This article was downloaded by: [University of Maastricht]

On: 30 June 2014, At: 07:58

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The International Journal of the

History of Sport
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fhsp20

The Historical and Cultural Identity

of Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean
Martial Art
a

Jeong Deok Ahn , Suk ho Hong & Yeong Kil Park

Korea Science Academy

Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)

Gyeongsang University
Published online: 15 Sep 2009.

To cite this article: Jeong Deok Ahn , Suk ho Hong & Yeong Kil Park (2009) The Historical and
Cultural Identity of Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean Martial Art, The International Journal of the
History of Sport, 26:11, 1716-1734, DOI: 10.1080/09523360903132956
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523360903132956

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

The International Journal of the History of Sport

Vol. 26, No. 11, September 2009, 17161734

The Historical and Cultural Identity of

Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean
Martial Art

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Jeong Deok Ahn, Suk ho Hong and Yeong Kil Park

Taekwondos cultural identity is considered in the light of the controversy over its
historical origins. After reviewing several existing theories, the meaning and development
of taekwondo as a Korean martial art is explored. There are two conclusions: first,
taekwondo is a fusion of several different sources; second, taekwondo is essentially a
martial art that focuses on foot skills, and this distinguishes it from Japans karate and
Chinas wushu, which are primarily based on hand skills. The fact that all terms are
rendered into pure Korean words shows the essence of Korean localization. Thus
taekwondo incorporates a distinct identity as a Korean martial art.

Introduction
Traditionally, oriental martial arts were regarded as both techniques of offence and
defence for the survival of a country and individuals. Martial arts were also seen as an
expression of physical and intellectual culture, distinguished from physical activities
such as playing on swings and seesaws, or participating in a game of chukguk, an
ancient form of Asian soccer. However, as modern civilization has developed, all
sectors have been commercialized and become specialized, causing oriental martial
arts to adjust their traditional principles and take the form of competitions for profit.
This conversion into sport, which started with Japanese martial arts such as judo,
kendo and karate, has extended to other martial arts namely Korean taekwondo,
Thai muay thai and Chinese wushu but taekwondo has flourished to become the
most successful martial sport in the world. [1] According to Kukkiwon statistics, 184
countries of the world are registered with the World Taekwondo Federation, showing
the fame of taekwondo around the globe. Taekwondo as a sport has become

Jeong Deok Ahn, Korea Science Academy; Yeong Kil Park, Gyeongsang University; Suk ho Hong, Korea
Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST). Correspondence to: ajdhwang@lycos.co.kr
ISSN 0952-3367 (print)/ISSN 1743-9035 (online) 2009 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/09523360903132956

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean Martial Art

1717

recognized globally. At the same time, it has been established as Korean, securing a
cultural identity that provides Korea with the opportunity to be acknowledged as the
originating country of taekwondo.
However, despite this undeniable success, there is constant controversy over
taekwondos cultural and historical identity. This arises from the fact that the
formation of modern taekwondo occurred under the direct influence of Japans
karate, beginning during the Japanese occupation period (191045), which
effectively suspended Korean culture for 36 years. Because of this, Kang Gyung
Hwa has suggested that although taekwondo is a modern martial art and despite
being seen as a Korean martial art, it is not a traditional one. [2] Kim Yong Ok
also proposed a framework for the philosophical reconstruction of taekwondo,
stating that taekwondo should be acknowledged as a martial art native to Korea,
even though it does not originate from Chosun, because it underwent creative
transformations by Koreans, and is a martial sport recognized around the world.
[3] These claims admit that students who studied in Japan under the Japanese
occupation brought back karate with them and operated gymnasiums under names
of Tang Soo Do, Karate, and Kwonbub, where later taekwondo was founded.
Nonetheless, they argue that modern taekwondo is a cultural heritage recreated in
Korea. Another view is that Korean peoples own bare-handed martial arts, namely
sunbae from Goguryoe, hwarang-do from Silla, subak from Chosun, evolved into
the taekwondo we know today. [4] A similar view also states that Korean barehanded martial arts were influenced by Japans karate techniques as a result of the
cultural suppression policy during the Japanese imperialistic period; however,
Korean martial arts also succeeded in preserving their traditions. [5] The two
perspectives above appreciate the fact that taekwondo as a martial art is part of the
splendid culture of Korea, but they differ greatly on the origins of this art form.
Moreover, Jeong Kyeong Hwa states that mural paintings on Goguryeos (37 BC
668 AD) Anak Tomb no. 3 and the Geumgang Yeoksa-sang of Silla (57 BC935 AD)
show similar positions to those used in taekkyeons offence and defence, and, in
fact, depict the movements of taekkyeon. Jeong therefore claims that the supporters
of taekwondo have distorted the truth to claim the legitimacy of being the heir of
traditional Korean martial arts. [6]
Still, it is wrong to think taekwondo has no cultural identity. Japanese karate has
been passed down through generations in Okinawa, as a form of the Chinese Tang
Dynastys barehanded martial art called Tang Soo, until 1879 when Okinawa was
annexed by Japan. After 1929, when Funakoshi Gichin, often called the father of
modern karate, displayed karate in the Old Martial Arts Exposition held by the
Ministry of Education, its popularity began to spread. Karate had its first gymnasium
founded as late as 1939 by Funakoshi, 16 years before the term taekwondo was
coined, after going through cultural transformations from a southern Chinese martial
art to an Okinawan one, then finally to karate.
Okinawa, known as the place of origin of karate, is located 300 miles north of
Taiwan, 300 miles south of Japan, and 400 miles away from the East Asian continent.

