deeper translation involved in the name.  I will have to review my books to find it though.


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 5, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Kind of my feeling.  So far as I know, documentation about the Hwarang themselves does not include details of their fighting style.
> 
> Daniel


They never had a specific fighting style that WHRDA claims they do.  They followed basic military fighting concepts similar to that found in the MYDBTJ.


----------



## shesulsa (Apr 5, 2011)

It's times like this I wish I was fluent in Korean so I could actually read the Sagi's myself.

It's always interesting (in a limp noodle way) to read the attempts at translation whenever it comes to the hwarang.

Flower boys. Homosexuals. Or my user name, female diarrhea.  

Curious if any of you have been to either a WHRDA school or to one of the HRD offshoot schools?


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 5, 2011)

shesulsa said:


> It's times like this I wish I was fluent in Korean so I could actually read the Sagi's myself.
> 
> It's always interesting (in a limp noodle way) to read the attempts at translation whenever it comes to the hwarang.
> 
> ...


The problem is that people take the term "blooming or flowering" literally as flower instead of a more ideological approach to the term.  I blame this on Western ignorance on Korean culture.  We tend to translate definitions directly into our own language.  

Yes.  I have studied with one of the renegades of WHRDA.    I hope you do not confuse my issue with their take of Hwarang or the origin of their art as an issue with the art itself.  I feel they are very good martial artists and the Hwarangdo is an effective martial art, but history is history.

I have read the Samguk Yusa, something that I recommend.  You can find it here:  http://www.amazon.com/Samguk-Yusa-Legends-History-Kingdoms/dp/1596543485.  I recommend reading it a couple of times as it can get confusing at times.  Currently there is university group based out in Hawaii who is was trying to translate the Samguk Sagi.  http://www2.hawaii.edu/~dkane/Samguk.htm. It is a project that I believe is still in process.  I hope they do complete as it would be great to read more history from that time.  

I am currently reading Korea:  Old and New by Lee, Ki-baek.  Which touches on the Hwarang as well as do most historical Korean books.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 5, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> This is not correct. A lot of people have claimed the Hwarang were homosexuals since they would take outings together in the mountains and such. This breaks down to simple ignorance of Korean culture. While the literal translation my have been "Flower" I believe there is a deeper translation involved in the name. I will have to review my books to find it though.


I always thought of it in terms of the Hwarang embodying the fullness of Korean virtue. 

As I understand, the Hwarang were versed in classical learning and fine arts, which may have actually been more primary than the martial arts.

Daniel


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 5, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I always thought of it in terms of the Hwarang embodying the fullness of Korean virtue.
> 
> As I understand, the Hwarang were versed in classical learning and fine arts, which may have actually been more primary than the martial arts.
> 
> Daniel


Yes, the Hwarang were comprised of the aristocracy of Korean society.  They were well educated in all areas including classical learning, fine arts, practical education and martial arts.


----------



## shesulsa (Apr 5, 2011)

The given history (WHRDA version) is that King Chin Hun approached Won Kwon Bopsa for an elite martial art to teach the Hwarang (more of a high society group and supposedly meaning 'flowering manhood' or 'flowering youth') and lead military commands. :idunno:

So it has always been my understanding - and if anyone here is fluent in an asian language, please reply - that while there are characters for simple words combining two characters creates a new word or at least a word with more specific meaning.  Hence, "flower" + "boy" would be something like "blossoming youth" (even we don't have a single word in English for this, I think).


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 6, 2011)

shesulsa said:


> The given history (WHRDA version) is that King Chin Hun approached Won Kwon Bopsa for an elite martial art to teach the Hwarang (more of a high society group and supposedly meaning 'flowering manhood' or 'flowering youth') and lead military commands. :idunno:



_(Note:  Some of what is in written in the Samguk Yusa is in dispute amongst modern day scholars due to no concrete facts supporting the ideas stated, so take it for what it is)_  According the Samguk Yusa,  King Jinheung (aka Chin Hun) began the Hwarang group after the disbandment of a group called Wonhwa, a female group that was trained in ethics, filial, loyalty and sincerity.  After their disbandment King Jinhueng put together, what he called the Hwarang.  This was a group of boys from good families.  The main purpose was not military oriented but aimed in keeping good ties with what was known as the golpum system.  _(Golpum (aka bone rank) was a caste system established in Korea.)_  Families that were high ranking in the golpum were usually granted high government positions.  This was a way to keep the peace.

