Kendo World article about Kumdo [Archive]

glad2bhere

03-01-2004, 07:43 PM

Dear Carlton:

"..... I did a little research on the origins of Kumdo....."

Yes. Apparently it IS just you. The art of Korean sword can be traced minimally back to 1450 and the publication of the DONGKUK BYONGKAM ("Comprehensive Military Chronicle of the Eastern Kingdom") one of over 200-to-400 various works incorporated into the MU YEI TOBO TONG JI ("Illustrated Comprehensive Manual of Korean Martial Arts") published in 1795. Had you done more than a "little research" you would have found that the sport of Kendo was organized out of some 13 kenjutsu forms by a staff of specialists at the behest of the Butokukai after its founding in 1894. It goes without saying that Kendo and Kumdo are both renderings of the same Chinese ideographes. It also goes without saying that Kendo was introduced to Korea by the Butokukai-Choson as well as educational regimentation and Japanese Occupation forces. Fine. All well and good. It would however be just a little easier to discuss such things if your attitude was just a tad less dismissive regarding Korean sword method. I have yet to find where the Koreans ever required the intervention of the Japanese culture to teach them how to use a sword, as historically they seem to have done well for themselves. Promoting skills which span at least four varied sword architectures and include at least two polearms, I am not sure that the measure of Korean sword is how well one armoured person can chase another with a stick.

Regards,

Bruce

Ben Bartlett

03-01-2004, 08:07 PM

Originally posted by glad2bhere
"Same S***, different day."

This is just one more rehashing of the age-old chestnuts that people trot out. The Jist of the article is that unless the Japanese produced it, the thing never existed with any true veracity.

Hapkido is the same as Aikido?

Kendo is the same as Kumdo?

Yudo is the same as Judo?

All have these have been chewed over multiple times and it always comes back to the same thing. People who want to believe the stuff of which this article is written will believe it no matter how many fact are produced. People who are aware of the facts (including yours-truely) will roll their eyes, groan once again, and move on to the more intelligent areas of the Internet.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

In fairness, the fact that kumdo seems to be often advertised as the "ancient way of the samurai" (at least the times I've seen it advertised) doesn't help much with this image (bloody marketing). Out of curiousity, though, since I don't know much about kumdo, what are some of the differences?

glad2bhere

03-01-2004, 08:52 PM

Dear Ben:

We can start with the variance of the weapon itself. Technically a "guem" is a straight, two-edged sword not unlike the Chinese jian. However, as with many terms, the noun "kum" has come to identify a sword generally. What most people identify as a "katana" or in Korean, "ye-do" is actually a "short sword" or more correctly a dao or sabre with a single edge and curved profile.

Unlike the Jpanese culture, the Koreans never organized a societal sword class, nor regarded the sword as anything but a tool for accomplishing a given task.

Also, unlike the Japnese culture the sword was not regarded as a tool for setting disputes such as in the case of dueling. There are few if any records of sword saints going on pilgrimages on which they tried themselves on the mettle of various schools or teachers.

Now, I said all of that to say this. While there are a significant portion of Kumdo people who actually practice and compete in Kendo, it is erroneous to suppose that all Kumdo is Kendo. What is more it would be just as inaccurate to say that because Kendo and Kumdo share the same ideograph, then all Japnese sword is simply Kumdo by another name. I have no doubt not a few ken-justu-kas would take similar umbrage with that. ;)

So where does the difference come in? Kumdo also may be used to identify those practitioners of "sword method" or Kum Bup. The difference is roughly the same as the distinction between Kendo and ken-jutsu. The Kum-Bup aspect of Kumdo is rightfully a separate and distinct form though it is often identified with the same label-- "Kumdo". Execution includes significantly higher frequency of thrusting, engagement of targets in a spherical rather than linear array, a broader range of supposed weapons to be engaged, as well as a wider spectrum of weapons to master.

Moving back to the actual Kumdo side of the art, the use of the juk-to tends to be a tad heavier and the use of IKF kata, known in Korean as the (7) DAE TO e Bon and (3) SHO TO e BON may or may not be substituted by a variety of more impromptu 2-man drills such as PAL POONG TA GUEM BUP. It has also been rumored that some Kum Bup practitioners take their art seriously out of all reasonable proportion, a failing for which I have had to apologize on more than one occasion. :-) FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

gendzwil

03-02-2004, 08:17 AM

Originally posted by glad2bhere
Blah blah blah history-cakes
As we'd say over on TWoP. That's not really the point of the article. The fact is that the vast majority of what is called kumdo in Korea is in fact kendo by another name, introduced to the Koreans by the Japanese during the occupation. The Koreans, justifiably pissed at their treatment but still loving kendo (and damn good at it) have applied a bunch of revisionist history such that a large number of Korean kumdo practisioners now believe that the origin of kumdo/kendo is wholly Korean. Now there's a significant faction that is aiming to put kumdo into the Olympics, in good measure to move control of it as a sport away from the Japanese. If that succeeds, the path will be clear - kumdo/kendo will become fencing with funny clothes and lose any aspect of budo it now has.

And for what it's worth on Korean swordsmanship, I'd be curious to know if there's been any continuous practice of the older schools. My impression is that these things have been recreated in recent times from old texts, unlike the Japanese schools which have had a teacher-student living transmission for hundreds of years in some cases.

Iron Chef

03-02-2004, 09:46 AM

I can't believe you guys are debating over this. Its just another case of back engineering into dead Korean martial art traditions and trying to make them live again in order to inspire national pride or maybe its to inspire dojang cash flow. :) Its the same MO that General Choi Hong Hi used to create TaeKwonDo. He studied Japanese karate. Then from his studies of Karate he created Tae Kwon Do and people back engineered a history to 'ancient' korean arts going back to the Koguryu kingdom (37 B.C to 66 A.D.) etc...... TaeKwonDo is the modern decendant of old Taek Kyon fighting methods which draws the roots of its technical syllabus off from the line of karate popularized by Funakoshi Gichen. :laugh: Though to look at it now you probably wouldn't know it.

Kumdo, same same.