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

1718

J. D. Ahn et al.

[7] Because of these geographical features, Okinawa was largely influenced by China,
Japan, and the Korean peninsula in political, cultural and religious ways; a little
influence also came from south-east Asia. [8] Apparently the Okinawan civilization
was based on the culture of the Southern cultural sphere, totally different from
mainland Japan, making karate a non-Japanese martial art in a strict sense. [9]
Furthermore, before 1922, karate was not known to Japan, and martial arts meant
judo and kendo at that time. Training in judo and kendo was used as a discipline for
Japanese troops at that time, whereas that was not the case for karate. Similarly,
although the US military government, which occupied Japan, banned the practice of
judo and kendo after the Second World War, it did not ban karate, perceiving it as
harmless dance or mere exercise. [10] These facts show that karate was not
considered by the Japanese people to be a main martial art in the same way as judo
and kendo were, but rather to be a minor one. Also, the post-war period saw no
specific documents about the movements of karate, which were passed down
unsystematically by oral and corporeal practices. [11] Kevin Tan notes that since
credible documents about the history of karate at that period do not exist, karates
history, as we now know it, has more ambiguity than clarity, and that we should
make inquiries of the origin of karate carefully and analytically. [12]
As suggested above, if we judge culture by its origin, karate cannot be considered a
traditional Japanese martial art, and, indeed, most parts of Asian culture could be
credited as the culture of India and China. However, karate is not considered a
Chinese cultural heritage, and taekwondo is definitely not considered as Japanese
culture. Nevertheless, the presence of ambiguity about taekwondos cultural identity
symbolizes the need to establish a new philosophical paradigm.
What is cultural identity? It may seem like a simple question, yet the problem of
identity is one of the oldest cruces of metaphysics. For instance, if a cultural heritage
was destroyed then restored, does it share the same culture? If we borrowed
foreign culture and sublimated it into our own, is it ours? What is sublimating into
ours? Books that answer these questions and discuss Koreas cultural identity
include those by Choi Jun Sik (1997) and Tak Seok San (2000). Especially, Tak
explains identity using three criteria: presence, popularity and independence.
That is, identity is something that exists when it is not a thing of the past, but
takes place now (presence). In addition, it is appreciated by the population
(popularity) and it is accepted independently by most individuals of the culture
(independence). [13]
In order to find the historical and cultural identity of taekwondo, we will trace
taekwondos origin first, and discuss Koreas cultural identity, which is apparent in
taekwondo phenomenologically. To do this, we will introduce taekwondos cultural
identity through analysing the formation process of modern taekwondo in a
macroscopic and integrated way from four historical perspectives. This research is
expected to propose a theoretical foundation of recuperation, helping to overcome
the problems that have been caused by the absence of history and identity for
taekwondo.

Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean Martial Art

1719

Four Perspectives on the Origins of Taekwondo

Unfortunately, since taekwondos early coaches provided a variety of explanations
about its origin, a single consolidated theory in the academic world does not yet exist.
The origins of taekwondo can be highlighted by four primary perspectives: the Choicentric theory: kwan-centric theory; karate inflow theory; and, of course, the
successive traditional martial arts theory.

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Choi-centric Theory
The Choi-centric theory is the claim that Choi Hong Hi, the former president of the
International Taekwondo Federation (ITF), created taekwondo alone. This claim is
mainly supported by Choi himself, along with the ITF, and is not supported by the
World Taekwondo Federation, Kukkiwon, or other organizations.
Choi, in his autobiography, Taekwondo and Me, said that, determined to make a
unique martial art for Korean people, he founded a modern martial art in 1955, after
nine years of tough work, beginning from March 1946. On 11 April 1955, this unique
martial art received the name Taekwondo written in hanja (Chinese-derived
characters). [14] He consulted the Naming Council to make a new name which
would unite the confusing names of existing martial arts such as Tang Soo, karate and
Kwonbub: that organization ratified Taekwon unanimously, because it has a
pronunciation similar to taekkyeon from the history of the Goryeo Dynasty (918
1392), and therefore is able to establish a historical connection.
The first appearance of the term Taekwon emerges at this point. Prior to this, the
name Taekwon did not exist for a martial art. Then how did Choi come up with the
name Taekwon? Working as a divisional commander of the 29th Infantry Division, he
made all his troops train in Tang Soo Do to make them stronger, and in September
1954, at the inaugural ceremony of 1st Corps, they demonstrated Tang Soo Do, the
pride of his division, in front of President Syngman Rhee. Intrigued, after seeing this,
the president remarked: That is taekkyeon that has existed since ancient times in our
country. Taekkyeon is good, all troops should learn this. [15] This incident has two
important meanings for the origin and development of taekwondo. First, as Choi was
troubling himself with changing and developing karate or Tang Soo Do, which he
learned in Japan, into a Korean martial art, he received praise from the president,
who called it taekkyeon, a historical martial art of Korea. This helped provoke the
name taekwon, combining tae (meaning feet) and kwon (meaning fists). Second, at
the time some core generals of the army disliked Choi for teaching his soldiers Tang
Soo Do, because he had learnt it in Japan; but after the president approved it, Chois
martial art uickly spread throughout the army.
There is no objection to the fact that Choi Hong Hi coined the name taekwondo
and started to use it. However, for the following reasons, we cannot conclude
definitely that the person who thought of the name taekwondo was also the creator
of taekwondo itself. First, according to Choi, all of the basic skills and forms were

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

1720

J. D. Ahn et al.

completed and spread by Choi alone. Before Choi came back from Japan and diffused
the martial art throughout the army, other people, such as Lee Won Kuk, Jeon Sang
Sub, Hwang Gi, Yoon Byung In and Roh Byung Jik were already teaching students
according to their own systems and techniques from 19446, and they in turn played
decisive roles in the formation of taekwondo. Their roles were too significant and
influential to be ignored and so undermine the claim that taekwondo was formed by
one individual, Choi Hong Hi. Secondly, Choi mainly practised karate. Although he
writes that he learned rudimentary taekkyeon movements from his calligraphy teacher
Han Il Dong, the proof is very thin. Also, Choi himself recollects that calling the
martial art, which he had previously been teaching under the names of Tang Soo and
Gong Soo (karate), as taekwondo felt very awkward. [16] Hence, if we assume Choi
to be the originator of taekwondo, we will not be able to find any connections
between Subak or taekkyeon, the ancient martial arts of the Korean peninsula, despite
the similar pronunciations. Moreover, there is a risk of losing the identity of Koreas
military arts and the philosophy currently associated with taekwondo. Also, it will be
harder to preserve their historical and cultural continuity. Thirdly, the historical
foundation or evidence of official presence or use of the name taekwondo is unclear.
Although Choi claims that he received the name taekwondo written in hanja from
President Rhee in April 1955, there is hardly any proof that the presidents
autographic writing existed (such as a photograph, custody or time record,
eyewitness etc) and Choi allegedly lost the original writing. Lee Gyeong Myeong
commented on this that the naming of taekwondo was not the creation of a new
system but a re-christening with a more appropriate name; but still, when, where,
who, and how the name was formed remains unknown. [17]
Kwan-centric Theory
The point of the theory that taekwondo was formed by gymnasiums is this: the
origin of taekwondo is the five mainstay gymnasiums established by the elite who
learned martial arts in Japan and China around the time of the defeat of Japan in
the Second World War and the liberation of the Korean people, i.e. from 1944 to
1946. The Chungdokwan of Lee Won Kuk was formed in 1944, the Mudeokkwan
of Hwang Gi in 1945, the Chosun Yeonmukwan of Jeon Sang Sub in 1946
(renamed as Jidokwan during the Korean War), while the YMCA martial arts
department of Yoon Byung In was formed in 1946 (renamed to Changmukwan
right after the Korean War), and the Songmukwan of Roh Byung Jik in 1946,
thereby making the five kwans around at the dawn of taekwondo and the firstgeneration elders of taekwondo.
These mainstay gymnasiums have a significant meaning in the history of Korean
martial arts. Firstly, it was the first time in Korean history that systematic and official
training in martial arts took place in private gymnasiums founded by civilians. Prior
to this, it was only accomplished through military organizations and educational
institutions. Secondly, long before the name taekwondo was formed and technical

