Talk:Sword of Goujian

First-level protected artifact

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)

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)

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)

Pattern

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)

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)

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) --

Wait, what!? Citations needed

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)

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)

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)

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

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)

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)

User:tsbertalan ->

• [T1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fpgSnIOby4
• [T2] http://www.wuyuescripts.com/yue-inscriptions1.php
• [T3] "A Special Ancient Bronze Sword and Its Possible Manufacturing Technique from Materials Science Analysis" Chi Xie, Chunlin Fu, Sishi Li, Lingmin Liao, Guantao Chen, and Chunxu Pan. Materials 2022, 15(7), 2491; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15072491

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?

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

Why does this page link to bell metal

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)

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

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

yes. and you have severe sinophobia. You probably have not realized that many sources are not written in English therefore you guys can't find them or read them. I have seen the artifact in person. And if you think all famous artifacts in China are fake and made for political propaganda, Britain won't rob so many artifacts just to build a Chinese exhibition in the great British Museum. 128.252.230.186 (talk) 14:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Was this artifact ever lent to Singapore?

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)

When was this sword found? Who found it?

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)

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

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)