My Judo teacher's teacher was a Korean Yudo teacher named Wey Seng Kim. We were USJF members. Sensei Kim trained at the Kodokan and finish 3rd in the heavy division in the 1960's World Championships. Yudo was Judo at least it was way back when. Now it probably gets its history from some ancient Korean method of royal court jacket wrestling. :laugh:

IOC is currently trying to trim down the number of events in the Olympics. Some fencing people are worried that fencing may not make the cut in the future. And fencing is one of the sports dating back to the first modern Olympics. So right now I don't see them added Kumdo or I mean Kendo. :) Maybe I'm a little cynical but the only 'ancient' Korean sword work I have ever seen came from a demonstration of the art of Kuk Sul Won. My God you should have seen that........

glad2bhere

03-02-2004, 10:05 AM

Dear Neil:

What caught my eye was your citation ("blah, blak, blah--- history cakes") and I was curious to know where this was taken from.

As far as your comment about "revisionism", I would submit that it is not revisionism when the art has existed for some 500 years. I know that followers of Japanese culture tend to represent that their Ryu-Ha systems somehow offer something special in the way of validation or authentification and perhaps they do. I don't know. The Korean MA educational system also focuses on a relationship between a teacher and a student. What is different is the military structure and the manner in which skills are passed from one generation to the next. (See: Palais)

Prior to the introduction of Japanese organization, education is structured MA skills fell to whoever was recognized as the local authority in a particular area or community. Those wishing to follow-up on the skills that they learned would then apply for testing under the Civil Service examines for governmental positions in the standing military cadre, institutional security or police. It fell to these cadre to maintain a core around which regular trainings of part-time civilian units could train and maintain their skills. (See: Hamel) Such manuals as the MU YEI TOBO TONG JI are representative of a class of published materials which were used to provide consistent guidance in a specified number of weapons and skills. This is NOT revisionism. It is, however, not an aspect that "martial arts historian" tend to promote, choosing instead to emphasize the more commonly held belief that Korean martial science had ended and all that remains to this day is what was introduced from Japan during the Occupation or brought from Japan after the Occupation.

Finally, I am thinking as I close this that perhaps one might want to walk softly when invoking the idea that Japanese patri-linear succession somehow guarentees the authenticity of a particular art. While this might be true of a small number of arts, it is increasingly apparent to people who delve below the surface that the Japanese were not unfamiliar with schism, splintering and misrepresentation when pressed about the source of any given tradition. It is also well-known that not a little "revisionism" such as Nitobe' work was rife prior to the Second World War. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Ren Blade

03-02-2004, 10:07 AM

Interesting article. I used to have a black belt friend in Tae Kwon Do that he was taught that Tae Kwon Do was the very first Martial Art to be created. That Tae Kwon Do was developed from watching the animals. I have nothing against Tae Kwon Do, but I don't believe that story. My friend believed it though. He was pretty hardcore about Tae Kwon Do. I just nodded my head and left it at "Oh ok." cause I didn't feel the need to debate.

Iron Chef

03-02-2004, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by Iron Chef
.... Yudo was Judo at least it was way back when. Now it probably gets its history from some ancient Korean method of royal court jacket wrestling. :laugh:
........ [/B]
HeeHeeHee!

I may not have been too far off. This is great! I found this on the net. The History of Yudo. Its prety long I'll just show the beginning and one quote from the middle. The first 3 paragraphs have nothing to do with Yudo what so ever.

The History of Yudo
By Amaury Murgado

Archaeologists have shown that cultural and technical advancement came to Korea through China. In turn, these advancements were later taken to Japan from Korea. Such advancements included unarmed combat techniques.

It is no surprise then that Korea has a rich martial arts history that includes all types of fighting skills. Though many people are familiar with Korean-style kicking and punching, most are not aware of Korean strangling, joint lock, or throwing techniques. They may not even know that the Koreans have complete unarmed fighting systems. Yudo is one such system.

During Korea's Three Kingdom Period, the Silla Kingdom (57 B.C. to 937 A.D.), developed specific throwing techniques for their Hwa Rang Do Warriors. Throwing techniques were also found in Taik Kyon, which could be considered Tae Kwon Do's predecessor. A primary throwing system, Kagju, was practiced in the Koryo Kingdom (918 A.D. to 1392 A.D.).

Many of the specifics of these techniques (but not all) would end up being lost to martial art historians. Many of them would later surface, however, in the various styles of Jujutsu in Japan.

Ironically, a complete unarmed fighting art would be reintroduced to Korea from Japan, by Jigaro Kano, after the Japanese occupation of Korea, shortly before the First World War. Jigaro Kano called his art Kodokan Judo, and it was a martial art based upon the application of scientific principles. .....

...Yudo as that form of self-defense which encompasses all of Kodokan Judo and incorporates additional traditional Korean martial arts techniques.

glad2bhere

03-02-2004, 10:32 AM

Dear Ed:

".......I can't believe you guys are debating over this. Its just another case of back engineering into dead Korean martial art traditions and trying to make them live again in order to inspire national pride or maybe its to inspire dojang cash flow. ...."

Its your use of such a broad brush to paint ALL Korean traditions that I find disconcerting. Whatever you may think you know about Taekwondo, it represents only a small portion of Korean martial science and tradition, and then, only tangentially through Taek Kyon. Its more official precursor, Soo Bahk, traces at least as far as the 14th dentury. In like manner modern Ssireum pre-dates the Yi dynasty and may go back as far as the Yuan (Mongol) dynasty. Archery, one of the mainstays of both mounted and dismounted Korean military science remains to this day a source of national pride and a regular producer of Olympic champions. Un-armed and stick fighting have both been consistenly represented well before Judo and Aiki-jutsu material came from Japan. To my eye the only thing "dead" about discussions such as this is the stolid manner in which promoters of Japanese culture carefully avoid examining beyond the safely trodden ground following the Sino-Japanese War. If you ever decide to give Korean Martial science a fair hearing you may want to consider THE BOOK OF CORRECTIONS as translated by Choi, Byonghyon (publ Institute of East Asian Studies; UC-Berkley). This offers an intresting counterpoint to the more commonly cited Japanese source on the Imjin War. I also recommend CONFUCIAN STATECRAFT AND KOREAN INSTITUTIONS by Palais (Publ University of Washington press) and SOURCES OF KOREAN CIVILIZATION by Lee (both vol 1 AND 2). True, none of this is the standard pablum one finds in the glossy magazines on the rack at the local stand. However, it MAY keep you from make uninformed generalizations about a subject you might want to know more about, yes? FWIW.

BTW: If ever you decide to watch Korean sword I suggest you take in the Kyong Dang and leave the Kuk Sool Won people to peddle their stuff to the masses.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

gendzwil

03-02-2004, 11:27 AM

Originally posted by glad2bhere

What caught my eye was your citation ("blah, blak, blah--- history cakes") and I was curious to know where this was taken from.
It's a catch-phrase often used by the reviewers over at TWoP (www.televisionwithoutpity.com) to sum up a speech by some character. In my case it meant "snip a bunch of history I'm not going to try to address in detail".