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean Martial Art

1721

systems were completed, these mainstay gymnasiums had a system of issuing geup
and dan certificates through their own performance tests. Thirdly, the founders of
these mainstay gymnasiums were teaching their martial arts under the names Tang
Soo Do karate, Kwonbub, Hwasu-do and so on, but they later played crucial roles
in creating the unified name taekwondo, founding the federation, and building
technical systems. Notably, Hwang has claimed that Subak-do existed as a Korean
martial art since the Gojoseon period (2333108 BCE) and had been imported by
China and Japan. His martial art, under the name Subak-do, still exists as a form of
martial arts different from taekwondo. [18]
The kwan-centric theory is mainly based on the testimony of gym leaders, apart
from Choi, who claimed to have created taekwondo at that time, and it is one of the
established theories of taekwondos history that is accepted by many organizations
such as Kukkiwon, the Korea Taekwondo Association, the World Taekwondo
Federation and the World Taekwondo Research Society. One of these testimonies is
an interview with Lee Won Kuk, founder of Chungdokwan, conducted by the
Monthly Joongang in December 1994. In this interview, Lee emphasizes that he
fortified karate with enhanced speed and original pumsae (fighting techniques) and
taught it under the name of Tang Soo Do, which became the taekwondo of modern
times. He also said that Uhm Woon Kyu, Kukkiwon president, and Jhoon Rhee,
father of American taekwondo, are all his direct students. The name taekwondo,
although not his creation, Lee claimed, was made by his students while he was living
in Japan, in exile because of a false charge that he had conspired to assassinate
President Rhee. [19] However, regarding the kwan-centric theory as the most
credible theory of taekwondos modern formation involves acknowledging the
following basic points of dispute. First of all, most of the leaders of the kwans at the
beginning learned karate; Hwang and Yoon, who learnt martial arts in Manchuria
and China, also spent time focusing on karate. Therefore it has to be admitted that
the influence of karate in the modern formation of taekwondo was substantial.
Indeed, ample research about the initial development of taekwondo recognizes these
historical facts. [20] Next, if we also take these as facts, it is difficult to explain the
interaction between the initial modern taekwondo and Korean traditional martial
arts. That is, it is hard to find a correlation between Subak-hui or taekkyeon, two
examples of traditional Korean martial arts. Although Hwang himself says that he
entered Subak-gi in 1927, [21] the elders of that time mostly deny this, and the
name of Hwangs first gymnasium was Unsoobu Moohoi Tang Soo Do-bu, although
the names of Subak-do and Tang Soo Do are both used now. [22] Hwangs claim
seems to be a personal determination to establish legitimacy through inheriting
Subak or Subyeok-chigi dating from Goryeo based on karate and lacks historical
context.
Judging comprehensively with all these points in mind, it is certain that the initial
mainstay gymnasiums were in at the beginning of the Korean history of modern
taekwondo, but this theory seems to possess some limitations that make it difficult to
take it as the sole determining theory for the origination taekwondo.

1722

J. D. Ahn et al.

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Table 1 Notable gymnasiums between 1944 and 1956 [23]

Gym name

Founders

When founded

City of
location

Chungdo-kwan
Mudeok-kwan
Chosun Yeonmukwan (Jido-kwan)
YMCA Kwonbub-bu
(Changmu-kwan)
Songmu-kwan
Odo-kwan

Lee, Won Kuk

Hwang, Gi
Jeon, Sang Sub

August 1944
November 1945
March 1946

Seoul
Seoul
Seoul

Karate
Karate, Subak-gi
Karate

Yoon, Byung In

1946

Seoul

Kwonbub, Karate

Roh, Byung Jik

Choi, Hong Hi
Nam, Tae Hee
Lee, Yong Woo
Hong, Jeong Pyo
Park, Chul Hee
Lee, Gyo Yoon

1946
1954

Gaesung
Gangwon

1954
1956

Seoul
Seoul

Karate
Chungdokwan, Karate,
Taekkyeon
Chungdokwan
YMCA Kwonbub-bu

1956

Seoul

Chosunyeonmu-kwan

Jeongdo-kwan
Gangdeok-kwan
Hanmu-kwan

Source of influence

Karate Inflow Theory

The karate inflow theory argues that karate, which was spread around mainland
Japan starting in 1922 by Funakoshi, is the root of taekwondo in Korea. These claims
are based on the fact that, as mentioned previously, the leaders of kwans, who
contributed greatly to the formation of modern taekwondo, and Choi, who coined
the name taekwondo, learned karate in Japan and then opened gymnasiums in Korea
around the time of its liberation.
To understand the background of the karate inflow theory, we need to examine the
social environments of the barehanded martial arts, from the Chosun Dynasty to the
occupation period. During the Chosun era the social climate attached importance to
literature and disdained military arts, even though many invasions occurred during
its 500 years of existence. Furthermore, the development of explosives as weapons
after the Japanese invasions of Korea from 1592 to 1598 led to the diminution of the
significance of Subak, a barehanded martial art, in the Chosun armed forces; rather,
soldiers started to officially learn Kwonbub, which had more systematic forms. [24]
Subak, removed from the regular army, remained as the not-so-systematic Subyeokchigi, [25] then in the late Chosun Dynasty it appears as takkyeon, a general term for
all barehanded martial arts, [26] or as a play-like form of taekkyeon concentrating on
foot skills in the Seoul and Gyunggi area. [27] The Korean peoples barehanded
martial arts decayed because of the cultural oppression policy during the Japanese
occupation period, barely remaining in existence with taekkyeon athletes in the order
of Ho Lim, Deok Gi Lim and then Han Seung Shin. In addition, Subak-hui or
taekkyeon had been passed down without any illustrations or records about the skills
or Yeonmu line, but solely through a number of individual movements. Therefore,
after 36 years of Japanese imperial rule, such barehanded martial arts were virtually
eliminated. These phenomena can be easily inferred by looking at Hwang Gis

