Why Taekwondo?

Taekwondo is practised around the world, is an Olympic sport, and is often described as an ancient Korean art. The sources read for this course describe it differently: as an art developed in the 1940s and 1950s, with a dispute about where it came from. This course reads the history, organisations and culture of taekwondo and its neighbours from open sources, keeps each claim attached to its owner, and uses the gaps and disagreements to show how to read any claim about a martial art. This chapter sets the words, the scope and the method.

The Words

The Taekwondo article calls it "a Korean martial art and combat sport involving primarily kicking techniques and punching", and says the name can be translated as tae ("strike with foot"), kwon ("strike with hand") and do ("the art or way"). It gives the main parts of the art, using Korean terms that recur in this course:

• Patterns. "Hyeong, Poomsae or Teul" are patterns of kicking, punching and blocking techniques, with the term depending on the style.
• Gyeokpa. The art of breaking wooden boards.
• Kyorugi. The full-contact sparring "seen in the Olympics".
• Dobok. The uniform.

The article adds that taekwondo "is primarily an unarmed martial art" and "does not include weapons such as swords or nunchucks". "Korean martial arts" is wider: the course also covers taekkyeon, which the Taekkyeon article calls "a traditional Korean martial art and a combat sport", and the older military tradition behind a manual such as the Muye Dobo Tongji (Chapters 2 and 7).

A Table of Dated Claims

The Taekwondo article gives this sequence. All dates and names are the article's.

Where Did It Come From?

The article's first paragraph says taekwondo "is originally a martial art which was developed during the 1940s and 1950s by Korean martial artists with experience in martial arts such as karate and Chinese martial arts". Its history section then says that "discussions around the historical influences of taekwondo have been controversial, with two main schools of thought: traditionalism and revisionism":

• Traditionalism "holds that the origins of taekwondo are indigenous".
• Revisionism, which the article calls "the prevailing theory", "argues that taekwondo is rooted in karate".

It adds that "in later years, the Korean government has been a significant supporter of traditionalist views as to divorce taekwondo from its link to Japan and give Korea a 'legitimate cultural past'". That is a claim about motive, with no source in the passage I read, and the quoted phrase is the article's, not a government statement. Chapter 9 takes the argument up in full. For now, the point is that this course treats "ancient Korean art" as a claim to check, and that the main Wikipedia article already states that the modern art dates from the 1940s and 1950s.

Older Things With Similar Names

The Taekkyeon article says taekkyeon "has come to be seen as a living link to Korea's past" and "is often considered as the oldest martial discipline of Korea", that it "was almost wiped out during the Japanese occupation, before being rediscovered after the Korean War", and that it "influenced the name and conceptualization of taekwondo". It also says it was "the first martial art listed as a UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage in 2011". The Muye Dobo Tongji article describes a manual "commissioned in 1790" and "published in four volumes in 1795", and says "the majority of any documentation of Korean indigenous martial techniques... has been lost" because of repeated invasions. So the older record is thin by the article's own account, and the link from those older arts to the modern art is itself a claim. Chapter 2 asks what they show.

What the Course Covers, and Leaves Out

It covers the older traditions the sources document, the post-1945 schools and the naming, the federations and their split, forms, sparring and belts as the sources describe them, the spread abroad and the Olympic path, taekkyeon and other Korean arts, the culture of the training hall, and the disputes (Chapters 2 to 9). Chapter 10 turns those threads into a checklist for reading any claim about a martial art.

It leaves out instruction in techniques; ranking the styles or schools; training advice; commercial school listings; and result tables for competitions. North Korean practice gets a short factual note in Chapter 4 only, because the ITF's history involves it. The other Korea courses have their own chapters on cookery, K-pop and drama.

A Method for the Rest of the Course

1. Whose claim? Attach every date and every origin story to an article, a federation or a named person.
2. Art, name or organisation? A martial art, the word for it, and a governing body can each have a different beginning.
3. Which taekwondo? "Traditional", ITF, Kukkiwon/WT and others are different styles (Chapter 4), and a claim about one need not hold for another.
4. Whose purpose? The article suggests a government motive for one view of origin. Note who benefits from a claim and look for a second source.
5. What is missing? A gap, such as an origin story with no source, is a result too.

Exercises

Next chapter: Before Taekwondo, which looks at the older Korean fighting traditions as the sources document them and what they do and do not show about the modern art.