As far as your comment about "revisionism", I would submit that it is not revisionism when the art has existed for some 500 years.
You've danced around my main point here. It is absolutely revisionism when they claim that modern Japanese kendo, as called kumdo and practiced in Korea using virtually identical technique and equipment, is rooted in old Korean swordsmanship. It's pure !!!!!!!!, which you often come off (unintentionally I think) as an apologist for.

I know that followers of Japanese culture tend to represent that their Ryu-Ha systems somehow offer something special in the way of validation or authentification and perhaps they do.
What they offer, despite organizational splintering and whatnot that you reference later, is actual physical practice of old styles of swordsmanship, and actual teaching handed down from teacher to student. What I'm curious about, and what you're dodging here, is whether there are any Korean traditions that can say the same. I don't deny that they used swords a long time ago in Korea, and it would be foolish to think they never codified any technique. But did any of it get practiced over the last hundred years or two, or has it all just been recently resurrected from old scrolls?

glad2bhere

03-02-2004, 12:06 PM

Dear Neil:

".......You've danced around my main point here. It is absolutely revisionism when they claim that modern Japanese kendo, as called kumdo and practiced in Korea using virtually identical technique and equipment, is rooted in old Korean swordsmanship......"

Actually I don't think that I have danced around anything. I don't know any Korean (except maybe a few misguided cretins) who has gone so far as to say that Kendo is rooted in Korean swordsmanship, or that Kumdo is entirely Korean swordsmanship. Kumdo as a label has become a general designation for Korean sword but only because a large population practices Kendo and calls it Kumdo owing to the transliteration. Hapkido and Aikido have the same problem. So does Yudo and Judo. People look at the characters see the transliteration and conclude that the curriculums are identical. However the Kumdo of Korea is swordwork of which the Kendo practitioners are only one segment. However, using the reasoning that you propose one could just as easily make the arguement that Japanese sword proceeds from its its continental counterparts going back to the incursions by emigres of the Paekshe and Silla kingdoms into the Japanese islands. Can you see how this can go?

"........What they offer, despite organizational splintering and whatnot that you reference later, is actual physical practice of old styles of swordsmanship, and actual teaching handed down from teacher to student. What I'm curious about, and what you're dodging here, is whether there are any Korean traditions that can say the same......"

Once again, I don't think I am dodging anything, I just think that you are using a single gauge by which to measure all others. The Japanese had an institutionalize sword class and patrilinear institutions for passing authority from one generation to another. The Chinese, Koreans, Germans, Spanish, Italians and just about everybody else did not have this. It does not mean that they did not turn out competent warriors, swordsmen and military. As far as I can see, only the Japanese had the sort of system that they developed. As far as I can see, only the Japanese would have supported such a system and only the Japanese would have seen such a system as desireable. As far as using scrolls or books for guidance even the Japanese passed scrolls of techniques from generation to generation. My sense is that you have come to conclude that the Japanese somehow cornered the market on authenticity and competence, and are in some way above the more pedestrian behavior of revivifying arts and representing them as on-going traditions, evidence to the contrary.

As far as practice of Korean sword material, to answer your question, yes, Korean sword was practiced in the 18th., 19th., and 20th centuries. But if you are looking for the Korean equivalent of a "Ryu" with structured protocols, patrilinear succession, sword culture, single uniformity of weapon and acoutrement, then "no". Korean culture does not have this. Sorry.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Iron Chef

03-02-2004, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by glad2bhere
...
As far as practice of Korean sword material, to answer your question, yes, Korean sword was practiced in the 18th., 19th., and 20th centuries. But if you are looking for the Korean equivalent of a "Ryu" with structured protocols, patrilinear succession, sword culture, single uniformity of weapon and acoutrement, then "no". Korean culture does not have this. Sorry.
...

However in the 20th century attempts have been made to invent such things. My wild hair guess is that customers prefer to think that they are paying to be taught authentic traditions. How do you insure the ciriculum as such without some sort of line of direct transmission.

We have the same problems with western martial arts. As much as the recreationist like to harp on fencers, at least fencing has direct lines to Italian and French schools. A lot was lost because of a matter of utility. Swords didn't work so well at gunfights. Some folks have great interest in old Eupopean martial arts and we have old texts and some things are just common sense,(fencing isn't rocket science). But the lines of apprenticeship are broken and what we mostly have now are fairly recent attempts at recreating what our educated guesses tell what might have been. For the most part WMA practitioners I think are pretty honest about that. Many come from classical and sport fencing roots and have a deep desire to dig into the historical research. But are pretty clear on what it is they propagate.

To large degree the beauty and value people place on Asian martial arts is the fact that they are living antiques. The older and more rare the more desirable they become. As a result I doubt we have practitioners of Korean sword disciplines claiming Yes this is our best guess of how old Korean swordsmen approached the application of sword techniques. No they will claim this is the way it was done baby, even though there are no "Ryu" or in other words no direct lines of apprenticeship (teacher/student) handing such techniques down intact. :) At least no unbroken lines before the 20th century. Its the same modus operandi we've all seen before in baffling budo.

chrismoses

03-02-2004, 12:56 PM

The question as I see it is this:

Are there Korean sword systems with movements that *lead* to modern Kumdo, or are the movements and strategies practiced in Kumdo traceable *primarily* to Japanese Kendo?

My ancestory is European, a people with a long tradition of swordsmanship in their own right. I myself studied foil and sabre fencing in High School. That experience and history in no way relates to my current study of Japanese swordsmanship. If Korean swordsmanship developed into Kumdo, we would expect it to look and feel more different to Japanese Kendo than it does. Kendo is based on using a two handed sword, yet most of the examples I have seen for traditional Korean weapons have been one handed. Strategies for using a one handed weapon tend to differ significantly from those employing a two handed one, yet Kumdo seems to use the same attacks and defences as Kendo. All over the world people practice other cultures arts, yet in Korea and Russia (for example), these arts seem to suddenly become native. Claiming that a culture has been studying the sword for centuries is only relevant if those studies evolved into the modern art. I think what Neil is getting at is that in Japan, there is a clear and logical progression from older arts and ways to newer ones. In Korea, there does not seem to be this type of connection with the past. This isn't to say that Korea doesn't have a martial heritage, just that modern Korean arts do not seem to be based upon that heritage so much as foreign influences.