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean Martial Art

1723

perception of taekkyeon. In contrast, Japanese martial arts, which had been

modernized, considered the place of practice to be sacred, as if it was a place of
religious ritual. They called it Dojo and made all pupils follow codes of conduct,
making a means for mental culture in a philosophical sense, and introduced physical
education to organizations and schools. Korean students had been practising modern
martial arts which were well equipped with systemized training and a refined mental
goal; however, now they openly adopted Japanese martial arts that they thought were
modern without even knowing the relevance of Subak or taekkyeon. Even though it is
extremely difficult to access or find credible information about this, it seems that, as a
result, the modernization process of taekwondo took the form of Japanese martial
arts, bringing up questions of legitimacy. [28]
The karate inflow theory is supported by taekwondos first-generation coaches, the
kwan leaders who had founded their gymnasiums from 1944 to 1946, but the Korea
Taekwondo Association rejects this theory, bearing the ethnic tradition in mind. In
recent years, however, Yang Jin Bang (1986), Kim Yong Ok (1990), Kang Gyeong
Hwa (2005) and Song Hyeong Seok (2005) have supported the karate inflow theory
with historical perceptions based on facts. [29]
According to Yang, Hwang said that he adopted foot skills from taekkyeon.
Furthermore, Choi claims to have studied taekkyeon and Tang Soo, which were
introduced in Japan, to develop them into the taekwondo known today; however,
there are no skills or terms from taekkyeon in Hwangs and Chois martial arts.
Rather, Yang writes that these martial arts had only minor differences of content
when compared with Japanese instructional books of karate and Tang Soo. [30] Thus
he mentions modern taekwondo was created with Tang Soo migrating from Japan,
without adopting or referring to traditional martial arts or other martial arts. Such
opinions have had a fresh impact on taekwondo society and are known to have
brought the necessity of establishing taekwondos identity to peoples attention.
Also, while Kim (1990) argued in favour of the karate inflow theory with regard to
the origin of taekwondo, he completely denied that taekwondo is related to the
traditional martial arts of the Korean peninsula, for example taekkyeon. He claimed
that taekwondos hyeong and karates kata had some similar movements, directions
and formations; both even had the same names Pyeongan (Heian), Gongsang-gun
(Kusanku), Gwangong (Kanku) and even the names of the kwan had their origin in
Japans first karate gymnasium, Shotokan (Song-do-kwan), from which Chungdo
kwan and Songmukwan took one character. He went further to say that we had to
admit that every martial art that we call taekwondo had their formations made in
Japan, so there was no problem in finding the identity of taekwondo. This claim
threw taekwondos society into confusion, and the debate over the legitimacy of
taekwondo as a traditional martial art founded in Korea has not stopped since. [31]
On the other hand, Kang remarked that integration between taekkeyon and
taekwondo could not take place because modern taekwondo coaches did not evaluate
taekkyeon rightfully, and sought to establish legitimacy by claiming that only
taekwondo was the orthodox martial art. The tradition of taekwondo started, from

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

1724

J. D. Ahn et al.

a nationalist perspective, to gain originality and orthodoxy, but this nationalistic

perspective lacks scientific research. [32] Therefore, getting too hung up on Koreanlike things could lead to historical distortions. What Kang claims is that although
most of the martial arts that appear in current Korean society are from Japan or
China, except for taekkyeon, Korean martial arts all claim to be traditionally Korean;
this we have to accept as fact, for Tang Soo takes place in the modern formation of
taekwondo, in a perspective of correct reading. [33] Also, Song said that we have to
accept that taekwondos only starting-point was karate from Japan, and points out
that taekwondo has the task of gaining historical originality and proving that it has
additional technical characteristics when compared to karate. [34]
Karate inflow is undeniably carved into the process of modern taekwondo
formation. Although this fact is solid, to jump to the conclusion of Tang Soo seems to
be making the vital fallacy of not seeing the forest for the trees. A culture takes on
new shapes after rising and falling, changing and fusing. Martial arts in the Korean
peninsula went through a period of unilaterally accepting Japanese modern martial
cultures during the 36 years of cultural control during the colonial period. That
period of rapid change and chaos in Korean society caused modern taekwondo to
completely differ from the karate of Japan. Moreover, Japanese karate itself did not
have a unified tradition and identity according to one ideology, and even now a
variety of ideologies exist, depending on the teacher. Nowadays, as the taekwondo of
Korea is settling into a definite identity, karate is not doing as well. [35] It does not
seem convincing that taekwondo is an epigone of karate and originated from karate.
Continued Traditional Martial Arts Theory
Continued traditional martial arts theory argues that taekwondo was formed in
succession to traditional martial arts in the Korean peninsula such as Sunbae (the
system of Goguryeo, a barehanded martial art that Sillas Hwarang practised), Subak
of Goryeo, and taekkyeon of the late Chosun Dynasty. Most early taekwondo
documents emphasize this theory. For example, in the taekwondo guidebook
published in 1972, it is written that taekwondo is a native traditional martial art that
comprises of ancestors wisdom and spirit, and receives its history from Goguryeo
mural paintings in Gakjeo-chong to the Chosun Dynastys Muyedo Botongji and has
been ascertained to be that of a national sport. The most recent taekwondo
guidebook from Kukkiwon also writes that taekwondo succeeds the history of
Goguryeos Sunbae, Sillas Hwarang, Goryeos Subak and Chosuns taekkyeon.
[36] In addition, most taekwondo guidebooks, when discussing its origin, give
taekwondo legitimacy as the modern heir of traditional Korean martial arts.
The claim that taekwondo has evolved from traditional martial arts was brought to
the attention of first-generation taekwondo coaches after liberation, because it was an
important issue to ensure the legitimacy of taekwondo. In fact, the person who has
thought more about this matter and acted quicker than anyone else is Choi Hong Hi.
He strongly asserted in his books Taekwondo Guidebook and Taekwondo Education