Around 551, when King Jinheung decided to expand the Silla kingdom by aligning with Baekje to conquer Gogoryeo, is when they started looking at the Hwarang to be more militaristic.  Around this time they were being trained in military arts of horsemanship, spear, swordsmanship, archery, etc...This pretty much began the golden age of the Hwarang.  After their victory over Gogoryeo, Silla aligned themselves secretly with them to oust out Baekje in 553.

The Hwarang were not chosen automatically to be warriors.  Based on their status in society they were chose to become government officials and other high ranking members in society, and from there certain ones would be bred as warriors.

Last note:  There is more history after 553...but I wanted to give an insight as to the origins of Hwarang.


----------



## shesulsa (Apr 6, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> _(Note:  Some of what is in written in the Samguk Yusa is in dispute amongst modern day scholars due to no concrete facts supporting the ideas stated, so take it for what it is)_  According the Samguk Yusa,  King Jinheung (aka Chin Hun) began the Hwarang group after the disbandment of a group called Wonhwa, a female group that was trained in ethics, filial, loyalty and sincerity.  After their disbandment King Jinhueng put together, what he called the Hwarang.  This was a group of boys from good families.  The main purpose was not military oriented but aimed in keeping good ties with what was known as the golpum system.  _(Golpum (aka bone rank) was a caste system established in Korea.)_  Families that were high ranking in the golpum were usually granted high government positions.  This was a way to keep the peace.
> 
> Around 551, when King Jinheung decided to expand the Silla kingdom by aligning with Baekje to conquer Gogoryeo, is when they started looking at the Hwarang to be more militaristic.  Around this time they were being trained in military arts of horsemanship, spear, swordsmanship, archery, etc...This pretty much began the golden age of the Hwarang.  After their victory over Gogoryeo, Silla aligned themselves secretly with them to oust out Baekje in 553.
> 
> ...



That is more eloquently put than but still in keeping with what I've been taught through oral traditions.  

Thanks!


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 6, 2011)

shesulsa said:


> That is more eloquently put than but still in keeping with what I've been taught through oral traditions.
> 
> Thanks!


Seems the WHRDA version makes it sound as though the Hwarang was formed specifically as a warrior class.  Plus WHRDA makes it sound as though the military leaders of Hwarang all became monks and went into hiding to practice their art.  This is not true.  A lot of them went on to be prominent merchants and politicians.  Some may have become monks as well, but I would not go so far as saying they all donned the robes and went into the mountains in secrecy.  Nor do I believe they taught secretly handing it down from one person to the next.  
Again, I have to emphasize that my disagreement of their history is not meant to say their martial art is bogus or their abilities lacking.  I simply feel they are embellishing to make themselves more than they are.


----------



## shesulsa (Apr 6, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Seems the WHRDA version makes it sound as though the Hwarang was formed specifically as a warrior class.  Plus WHRDA makes it sound as though the military leaders of Hwarang all became monks and went into hiding to practice their art.  This is not true.  A lot of them went on to be prominent merchants and politicians.  Some may have become monks as well, but I would not go so far as saying they all donned the robes and went into the mountains in secrecy.  Nor do I believe they taught secretly handing it down from one person to the next.
> Again, I have to emphasize that my disagreement of their history is not meant to say their martial art is bogus or their abilities lacking.  I simply feel they are embellishing to make themselves more than they are.



Understood. And not necessarily disagreed. ;-)


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 7, 2011)

I'll be going back over to Korea for a couple of weeks in June to visit my wife's family.  Hopefully I can sneak in some time to go to Gweongju (I believe this is the place) where the Silla Kingdom was HQ'd.


----------