SKalogre

03-02-2004, 01:08 PM

To be quite frank, I agree with Neil on this but I do not see much of a problem with the debate. The fact that kendo and kumdo are almost identical is telling as far as the origin is concerned. However, it does not mean that the Korean culture had not sword/martial arts prior to the japanese occuparion, that would be ludicrous. I am also certain there is revisionism going on to remove the bad memories of the occupation. But again, most cultures had some fighting methods, some probably more formalised than others. The Japanese would probably be a good example. Now if the Korean arts were lost in the past, much like many western MA, no amount of revisionism will bring them back.
I have seen Korean sword MA demonstrations that were definately different from anything Japanese I have seen. Anyway, for the purposes of that article, it seems to be more of a discussion of diverging ideas of what ken/kumdo is rather than where it came from and what should be done with its future.
Personally, I do not like the idea of Olympic kendo, I like the Budo aspect too much to have them fall into oblivion.
I would like kendo/kumdo to remain ki-ken-tai-ichi, not become buzzer-ken-kick-ichi :D

Tim Mailloux

03-02-2004, 01:22 PM

Just to add my two cents to this…..

I have seen several teachers of Korean swordsmanship demonstrate their arts in recent years. They have called it either Kumdo or Kumbump. But regardless of what they called it, it was simply a mish-mash of seite-gata Iaido & the shoden level of MSR/MJER Iai with a different name. Each of these teachers also claimed these techniques were traditional Korean swordsmanship to boot. So I ask, did the Tosa swordsmen learn their art from the Korea?

gendzwil

03-02-2004, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by glad2bhere
I don't know any Korean (except maybe a few misguided cretins) who has gone so far as to say that Kendo is rooted in Korean swordsmanship, or that Kumdo is entirely Korean swordsmanship.
Don't have time right now to look up the websites so I can't back this up with any authority, but I recall pretty clearly there are a number of people doing just that.

However the Kumdo of Korea is swordwork of which the Kendo practitioners are only one segment.
You say that like kendo is a small part of it, but in reality it's 90% of the sword work being practiced in Korea.

The Chinese, Koreans, Germans, Spanish, Italians and just about everybody else did not have [a similar transmission system]. It does not mean that they did not turn out competent warriors, swordsmen and military.
Of course, but we're talking about now, not then. The advantage of the rather anal-retentive approach the Japanese took to these things is that the old techniques have been preserved, or at least as much as they can be without videotape from the 14th century.

As far as using scrolls or books for guidance even the Japanese passed scrolls of techniques from generation to generation.
Those are just the shorthand - the real transmission is in the practice.
My sense is that you have come to conclude that the Japanese somehow cornered the market on authenticity and competence, and are in some way above the more pedestrian behavior of revivifying arts and representing them as on-going traditions, evidence to the contrary.
Not competence, just authenticity - they are a lot more likely to have the real goods than anyone else, due to the way they've preserved the technique. That's not to say there aren't any recreations, or lost techniques, or that every technique they're doing right now is exactly as it was done when it was invented.

As far as practice of Korean sword material, to answer your question, yes, Korean sword was practiced in the 18th., 19th., and 20th centuries. But if you are looking for the Korean equivalent of a "Ryu" with structured protocols, patrilinear succession, sword culture, single uniformity of weapon and acoutrement, then "no". Korean culture does not have this. Sorry.
So if there aren't any "ryu" equivalents, how was the practice maintained over this broad stretch of time?

glad2bhere

03-02-2004, 04:47 PM

Dear Ed:

".....However in the 20th century attempts have been made to invent such things. My wild hair guess is that customers prefer to think that they are paying to be taught authentic traditions. How do you insure the ciriculum as such without some sort of line of direct transmission. ...."

You get absolutely NO arguement out of me on these scores. I will be the first to go on record and say that the Koreans themselves are their own worst enemies and have actually done the most severe damage to the integrity of their own martial science history by virtue of playing fast and loose with the facts. One of the WORST travesties is the repeated invocation of the HwaRang in an attempt to authenticate material taught today. The fact that there are no records of their actual material or training methods surviving does not stop people from representing what they do as some identical replication of HwaRang culture.

On a lesser note, modern practitioners are just as bad what with TKD schools teaching nunchuka rather than Korean flail, Arnis instead of dan bong and Okinawan, Japanese and Chinese staff instead of Korean jang bong. Son monasteries still teach a very effective form of Soo Bahk that goes back quite a few generation, but they tend to be rather secretive about it, and most people will not go through the inconvenience of seeking them out in deference to the MA school just down the street. And then there are reconstructionists like the HAE DONG KUMDO people who are probably well-meaning but are constantly pointed out as representing the mainstream Korean Kum-Bup population. We also don't have much connection with the Korean North who tended to retain a greater portion of the Korean martial tradition than has the South. Gawd knows whats left up there. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

DCPan

03-02-2004, 05:06 PM

Originally posted by gendzwil
Don't have time right now to look up the websites so I can't back this up with any authority, but I recall pretty clearly there are a number of people doing just that.

http://kumdo.co.kr/kendoacademy/whatkum.htm

http://kumdo.co.kr

You can find a picture of someone doing Gyaku-To from MSR/MJER in there as well....

:D

glad2bhere

03-02-2004, 05:30 PM

Dear Neil:

"......So if there aren't any "ryu" equivalents, how was the practice maintained over this broad stretch of time?....."

I think if I had to tease out any common theme in the last few posts, your comment, cited above, is probably representative. And it is not a simple institution to explain, but I will do my best and use my wifes skill for cooking as an example.

In my wifes' experience she learned some basic skills about measuring and ingredients and cooking items from her mother. In time she picked up various recipes and cookbooks and became so good at remember the various recipes that she was able to pretty much throw a meal together out of whatever is in the kitchen. I am sure others have used this same approach to go on to become even more talented cooks, though I can assure you that I have no complaints about my wifes abilities.

By comparison, my daughter-in-law (from a good Italian family) learned everything she knows from her mothers' knee. Never touched a cookbook and pretty much finds them a pain in the butt. Everything she does is from instinct. She rarely measures, seasons to taste, and has an eye for presentation that would challenge most restaurants.