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean Martial Art

1725

Book that Changhun-ryoo (a taekwondo pumsae of his making) has been developed
from taekkyeon, which is from Silla and consists mainly of foot skills, and Tang Soo,
introduced in Japan with a focus on hand skills. He continues to add that his
taekwondo is the same martial art as Subak and taekkyeon and it has inherited the
fine heritages of its ancestors. In the 1970s, centring around Kukkiwon and KTA,
attempts to globalize taekwondo through first localizing it to Korea and designating it
as a national sport were made widely and more systematically; at this time, successive
traditional martial arts theories seemed to lay the foundation for scientific support.
Research on taekwondo history by Jo Wan Mook and Chung Chan Mo showed, by
uncovering the origin and developments of taekwondo before modern times, that
modern taekwondo had historical grounds for being regarded as a traditional martial
art, [37] while Na Hyun Seong writes that although it is uncertain if Subak is a kind
of martial arts thought of as the prototype of modern taekwondo, judging from its
forms, it would not be wrong to say so. [38] Also, Kim and Kim (2003 have suggested
the link between taekwondo and taekkyeon by writing that Subak of the Three
Kingdoms Period and Goryeo, called taekkyeon in late Chosun, was developed into
taekwondo by mixing it with Chinas Kwonbub, after the issuance of the Muyedo
Botongji (an illustrated manual of martial arts) in the eighteenth century, but because
of the martial arts suppression policy and the foreign martial arts that were taken in
without care by students who studied in Japan during the Japanese occupation there
was some confusion. [39] Since taekkyeon was a martial art in which one aims to kick
high so as to kick the others topknot or force them to topple over, the interpretation
is that taekwondo developed into a sport focusing on foot skills because of
taekkyeons influence, whereas wushu and karate are evaluated to have their focus on
hand skills.
Several problems have been raised about these claims. To begin with, firstgeneration coaches were only interested in securing the cultural legitimacy of
taekwondo as a traditional martial art, and did not try to study the martial art and
improve skills to build a new system for taekwondo. In other words, the lack of
creativity in making old things new brought on the historical and philosophical
debates. Choi claims that the Changhun-ryoo that he created is a synthesis of
taekkyeon and Tang Soo, but in its skill system takkyeons basic skills are nowhere to
be found; in fact, it is said to comprise only Japanese Tang Soo. Critics claim that by
calling it a traditional martial art he made it harder to understand or revive the
original traditional martial arts. [40] Another issue is the confusion about cultural
identity of taekwondo and taekkyeon. At present, Kukkiwon and KTA have a clear and
strong opposition to the karate inflow theory. If we look at Kukkiwons 2006
Taekwondo Guidebook, it finds taekwondos legitimacy in taekkyeon, and avoids
discussing the situation related to Tang Soo inflow at all. On the other hand, the
Taekkyeon Association claims that taekkyeon follows in the footsteps of Goguryeos
Sunbae, Sillas Hwarang, Goryeos Subak and Chosuns Subyeok-chigi, and that the
taekwondo party is distorting these legitimacies as if it were their own. Moreover,
Kyeong Hwa Jeong, a taekkyeon master, presents in the name of taekkyeon the same

1726

J. D. Ahn et al.

historical evidence that the taekwondo side speaks of as a sound argument, making
the situation more confusing. [41] This debate over the legitimacy of taekwondo and
taekkyeon is one of the main causes for the confusion among many students both
inside and outside Korea who are studying and practising taekwondo and have an
interest in Korean traditional martial arts.

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

An Investigation of Taekwondos Cultural Identity

The first problem that comes up when discussing taekwondos cultural identity is about
the origin of taekwondo. Because of Japanese colonial rule, Korea suffered 36 years of
traditional and cultural subjugation, and during this period the first generation or
formative coaches of modern taekwondo localized and settled on karate, which they had
mostly learned in Japan as students. As mentioned before, this became the basis for the
philosophical confusion that taekwondo is not a traditional martial art that has
inherited Korean barehanded martial arts. There is a misconception that only origins
can assure the identity of a culture. It is a wrong perception that for taekwondo to
establish a cultural identity as the traditional martial art of the Korean people it has to
start from the Korean people so that its originality as Korean culture and cultural
identity can be secured. A cultures originality is not a matter of origin, but a matter of a
cultures characteristics and uniqueness. [42] That means that no matter where it started
and who started it, if Koreans put in their own characteristics and uniqueness, it can be
theirs. [43] If we set up place of origin as the most important yardstick for originality, the
vast portion of human civilization would be merely an imitation of the civilizations of
China, India, Mesopotamia and Egypt. The French philosopher Paul Ricoeur and
British sociologist Anthony Giddens, who are spoken of as representative scholars that
have advocated a new cognition of identity by generalizing modernistic definitions and
postmodern thought, consider identity not as an unchanging, closed Eigen system but a
variable, intricate and open system that dynamically recomposes according to timespace events. [44]
Then what culture sufficiently connotes Korean identity and is a Korea-like
cultural heritage? Tak presents three factors of presence, popularity and
independence for that determination. Presence means that we have to start finding
the identity from investigating the phenomena that are taking place in Korea now,
not the ones of the past. Nowadays taekwondo has settled down as the most learned,
beloved and enjoyed national sport of Koreans. [45] Each town has at least one
taekwondo gymnasium, and several gymnasiums are in competition near big
apartment complexes. Moreover, taekwondo is practised in numerous middle and
high schools in the country for students ethnic and physical promotion. It is
common for all students in a school to train in taekwondo. From the 1950s to the
present, almost all the Korean military forces have taught taekwondo for the training
of their soldiers. This popular and widespread phenomenon seems to meet the
required criteria of presence and popularity for taekwondo to have an identity as a
national martial art that represents Koreans.

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean Martial Art

1727

Independence, another important standard, describes the attitude and consciousness towards that phenomenon. This can be investigated from two perspectives: With
what attitude and consciousness do Koreans see taekwondo? And how much of
Korean cultural mentality is dissolved into taekwondo? First, as a straightforward
example that speaks for Koreans attitude and consciousness, in 2002, when the
Ministry of Culture and Tourism, based on experts opinions and surveys of public
opinion, picked ten cultural images that represent Korea best, taekwondo was
selected along with kimchi and Korean dress. This shows that people consider
taekwondo as the most popular traditional martial art and one that speaks for
theKorean peoples dynamic and strong qualities, rather than Ssireum, taekkyeon,
archery and royal court martial arts.
Next, to address the question of how much of Koreas mental and cultural
characteristics, along with nature, is present in taekwondo, we will have to examine to
what extent the cultural images of Korea, which represent most Koreans mentality,
thoughts and behaviours, are involved in taekwondo.
The first of the essential Korea-like images inherent in taekwondo are the terms
that are all native to Korea. For instance, the Kuk-ki Taekwondo textbook (2006, a
very creditable textbook for its field, shows that most movements use an unchanged
form of the original Korean name, for example: naranhiseogi, juchumseogi,
hakdariseogi and kkeokki. Although names of the pumsae are in hanja, such as
taeguk, goryeo, geumgang, taebaek, pyeongwon and sipsu, these words have been used
by Koreans for over a thousand years, and as a result, Koreans are familiar with them,
and the official command words use Korean tongue, as in charyeot, gallyeo, baro,
swieo and geuman, reflecting cultural subjectivity. A second piece of evidence is
that taekwondo mirrors the Koreans fighting qualities of placing great value on foot
skills. One of the Korean barehanded martial arts characteristics is using ones feet
more frequently than the hands, which can be inferred from the fact that taekkyeon
was a sport that aims to kick the topknot with feet. The fact that taekwondo, unlike
karate, hapkido or kung fu, has established itself as a martial arts sport that focuses on
foot skills is not irrelevant to the characteristics of Korean barehanded martial arts. A
third area of investigation is the colours of the fighters trunk protectors, blue and
red, which resemble those of the Korean peoples favourite symbolic colours the
colours of five directions. This was the first use of colour in a martial sport, setting an
original and creative example. Moreover, the mentality in the organization of
pumsaes is evaluated to constitute systems that have interiorized the taeguk doctrine
and orthodox ideas of Confucianism, Buddhism and Zen sects, which are the
ideologies that represent the Korean peoples mental culture. [46]
Conclusion
Records about the Korean peoples barehanded martial arts, unfortunately, are
identified only as late as 1170 CE, from the Goryeo period. It is certain that before,
during the Three Kingdoms period of Goguryeo, Baekje and Silla, barehanded

