Talk:Sword of Goujian

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First-level protected artifact[edit]

Please edit to further define, or link to a page that defines, first-level protection, or reword the sentence. It is difficult to understand what is meant by first-level, and how this would differ from second or third levels, if they exist. Is this in a museum context, or government security context? AtenRa 22:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I just searched for "first-level protected artifact" on Google and top hit was this wikipedia article with no other top 10 hit making sense. 66.63.57.2 (talk) 19:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yeah ANYTHING in this article that you try to verify seems to lead to google results that are only copying what wiki says. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:38, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pattern[edit]

I'm curious does anyone know if the pattern is external or internal, i.e. is it a purely decorative pattern etched to the finished weapon , or is it a result of plaiting together metal billets around a central core and Pattern welding them together?KTo288 21:11, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. Ask china. They're the only ones who have ever seen it. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:39, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well if this small snippet referencing the Beijing Daily is anything to go by, it appears to be patterned after the sword was forged or as a part of the quenching process? I'm afraid Chinese to English doesn't always convey proper meanings, especially with my mediocre skills in Chinese. Heliatrope Fish (talk) 07:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC) --[reply]

Wait, what!? Citations needed[edit]

So this is an ancient sword, discovered during the cultural revolution, made mostly of copper, that emerged untarnished in its wooden scabbard after 1000's of years in a waterlogged grave? Doesn't this sound a little implausible? This article really needs citations to independent scholarly research on this amazing artifact. Ϙ (talk) 08:18, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

this is obvious to everyone who doesn't have an ulterior motive. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:35, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that sword in an exhibition 30+ yrs ago so it couldn't be a modern reproduction or "fake". The scabbard was never seen by the public, so I assumed that was not exist at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.227.8.117 (talk) 13:02, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or, they made a fake thirty one years ago. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]



Why does this paragraph (below) even need a citation?

The sword was found sheathed in a wooden scabbard finished in black lacquer. The scabbard had an almost air-tight fit with the sword body. Unsheathing the sword revealed an untarnished blade, despite the tomb being soaked in underground water for over 2,000 years.[citation needed]

So no one knows how to subtract and obtain "over 2,000 years"? Sheesh. At the very least, the "citation needed" ought to be moved to an earlier sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cutefidgety (talk • contribs) 13:39, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The WHOLE PARAGRAPH needs some citation. This article is not up to wiki standards. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]


User:tsbertalan ->

The video [T1] includes an interview with Olivia Milburn (a cultural historian, not an archaeologist). The video's description links to the website that I find contains the page [T2], which (if you scroll down) does appear to show the sword in question in quite a few high-resolution photos that certainly do look old-ish (but I'm no archaeologist myself).

I'll go ahead and paste the references from that page here verbatim:

  1. Cao Jinyan 曹錦炎, Niaochongshu tong kao 鳥蟲書通考 (Expanded Edition, 增訂版) (Shanghai: Shanghai cishu chubanshe, 2014), Yue #3, 72, 74-75; illus. #46, 75.
  2. Dong Chuping 董楚平, Wu Yue Xu Shu jinwen jishi 吳越徐舒金文集释 (Hangzhou: Zhejiang guji chubanshe, 1992), 202-205. Dong Chuping 董楚平, Wu Yue wenhua zhi 吳越文化志 (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin chubanshe, 1998), 104.
  3. Dong Shan 董珊, Wu Yue timing yanjiu 吳越題銘研究 (Beijing: Kexue chubanshe, 2014), #73, 45n3.
  4. Hubeisheng wenwuju wenwu gongzuodui 湖北省文化局文物工作隊, “Hubei Jiangling sanzuo Chumu chutu dapi zhongyao wenwu” 湖北江陵三座楚墓出土大批重要文物 Wenwu 文物 (1966.5): 36, illus. #1, p. 41, plates 1-3 [33－39].
  5. Lin Chin-Chung 林進忠, “Dong Zhou niaochongshu de wenzi zaoxing yishu” 東周鳥蟲書的文字造形藝術, Shuhua yishu xue kan 書畫藝術學刊, No. 2 (2007): 22, #72.
  6. Shi Xiejie 施谢捷, Wu Yue wenzi huibian 吳越文字彙編 (Nanjing: Jiangsu jiaoyu chubanshe, 1998), #123, 570.
  7. Wang Jiehua 王結華, Mao Ying 毛穎, and Liu Liwen 劉麗文, Guyue yizhen yanjiu 古越遺珍研究 (Beijing: Kexue chubanshe 科學出版社, 2010), 6-7 (perhaps this)
  8. Zhang Guangyu 張光裕 and Cao Jinyan 曹錦炎, Dongzhou niaozhuan wenzi bian 東周鳥篆文字編 (Hong Kong: Hanmoxuan chuban youxian gongsi, 1994), #72, 234.

For convenience, GPT 3.5 translates these as

  1. 2014 - "Comprehensive Study of Bird and Insect Books"
  2. 1992 - "Annotated Collection of Jinwen by Xu Shu of Wu Yue"
  3. 1998 - "Cultural Records of Wu Yue"
  4. 2014 - "Research on Inscriptions from the Wu Yue Period"
  5. 1966.5 - "Significant Cultural Relics Unearthed from Three Chu Tombs in Jiangling, Hubei"
  6. 2007 - "The Artistic Form of Characters in Eastern Zhou Bird and Insect Books"
  7. 1998 - "Compilation of Wu Yue Characters"
  8. 2010 - "Research on Ancient Yue Treasures"
  9. 1994 - "Compilation of Eastern Zhou Bird Seal Characters"

FWIW, I found [T3] about a modern analysis of a sword claimed to have been found in 1965 and inscribed with "King Gou Jian of Yue, Self-used Sword". However, the pictures are of a completely different, degraded and fragmentary artifact.

<- User:tsbertalan

Unusual sharpness compared to....what?[edit]

Seems like this is just advertising. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this page link to bell metal[edit]

is somebody trying to imply that is what this sword is made off. Is ANY of this from any source besides the CCP? 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:33, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11 years without a single verifying citation I think this page is political not informative in nature.[edit]

but I'm probably racist right wiki? 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:34, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Was this artifact ever lent to Singapore?[edit]

there seems to be no record of this ever happening until AFTER the sword was in China and nobody in archaeology was allowed to see it. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:41, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When was this sword found? Who found it?[edit]

Seems like these are both very simple questions is there ANY scientific rigou, any scientific qualifications, or not? 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:42, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The VERY FIRST and ONLY trustworthy reference this page uses LEADS NOWHERE[edit]

Was there EVER an actual reference or is this entire page pure fabrication? 2604:3D09:D78:1000:8F83:FBCB:F8BF:F963 (talk) 14:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sword_of_Goujian&oldid=1207536009"