The Korean martial traditions are founded in the unstructured instruction descending from the community. A teacher may have been an ex-military, a Confucian scholar, a retired court offical turned monk or maybe just a well-traveled trader. Perhaps the weapon taught might be a Korean guem (Chinese jian), or a To (Chinese dao) or a wol-do (Chinese kwan dao). Whatever was taught is what the student learned. If the teacher thought he would gain anything from someone else, maybe the student was packed off to the next town with a referral to someone else for additional training.

You have come back to the idea of "uniformity" (my word not yours) a few times and I will tell you that there is a constellation of techniques common to just about all Korean sword.

12 cuts

8 snap cuts

2 kinds of thrusting

and 23 to 26 postures.

The names and execution of the material listed varies throughout Korea as do the names. Cosmology, for instance will only get a Korean to admit to NINE cuts because of the much touted sacred nature of the number THREE. (Hence 3X3 is held in deference to the actual number of cuts practiced). There are also variations on parrying (there is NO blocking in Korean Bup) with a standard four parries augmented by three inverted or "hanging parries" and the ever interesting "coiling" method of deflection common to continental sword work and best recognized in Chinese Tai Chi jian work.

How is the uniformity maintained over time? The answer is simple. It isn't--- not all the time. Techniques are remembered, forgotten, "reinvented" passed along and lost again just as in every other martial tradition. The two single oldest hyung or Bup ( Bon Kuk Kum Bup and Choson Kum Bup) embody the basic premises for Korean sword handling method and both go back at least as far as the 1500-s and the publication of the WU BEI ZHI by Mao Yuan-yi. Later, manuals such as the MU YEI TOBO TONG JI are/were governmental attempts to maintain basic parameters of skills but are not hard and fast. Ones' competence was proven during the Civil Service examine and in combat. Nobody spent a lot of time obsessing over whether one could draw-and-cut in a single motion, cleave a person in two from a kneeling position, or return the sword to the sheath with perfect reflection. The sword was a tool to accomplish a goal, pure and simple. And most people will not practice Korean Kum-Bup because, frankly, it is just too stark in its simplicity. Consider the material practiced by the Toyama-Ryu for comparison and you begin to realize that after doing the same basic cuts for a while the average practitioner starts playing with the material trying to make it more exotic, dramatic or novel. And thats where things go wrong. Traditional Kum-Bup is almost spartan in its simple practicality and has no sport application. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Jock Armstrong

03-02-2004, 10:47 PM

Brucxe, you as an honest guy may not be gilding the lily but someone is- check out the link by DC Pan........

glad2bhere

03-03-2004, 06:52 AM

Dear Jock:

You're right on the money!

".....Kumdo is an ancient form of martial art with its origins in Korea. Kumdo means "The way of the sword" and its ancient form originated in Korea nearly two thousand years ago as a form of sword fighting used by warriors to defend their territorial hold over the country. Kumdo is therefore founded on a strong sense of patriotism and loyalty to one¡¯s fellow countrymen and family. Also, as a sword symbolized a power over one's life, Kumdo soon developed into a true martial art and a way of life in the heart as opposed to a brutal method of combat. In the 18th century, Kumdo was reshaped to its present form using bamboo swords and protective gear to make Kumdo safer to practice without compromising any of its focus on spiritual and mental prowess. Although strength and speed play important roles, one cannot master the art of Kumdo without a pure and unadulterated state of mind and heart. It is this aspect of Kumdo which makes it very appealing and beneficial as it intensively trains both mind and body. Kumdo is a very popular martial art with over three million current practitioners all over the world......."

There is simply WAY too much license taken with the facts and this citation is an excellent example.

1.) Nobody knows if there was actually a "way of the sword" 2000 years ago. The history of the Three Kingdoms period written in the 14th century tells us that each of the Three kingdoms developed an institution for training military cadre so there must have been SOME organized approach to instruction but we don't know what it was. Even so, this approach would have started in about the 5th century, making an organized sword method about 1500 years old at best. Furthermore it would be a misnomer to call this a "way of the sword" as the sword would only have been one of an array of weapons learned. One could just as easily called this approach the "way of horse-riding" or the "way of the spear" which were also taught at the time.

2.) The use of the term "Kumdo", without any qualification, makes it sound like "Kendo" came from Korea and that the Koreans were instrumental in developing the juk-to and hogu for safe competitive events. Civil service exams as well as frequent competitions among military personnel (not to mention infrequent royal exhibitions) routinely resulted in maiming and death as the weapon of choice was the muk-guem which as we all know can be every bit as dangerous as a steel blade. If one is to use the term "Kumdo" then a clear and distinct line needs to be drawn between whether it is being used as a general term to identify all modern sword use, or specifically to identify the Korean counterpart of Japanese Kendo. In the latter case, the more correct term to use in identifying the more traditional swordwork would be Kum-Bup.

3.) I personally lay blame for the promotion of misinformation regarding Korean martial science squarely on the shoulders of the Korean culture itself. The citation above is only a single case of sloppy communication and perhaps even intentional misrepresentation. The Korean culture has no small history of martial skill and valor, but this is all-too-often obscured by oral tradition and the desire to inflate it for commercial purposes. IMVHO if the Korean people would take a bit more pride in the content of their traditions rather than manipulating elements to improve marketing I think we would have a much more accurate picture of their contributions. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

chrismoses

03-03-2004, 08:49 AM

Cheers Bruce, well said. I think you've nailed it. Unfortunately for everyone involved, the revisionists seem to speak with the loudest voice, but that's true in more circles than just Korean martial arts.

Kampai! :beer:

DCPan

03-04-2004, 07:26 PM

Hi Bruce,

Just want to add that your response to what people refer to as "Kumdo" reminds me of how I use to get really frustrated when people call Kendo as "just" a sport...

:D
- - -

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 16:28:43 -0400
From: Kim A Taylor <kataylor@UOGUELPH.CA>
Reply-To: Japanese Sword Art Mailing List
<IAIDO-L@LISTSERV.UOGUELPH.CA>
To: IAIDO-L@LISTSERV.UOGUELPH.CA
Subject: Re: "Kendo" (aka "What's in a Name?")

Once again I am having a good time seeing just how passionate folks can be about their sword practice. Great stuff, that alone proves to me that it's at least as important as who's ahead in the Stanley Cup race.

It's also nice to see an argument as opposed to "you don't know jack,
I'm right".

Tom and Karl I think you may be talking at cross purposes just a bit
(as is the case in most email arguments).

It may indeed be true, as Karl says, that for the vast majority of
those in Japan who do kendo, it's not much different than basketball as we practiced it in school. How could it be different for the high school kids in Japan? It's taught as a sport, they do it as sport.