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

1728

J. D. Ahn et al.

martial arts existed, but as an analogical inference from interpretations of silhouettes

of martial art movements drawn in earthenware or tomb murals. The documents of
the Korean people from the Three Kingdoms period are lamentably not
contemporary ones. The two most popular ones are Samguk Sagi (1145) [47] and
Samguk Yusa (1283) [48] which were actually written during the later Goryeo period.
It is presumed that the history books written in the days of Goguryeo, Baekje, and
Silla were incinerated to ashes in buildings burnt in time of war.
Taekwondo is the pride of Korean culture, and a martial art sport enjoyed by
people all around the world. It is also true that, although Koreans feel proud and
privileged about taekwondo, because of a lack of certainty over its origin and identity,
there is some confusion. We need to see both the spread of karate, from the opening
of the first karate gymnasium in mainland Japan (1939) up to the 1960s, then
expanded in the United States by Yeong-ui Choe, and that of taekwondo, which
started to globalize in the 1970s after establishing itself as a sport, quickly becoming
more popular than karate, as a contemporary process of recent history. [49] Despite
this need to escape from the narrow trap of nationalism that only focuses on its
origin, still the controversies over taekwondos identity are being raised. [50]
Researchers have highlighted the origins of taekwondo from four perspectives to
investigate taekwondos cultural identity. Each of the perspectives contains not only
historical evidence but also blind spots or logical leaps. Firstly, the theory of
taekwondo originating from Choi Hong Hi, despite the clear fact that the name
taekwondo was created by him, is controversial in some aspects. As he mentions
himself, the martial arts that he learned are definitely karate. If Choi is seen as the
origin of taekwondo, there would be limited pride in taekwondo as a Korean
traditional martial art and in preserving the historical cultural continuity. The kwancentric theory is correct about the process of unification, but it is difficult to find
consistent and pervasive evidence that early gym leaders of kwans put their forces
together and recreated taekwondo. That is, the critics reproach is that no kwan
leaders tried to find an agreement on movements, technical terms and forms of
pumsae, but rather clung to each movement style to the end, and continued to follow
karates forms and shapes. Notably, Hwang pieced together Subak-do independently
and is now insisting that his martial art is the heir to the roots of Korean traditional
arts. The karate inflow theory is accurate when observed in a historical context, but it
is hard to accept that modern taekwondo originated from what only started to spread
around Korea in the late 1940s, because it is a perception too confined and
disconnected. The reason is that the history of Korean barehanded martial arts,
estimated to be thousands of years old, is too prolonged and deep. Finally, the
successive traditional martial arts theory, supported as the established theory by
Kukkiwon, KTA, the Ministry of Culture and Sports and Tourism of Korea, does not
even mention the inflow of karate during the Japanese occupation. It does, however,
consistently assert self-centred opinions that only emphasize taekwondo as a national
sport of Korea. This has caused the theory to face controversy over its legitimacy
from taekkyeon organizations, and criticisms that it has caused confusion of identity

Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean Martial Art

1729

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

to scholars. For example, Kim claimed that taekwondo was developed by Koreans to
strengthen their culture, but at the same time, since he was not able to explain the
intrinsic interests and the kinetic principles of its movements, it is hard to classify
taekwondo as a traditional martial art. [51] Hence we researchers have arranged the
origins of taekwondo into a synthetic point of view in Table 2.
Taekwondo therefore went through a fusion combining Choi, the karate inflow
period of cultural separation during the Japanese occupation, the first kwan leaders
and traditional Korean martial arts. This process of disorder and cultural
reproduction continued until 1955, when the official name taekwon was approved.
In 1959 the Korea Taekwondo Association was founded, and taekwondo was

Table 2 Taekwondos origin and forming process

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

1730

J. D. Ahn et al.

modified as a Korean barehanded martial art. Whether taekwondo has evolved into a
martial art that conserves the identity of Korean traditional martial art has been
discussed against the criteria of presence, popularity and independence. Presence and
popularity mean focusing more on the present state from a phenomenological
perspective, rather than the origin or beginning of a culture, to determine an identity.
In other words, it is based on the fact that culture keeps evolving and is continuously
forming a new identity. Additionally, independence is an approach as to how much
Korean mentality and behaviour has influenced the organization and movement
techniques of taekwondo. By summing up these discussions, we can conclude as
follows.
First, modern taekwondo has to be seen as a recreation of a modern civilization that,
in its origins, has been affected together by Choi Hong Hi, karate, kwans and traditional
Korean barehanded martial arts. Certainly, each of the four origins has its limitations if
one tries to consider it as the sole origin of taekwondo, but it is certain that all of them
have made major contributions to the formation of taekwondo. Therefore it is asserted
that there needs to be a single theory that is a fusion of these four theories and, through
further research, we can nullify the protest of opposing theories.
Second, taekwondo is a martial art sport enjoyed not only by Koreans but by people
all over the world. This sufficiently fulfils the characteristics of presence and popularity,
factors of cultural identity. Moreover, it has essentially inherited and developed
movements from Korean barehanded martial arts, which lay stress on foot skills. This
distinguishes it from Japans karate and Chinas wushu, which are based on hand skills.
Furthermore, the trunk, groin protectors and helmets are blended remarkably with
taegeuk patterns and the traditional colours of five directions. All technical terms being
written using pure Korean words shows the essence of Korean localization.
Now taekwondo has been clearly identified as a traditional Korean martial art that
has secured the most exciting and stable modes of sport and has grown into the most
globalized of all the cultural heritages of Korea. Moreover, it continues to evolve to
this day. Tradition is not isolated or stagnating, but rather it is something that is
continuously recreated and transformed in changing socio-cultural environments.
The culture of taekwondo as a traditional martial art has been developing as it
adopted and combined a variety of characteristics. Therefore, Koreans should
endeavour, along with trying to overcome an exclusive nationalism as to taekwondos
country of origin, to build a new paradigm of establishing an identity as a
multicultural and global martial art sport that captures the uniqueness and values of
each locale and creates a suitable code of conduct and style.
Notes
[1] Karate is a Japanese word rendered as gong soo do in Korean, and both words basically have
the same meaning. In this article only the term karate is used. Also, the Korean word Tang
Soo Do, literally Tang Hand, is the word for karate in Okinawa.
[2] Kang, The Study of Modern Taekwondos Identity, 4.

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean Martial Art

1731

[3] Kim, Principles Governing the Construction of the Philosophy of Taekwondo, 29.
[4] The term Subak is seen first in Chinas Book of Han, Yiwenzhi, chapter byungseobu,
byunggigyo, where a book on martial arts called Subak six parts is introduced, and can also be
seen in the records from year Janggong 12 (Spring and Autumn Annals), vol. 8. The
Commentary of Gongyang, a book from the Eastern Zhou dynasty (768662 BCE), specifically
says Jangman, a subject of Gungong, was offended and so twisted Mingongs neck with
Subak. A description of Subak in Chinese documents appears limited to the Qin, Han, and
Song dynasties. It is explained in Lim Baek Wons Ancient History of Chinese Physical
Education how Subak was addressed and how it changed in China. In Korean documents,
books on Goryeo such as Goryeo History and Goryeo History Jeolyo and Siloks of the early
Chosun dynasty, and many books ever since those mentions Subak, including Jaemulbo
(1798). Given that Koreans and Chinese have interacted in many cultural ways, it is possible
that Koreans imported the term from China, but it is the standard view to think that Chinese
Subak and Korean Subak are completely different.
[5] Kim and Gwack, A Study for the Philosophical Thesis of Taekwondo Spirits; Kim and Kim,
The Historical Comparative of Korean Taekwondo and Japanese Karate; Kim and Choi, A
Comparative Study on the Old History of Taekkyon and Taekwondo; Korea Taekwondo
Association, Taekwondo Textbook.
[6] Jeong, Principles of Taekkyeon, 65.
[7] Ryukyu Islands, Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2009.
[8] Kerr, Okinawa; Lebra, Okinawa Religion, as cited by Tan, Constructing a Martial Tradition.
[9] Kim, Principles Governing the Construction of the Philosophy of Taekwondo, 101.
[10] Draeger and Smith, Asian Fighting Arts.
[11] Haines, Karate History and Traditions.
[12] Tan, Constructing a Martial Tradition.
[13] Tak, Identity of Korea, 10317.
[14] Choi, Taekwondo and Me, vol. 1, 343.
[15] Taek-kkyeon: another expression of taekkyeon. In Jaemulbo (Lee, 1798) or Haedong Jukji
(Choi, 1925) it is shown as takkyeon, in Ahn, Heroic Stories of Chosun Warriors, as taekkyeon;
in Korea Games (Culin, 1895) as taekkyeon-hagi (literally doing taekkyeon); in Kim Taek-soos
(1935 Bak Taryeong [Five Comprehensive Songs] as chakkyeon, and in Grand Dictionary of
Our Language (1938 as gyeollyeon-taekkyeon. After being proclaimed No. 76 of Important
Intangible Cultural Properties in June 1983 as taekkyeon, the various names were unified.
Now taekkyeon organizations have branched out into the Preservation of Original Korean
Taekgyeon Association, the Korea Taekkyon Association, the Kyulun Taekkyun Association and
the Korean Traditional Taekkyeon Association among others, and these organizations are in a
struggle for leadership.
[16] Choi, Taekwondo and Me, vol. 1, 36 and 347.
[17] Lee, Taekwondos Yesterday and Today, 43.
[18] Hwang, Subak-do Encyclopaedia, 47.
[19] Kwon, Originator of Taekwondo Driven Out by his Country.
[20] Yang, A Study on the Development Process of Modern Korean Taekwondo; Kim, Principles
Governing the Construction of the Philosophy of Taekwondo; Kang, The Study of Modern
Taekwondos Identity.
[21] Hwang, Subak-do Encyclopaedia, 9.
[22] Kang and Lee, The History of Our Taekwondo, 40.
[23] Ibid., 3453.
[24] Heo, History of Our Martial Arts Customs From Old Paintings, 245.
[25] Choi, Haedongjukji.
[26] Ibid. See also Jaemulbo: Manmulbo by M.Y. Lee.

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

1732

J. D. Ahn et al.

[27] Ahn, Heroic Stories of Chosun Warriors.

[28] Yang, A Study on the Development Process of Modern Korean Taekwondo.
[29] Yang, A Study on the Development Process of Modern Korean Taekwondo; Kim, Principles
Governing the Construction of the Philosophy of Taekwondo, 6570; Song, Lecture on
Taekwondos History; Kang, The Study of Modern Taekwondos Identity-Focused on the
History and Culture of Korean Martial Arts.
[30] Ohya, Ways to Learn Karate; Kanken, Karate.
[31] Kim, Principles Governing the Construction of the Philosophy of Taekwondo, 70.
[32] Kang, The Study of Modern Taekwondos Identity, 68.
[33] Ibid., 67.
[34] Song, Lecture on Taekwondos History, 215.
[35] Lee, Modern Taekwondo History and New Controversies, 95.
[36] Kukkiwon , Kuk-Ki Taekwondo Textbook (rev. edn).
[37] Jo, Research of Taekwondo History, 13; Chung, Korean Taekwondo History; A Study of
Taekwon (Subak) in the Koryo Dynasty, 218.
[38] Na, The Study of the History of Korean Physical Education.
[39] Kim and Kim, The Historical Comparative of Korean Taekwondo and Japanese Karate.
[40] Yang, A Study on the Development Process of Modern Korean Taekwondo.
[41] Jeong, Principles of Taekkyeon, 64.
[42] Jo, Searching for Korean Thoughts, 275.
[43] Tak, Identity of Korea, 86.
[44] Ricoeur, Soi-meme comme un autre, 16775; Giddens, Modernity and Self-Identity, 18698.
[45] Ibid.
[46] Lee, Modern Taekwondo History and New Controversies, 113.
[47] Samguk Sagi [Chronicles of the Three Kingdoms], the first history book to be written by
officials, was edited by Kim Bu-sik along with 11 scholars, focusing on the political rise and
fall of Silla, Goguryeo and Baekje in 1125 (Goryeo period), commissioned by King Injong.
This work comprises nine books, 50 volumes. This book is regarded as the most valuable
history book for carrying out research into Korean history, including the unified Silla period.
[48] Samguk Yusa [Memorabilia of the Three Kingdoms] is a history book edited by the high
Buddhist monk Ilyeon in 1281 (late Goryeo). Three volumes (volumes 35) were handed
down, collectively as one book, consisting of 107 chapters and proclaimed a national treasure.
Many translations are available.
[49] Kim, Principles Governing the Construction of the Philosophy of Taekwondo.
[50] Kang, The Study of Modern Taekwondos Identity.
[51] Kim, Korean Traditional Martial Art of Physical Educations Philosophy, 255.