I doubt Canadian school kids are taught the cultural significance of
basketball beyond our "cultural moments" on TV, ie a Canadian invented it and only decided to cut the bottom out of the peachbaskets when a janitor complained about having to climb up and get the ball after each hoop.

I sort of doubt Japanese kids are taught much more about the cultural
history of kendo.

But

In North America we have a different experience with kendo and Japanese culture in general. It's always been an exotic, still is. We don't see it in the same way we see basketball, instead we (rightly or wrongly according to what the current trend is in Japan) attach all sorts of other meaning to it. It's a launching pad into the Japanese culture in general and those aspects of it we choose to use for our self-improvement in particular.

If the Japanese kids don't see it that way, it's understandable, it
isn't an exotic to them, it's common as dirt.

But Koryu in Japan is an exotic. I would expect the Japanese themselves to see koryu practice as something beyond a physical activity since it's rare, difficult to find, requires special acceptance (you don't find it in high school PT class), in short, it's exotic. Just as we attach special meaning to kendo, judo, aikido etc. here (thoroughly pedestrian things in Japan), the Japanese would be expected to assign special meanings to the koryu just because they are exotic and seem attached to a different time.

Canadians feel pretty much the same way about canoeing around in
Algonquin park. It isn't just exercise out in the fresh air, it's a connection with the heritage of the country itself. So while we may feel pretty flat about going for a jog around the block, that big canoe trip sticks in our memories for decades.

Same result, you get a bit of exercise in the fresh air, but one is
exotic and linked (albeit in our minds) with a cultural experience greater than ourselves. It's our koryu kendo/jutsu.

Why do we North Americans get a different view of kendo than the
Japanese high school kids? Well we tend to see the top dogs for one thing, the 5dan high school instructors don't make trips to the west to teach the barbarians, the 8 and 9dans do, so we get their view of what kendo is.

Our daily kendo practices tend to be taught by issei and nisei, a
generation of Japanese who have left the old country and teach kendo as a connection to their root culture. Again, the 5dan at the local high school gym isn't teaching it to maintain a connection with anything except his paycheck (well maybe a bit harsh there but you know what I mean).

Our fellow students all want to be there in class, and all tend to be
looking for something beyond a bit of a workout. Kendo practice in
North America IS NOT the daily PT class at the local highschool, the students walk in with a very different agenda. We are going to get our asses kicked from now to doomsday by the (Koreans and the) Japanese in the "sport". That should be proof enough that us hyper-competitive dualistic westerners are doing it for some reason other than a jolly good sweat and the joy of competition.

That makes North American kendo (and outside Japan kendo in general) a
very different animal indeed than kendo inside Japan.

So, as Tom and David are arguing, for us, here in North America, who
have had our exposure to kendo in this particular cultural stew, kendo is not so far from koryu practice. (Let's face it, for the average kid on the street, Kashima Shinryu isn't going to be any more exotic than kendo until we explain the difference to him).

Our experience of kendo in North America may not be all that much
different than the experience of the Japanese in Japan with koryu.

Kim "who, being Canadian, thinks Chocolate ice cream is pretty exotic" Taylor

Ben Bartlett

03-04-2004, 10:18 PM

Originally posted by DCPan

Canadians feel pretty much the same way about canoeing around in
Algonquin park. It isn't just exercise out in the fresh air, it's a connection with the heritage of the country itself. So while we may feel pretty flat about going for a jog around the block, that big canoe trip sticks in our memories for decades.

I'm doing that this summer... I had no idea it was so culturally significant. :)

glad2bhere

03-05-2004, 05:58 AM

Dear David:

I wish there was some way to tattoo this point on the foreheads of people who want to participate in the MA or MS of a particular culture. In our modern commercial world, many of the things that are promoted often have meaningful cultural underpinnings that are (I believe) demeaned or disrespected in the name of profits.
Here in the States its not at all unusual to find "Indian" artifacts such as pottery and beadwork sold in souvenir shops but manufactured in Taiwan or Hong Kong. My own background which includes a heritage in Eastern Europe has many cultural and religious practices that turn-up around significant Christian holidays, but primarily for the sales. Somewhere along the line I think people need to understand that these MA and MS traditions are gifts to the world and not something that people of other cultures can modify at a whim to increase returns on investment. What saddens me is that some of the worst offenders are often the nationals of the countries from which these traditions proceed! This whole aspect of sport MA has taken on a life of its own and if people want to make a yen or a won on it thats fine. My issue is that, as someone pointed out, after a while Kendo has a rep as a sport and the MA connection begins to be lost or downplayed. My whole original position in this discussion was that Kumdo has become TOO closely aligned solely with Kendo such that people no longer recognize that Korea has a viable sword tradition apart from the sport. Such tendencies need to be watched carefully as often their damage can be irreversible.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Alexander Bennett

03-15-2004, 10:52 PM

So Bruce,

after all that did you in fact end up reading the article?

Alex;)

glad2bhere

03-16-2004, 06:54 AM

Dear Alexander:

I had read the article from the beginning. What bothered me from the start were comments that pre-supposed conclusions that were in- accurate. For instance equating "Kumdo" to "Kendo" without qualification reinforces erroneous conclusions that these are one in the same. In like manner, to report that Kumdo practitioners are pre-disposed towards competition, again without qualification, is likewise in error. I am sure that for many people these observations are little more than picking nits. However, I assure you that after many years of watching such errors slide and later snowball into out and out stereotypes, I have made a point of pointing these things out whenever they crop up. I also have no doubt that were the roles reversed, and had I posted an article that made sweeping generalizations about some closely related Japanese arts, I might have well expected a more knowledgeable person to point this up to me, yes? FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Alexander Bennett

03-16-2004, 10:04 AM

Hello Bruce,

I still don't believe you actually read the article in full. If indeed you did, you didn't read it carefully. You are missing the point entirely. Basically, I don't think you are interested in what other people have to say as you already seem to know an awful lot.

I never denied in anyway whatsoever the fact that Korea has a long history of sword arts. However, if you truly believe that kumdo in its modern competitve form does not come from Japanese Kendo, then we're on different planets. (which probably isn't a bad thing, but it means we'll just have to agree to disagree.)

Fair comment about some sweeping generalisations (such as the competitve nature of kumdo) in the text, but these opinions were gleaned from many in-depth conversations (through the work I have done for the IKF, the Budokan, and Kendo World Magazine) over a number of years with top ranking Korean Kumdo practitoners including national team members, national coaches, and officials. It's what THEY told me, not some pre-conceived ideas I plucked out of the air. If such people tell me that Kumdo is "too competitve" and is "actually Japanese", I am inclined to listen to their opinions and back it up with my own observations(and the results of a KW survey of data from kumdo practitioners.) I could have made that clearer, but it wasn't the point of the article.

You see, the purpose of the article is not to judge the percieved rights or wrongs of what the Koreans are doing with their sword arts around the world. It is a critique of the inactivity of Japanese kendo authorities to let kendo adapt and evolve.

I have no doubt you will react to this post with unbridled verbosity. If you could limit your frenzy to 2000 words that would be much appreciated. Basically I'm not concerned about your rantings because the article speaks for itself. However, I do object to having my work discarded by somebody who OBVIOUSLY missed the point because of their own pre-conceived notions. Nit-picking is a healthy activity, but it is objectionable if the nit-picker ignores the whole picture for the sake of using their soap box and demonstrating how much more they know about a given subject.

That's really all I have to say on the matter. I expect to see a reply, probably very cutting, but I don't think anything else probably needs to be said after that, from me at least. When in doubt, just read the article...properly.
:p
bye now

Alex

glad2bhere

03-16-2004, 12:31 PM

Dear Alexander:

You continue to press the message of the article while I continue to take except to the manner in which the article was written. Many of the comments made in the article have become so common in the martial arts community that they are taken as truth. Perhaps you would be interested in some examples, and these are merely from the first section of the article.

".......hapkido is Koreanised aikido....."

"....... kumdo is making inroads into the kendo world attracting mainly Korean immigrant children at this stage, but has the potential to change the face of kendo internationally, which will eventually have far reaching consequences even in Japan....."

".......This interesting phenomenon of the gradual ¡®Koreanisation¡¯ of budo overseas is perceived by the Koreans as the internationalisation of their own Korean martial arts heritage. The Koreans are aggressive in their dissemination, sometimes nationalistic, and often very commercial in their approach, providing attractive packages for their students and instructors alike, not to mention propositions of business partnerships with already existing dojo......"

"........In this paper I will consider the case example of kendo. The situation concerning the spread of kumdo as opposed to kendo has become particularly conspicuous in Japan recently due to the World Kumdo Association (WKA) inauguration in Korea, and their overtly opposing policies to the current chief international governing body of kendo the Japan based International Kendo Federation (IFK). In particular, the WKA¡¯s mission to turn kendo/kumdo into an Olympic event is something vehemently opposed in traditional Japanese kendo circles........"

"..........In this sense, I consider the kumdo tremors coming from Korea as a ¡®Black Ship¡¯, which will provide the impetus for earnest self-reflection of what kendo is to people in the 21st century...."

"..........As colonies of Japan, the Taiwanese and Korean populace were also ¡®encouraged¡¯ to participate in these activities.(3) Koreans took to budo with unexpected enthusiasm, and even when the war ended and the Republic of Korea was established, they maintained a commitment to kendo that persists to this day, evident in the comparatively high level and large population of enthusiasts. (4) However, in many ways the old wounds of the occupation have still not healed, and in a nationwide revisionist stance, Koreans for the most part refuse to entertain the notion that the sport's origins lie in Japan, and instead call it "kumdo", insisting that it originated in Korea......."

A person could be forgiven for reading that despite the intended goal of a balanced discussion of the influence of Korean practice on a Japanese institution the information used bespeaks the same sort of xenophobic rhetoric often found in the Japanese culture. It has been my personal experience that Koreans are no more commercial, nationalistic or goal oriented in their pursuit of their martial traditions than any other country. And if there is any reason to wonder why they believe that Kumdo originated in their country perhaps its because that the Koreans did in fact originate their own swordsmanship and, indeed called it Kumdo. Real sorry if that just happens to be the same reading as the characters for Kendo. Nor would I bet against anyone raising an eyebrow to hear Yudo automatically equated with Judo, to hear Hapkido equated with Aikido or Karate equated with Taekwondo. The underlying premise remains that without the Japanese culture the Koreans would have no martial culture and this simply is not true--- no matter how many times it is casually repeated in the press. The strength of my objection is reserved not for the subject being discussed but rather for the cavalier fashion old stereotypes are being reprinted. Had this been a discussion of Music would anyone have commented about a remark lauding Blacks for having "natural rhythmn? FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

gendzwil

03-16-2004, 01:40 PM

Hating to hop in here again but... what are hapkido, taekwondo and yudo if not aikido, shotokan and judo filtered through years of Korean practice?

Nathan Scott

03-16-2004, 01:54 PM

Bruce,

With all due respect, I have to agree completely with Neil and the others on this. What is annoying to me is that Korea DOES have it's own culture, but when it comes to martial arts at least, prefers to borrow Japan's culture (in this case) and call it their own. Why not just give credit where it is due? As Neil said, the competitors coming from Korea in Kumdo, Yudo, and other arts are often outstanding. It is not a value judgement in this regard, just on representation of what it is they are doing.

It is easy to look an art from your own perspective and say what it "is or isn't". For example, I study and teach Aikido, and personally, I think Aikido is a very effective, insightful and fascinating art. But if someone told me that Aikido sucks, and that Aikido-ka couldn't actually throw anyone if they tried, I would not be offended. Unfortunately, this is true for the vast majority of modern Aikido, regardless of what I wish it was or how "I do it". Fact is, I have a hard time sitting through Aikido demonstrations, because I can only take so much of people doing pre-arranged free style and throwing themselves around on their own.

What can you do? Improve the art in your own little world, and hope that others do the same. Maybe things are different in Korea, but I can tell ya that here in America ALL I SEE are Korean-style dojang marketing to the masses on every street corner and lying (not exaggerating or being loose with the facts, etc) about the history of their teachings.

Regards,

glad2bhere

03-16-2004, 06:49 PM

Dear Neil and Nathan:

I hope you don't mind my responding to both of your posts at the same time but I think there is a common thread through both of them. The thread I speak of is one of "emphasis". Lets take these one at a time.

What is Hapkido? Yes you are very right that a great deal of Hapkido shares reported roots with Aikido in the DRAJJ tradition. A great deal, but not ALL. Hapkido is also attributed to at least four styles of Chuan Fa Chin Na, Monastic training, and no small amount of Chinese and Manchurian martial tradition. But what gets emphasized whenever this subject comes up? The Japanese connection.