References
Ahn, Hwak. Heroic Stories of Chosun Warriors, rev. edn. [in Korean]. Andong, Korea: Korean
Studies Advancement Center, 1919.
Choi, Hong Hi. Taekwondo Guidebook [in Korean]. Seoul: Korea: Seonghwa Culture, 1966.
Choi, Hong Hi. Taekwondo Education Book [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Jeongyeon-sa, 1972.
Choi, Hong Hi. Taekwondo and Me, vol. 1: Land of Ordeals, My Homeland [in Korean]. Seoul,
Korea: Daoom, 2000.
Choi, Joon Sik. Do Koreans Have Culture [in Korean]. Paju, Korea: Sakyejul, 1997.
Choi, Yeong Nyeon. Haedongjukji [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Janghak-sa, 1925.
Chung, Chan Mo. Korean Taekwondo History (Taekwondo Teaching Materials) [in Korean]. Seoul,
Korea: Ministry of Culture and Education, 1975.

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Taekwondo as a Traditional Korean Martial Art

1733

Chung, Chan Mo. A Study of Taekwon (Subak) in the Koryo Dynasty [in Korean]. Journal of the
Physical Education Research Institute of Seoul University 2, no. 2, (1981): 218.
Cullin, Stewart. Korean Games. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1895.
Draeger, D.F. and R.W. Smith. Asian Fighting Arts. Tokyo: Kodansha International, 1969.
Giddens, A. Modernity and Self-identity [in Korean], trans. Gi Don Kweon: Seoul: Saemeulgeul,
1997 [1991].
Haines, B.A. Karate History and Traditions. Rutland, VT, and Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle, 1995.
Heo, In Ok. History of Our Martial Arts Customs From Old Paintings [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea:
Pureun Yeoksa, 2005.
Hwang, Gi. Subak-do Encyclopaedia [in Korean]. Daegu, Korea: Sam Gwang, 1970.
Jeong, Kyeong Hwa. Principles of Taekkyeon [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Bokyung Culture, 2002.
Jo, Ji Hoon. Searching for Korean Thoughts [in Korean]. Paju, Korea: Nanam, 1996.
Jo, Wan Mook. Research of Taekwondo History [in Korean]. Taekwondo Monthly (Korea
Taekwondo Association)l (1971): 13.
Kang, Gyeong Hwa. The Study of Modern Taekwondos Identity Focused on the History and
Culture of Korean Martial Arts [in Korean]. Unpublished masters thesis, Changwon
University Department of Philosophy, South Gyeongsang Province, 2005.
Kang, Won Sik, and Gyeong Myeong Lee. The History of Our Taekwondo [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea:
Sang-a book Project, 2002.
Kanken, Toyama. Karate [in Japanese]. Tokyo: Tsuru Shobo, 1958.
Kerr, G.H. Okinawa: The History of an Island People. Rutland, VT, and Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Co., 1965.
Kim, Bu Chan. Korean Traditional Martial Art of Physical Educations Philosophy [in Korean].
Jeonju, Korea: Sin-A, 2006.
Kim, Gyeong Ji and J.H. Gwack. A Study for the Philosophical Thesis of Taekwondo Spirits [in
Korean]. Journal of Physical Education and Science (University of Gyeong Hee Institute of
Social-Physical Education) 11 (1998): 2743.
Kim, Gil Pyeong and Geun Ki Choi. A Comparative Study on the Old History of Taekkyon
and Taekwondo [in Korean]. The Korean Journal of Physical Education 42, no. 5, (2003): 3
10.
Kim, Joo Hoon and Gil Pyeong Kim. The Historical Comparative of Korean Taekwondo and
Japanese Karate [in Korean]. Journal of Sport and Leisure Studies 19 (2003): 5161.
Kim, Yong Ok. Principles Governing the Construction of the Philosophy of Taekwondo [in Korean].
Seoul, Korea: Tong Na-mu, 1990.
Korea Taekwondo Association. Taekwondo Textbook (Pumsae) [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Sam-il, 1975.
Kukkiwon. Kuk-Ki Taekwondo Textbook [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: O-Sung, 1987.
Kukkiwon. Kuk-Ki Taekwondo Textbook, rev. edn. [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: O-Sung, 2006.
Kwon, Tae Dong. Originator of Taekwondo Driven Out by His Country Lee Won Kuk [in
Korean]. Joongang Monthly, 1 Dec. 1994: 31225.
Lebra, William P. Okinawa Religion: Belief, Ritual and Social Structure. Honolulu, HI: University of
Hawaii Press, 1966.
Lee, Chang Hoo. Modern Taekwondo History and New Controversies [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea:
Sang-A, 2003.
Lee, Gyeong Myeong. Taekwondos Yesterday and Today: Searching for Taekwondo Cultures Origin
[in Korean]. Paju, Korea: Omungak, 2002.
Lee, Man Yeong. Jaemulbo: Manmulbo. Seoul, 1798.
Na, Hyeon Seong. The Study of the History of Korean Physical Education [in Korean].
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kyeong Hee University, Seoul, 1974.
Ohya, Reikichi. Ways to Learn Karate [in Japanese]. Tokyo: Golden Garden Co., 1957.
Ricoeur, Paul. Soi-meme comme un autre [in Korean], trans. Woong Kwon Kim. Seoul:
Dongmoonseon, 2006 [1990].

1734

J. D. Ahn et al.

Downloaded by [University of Maastricht] at 07:58 30 June 2014

Song, Hyeong Seok. Lecture on Taekwondos History [in Korean]. Daegu, Korea: Lee-Mun, 2005.
Tan, Kevin S.Y. Constructing a Martial Tradition: Rethinking a Popular History of Karate-Dou.
Journal of Sport & Social Issues 28, no. 2, (2004): 16992.
Tak, Seok San. Identity of Korea [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Chaek Saesang, 2000.
Yang, Jin Bang. A Study on the Development Process of Modern Korean Taekwondo after
Liberation and its Historical Significance [in Korean]. Unpublished masters thesis, Seoul
University, 1986.