What about Taekwondo? A great deal of TKD is derived from Shotokan, Shotokai and Shudokan. Once again a great deal but not all. TKD and TSD are both also heavily influenced by Taek Kyon and also, again, Chinese traditions. But what gets emphasized whenever the subject comes up? The Japanese Connection.

What about Yudo? A great deal of Yudo is attributed to Judo. Once again, a great deal but not all. Yudo is also heavily influenced by both Mongolian and Korean wrestling which is the same combo that produces Ssireum-- Korean wrestling. What gets emphasized? The Japanese Connection.

What about Kumdo? A great deal of Kumdo is attributed to Kendo. Fine; a great deal but not all. Kumdo also has its roots in Chinese traditions and Koreas own indigenous sword material. What get emphasized? The Japanese Connection.

Now, nowhere in any of my posts have I denied that there is a Japanese Connection. Why is it that people are so reluctant to show the same level of respect to that smaller but vital portion which is NOT Japanese? FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

chrismoses

03-16-2004, 07:14 PM

Well to point out the obvious answer as to why so many have a Japanese-centric view, this is e-BUDO which implies Japanese traditions. I think you, Bruce, are taking the unfortunate and undeserved brunt of many people's frustration with the common practice of Korean arts misrepresenting or outright lying about their heritage/ lineage. Your posts have always struck me as honest and informative as a similar but different viewpoint. I think many others on the board can make the distinction between common statements of Korean systems and Bruce Sims. Just because you're one of the few Korean practitioners that frequently posts here does not mean that we should expect you to be the spokesman for all Korean arts. That's all I wanted to say, thanks for toughing it out around here Bruce.

DCPan

03-16-2004, 09:33 PM

Originally posted by glad2bhere

What about Kumdo? A great deal of Kumdo is attributed to Kendo. Fine; a great deal but not all. Kumdo also has its roots in Chinese traditions and Koreas own indigenous sword material. What get emphasized? The Japanese Connection.

Hi Bruce,

Honestly, I think a large part of the difficulty, as you've said yourself, is that you are using the word Kumdo in a way that is different from how most other people use it. Did you not say yourself that the "Kumdo" that you refer to is probably more properly terms as "Kum-Bap"?

The ideograms for the words "Ken-Do/Kum-Do" have been used to describe Chinese Swordsmanship as early as the "Warring Periods (475-221BC)". However, even if you talk to a Chinese MA practitioner now about "Ken-Do", they'd probably think you are referring to Japanese Kendo anyway.

I don't know how many times I've mentioned how Yagyu Nobuharu sensei use the words Kendo and Kenjutsu interchangeable when talking about Yagyu Ryu in demonstrations/exhibitions and how I think to use the word "Kendo" only in the AJKF Kendo context is a limitation that I don't care for.

Unfortunately, if you talk about Kendo, 99% of the people will assume that you are talking about shinai kendo/gendai budo/etc etc. I happen to think of Kendo as a more encampassing term that describes a path which includes Kenjutsu (sword-skills) as a part of it. However, if I use those terms that way with other practitioners, I'm probably just asking for frustration.

WOW, what am I saying/rambling?

Perhaps, being multi-lingual, I generally believe that words are only useful if they get the point across. So, if you are using some words in a way that is different from how everyone else use it, I hope that distinction is important enough for you to find the constant clarification and re-defining worthwhile.

Really, what do you feel is the defining quality of Kumdo?

When someone mentions Kumdo to me, I "see" Kendo done with the same armor and bamboo implements, maybe some folks wearing koshita-less velcro-belt "hakama", not doing sonkyo, and using green and whatever color ribbon to denote competitors instead of red and white, and calling out the parts in Korean instead of Japanese.

The elements of the swordsmanship derived from Korean roots, how much of it can be done in bogu with shinai?

When you talk about Kumdo practitioners, are you talking about people who also use kendo equipment, but use them to execute techniques that are non-Japanese in origin? If it is Korean in origin, why use equipments from a Japanese-based art to practice?

Just curious... :D

glad2bhere

03-17-2004, 05:58 AM

Dear Christian:
Just a quick "thanks" for your thoughts. And, yes, I know that in some ways I can be a a kind of whipping-boy for a lot of the misrepresentation of many Korean practitioners. Certainly it would go without saying that it is wonderful that people here can be so accepting of a view which is decidedly not Japanese on a Net dedicated to, well, Japanese traditions. That said, my hope is to provide a balancing point-of-view to some of the more commonly held misconceptions. Now, Gawd in heaven knows that I can't make-up for a lot of the garbage that some of those Korean entrepeneurs shovel and a lot of that is purposeful misrepresentations. In this way its easy to see that the Koreans themselves have made their own bed and often must sleep in it, like it or not. My hope is to offer a bit of corrective guidance so that we might keep things in focus. Thanks again. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

glad2bhere

03-17-2004, 06:17 AM

Dear Dan:

"......Really, what do you feel is the defining quality of Kumdo?...."

Unfortunately I need to answer you two ways, so bear with me for a second, 'kay?

Prior to the end of WW II and the origination of the KKF by the six Korean masters, it would have been the most casual thing in the world to refer to Korean sword as "kumdo". I know that we have mentioned the importation of Kendo into Korea through the educational system. There were also Japanese sword influences through the military and security forces as well. I think it was the most natural thing in the world for Koreans and Japanese to find an intersect using the same characters for Kumdo and Kendo. At that particular time though practical use of a live sword was, I believe more to the front and the sport application was more to the back. There was no need to have a separate term for live practice as people understood that there was still a role for live blades along side of sparring practice. After all I think we all remember that the original purpose for juk-to and hogu was to facilitate training and not as a sport in its own right.

After the end of WW II, with the origination of the KKF, IKF and now the WKA, I believe that the sport aspect surpassed or eclipsed the practical use of live swords. The emphasis on sport was still called Kumdo, or Kendo in Japan, and now the live sword took the backseat. As a result the Korean sword traditions began to extinguish. I would bet, that in Japan, without the existence of the Ryu-ha system, such treasures as TSKSR and Shin-Kage sword would have likewise extinguished, yes? In order to keep the Korean traditions alive it became important to revive the use of the term "Kum-bup" much as the Japanese practitioners delineated between "kendo" and "ken-jutsu", though we all know that each art has pieces of the other in it. I know that many Kendo practitioners, for instance, still practice form with live blades, do cutting, and train in disarms though this is not something often equates with Kendo competition generally.

Hope this is of some help.

Best Wishes,

Bruce