Talk:Won Gyun

Rewrite needed

This article, like so many others related to the Imjin war, need alot of work. But this article stands out amongst the others. It is extremely biased, contains dubious information that often contradicts information in other articles related to the Imjin war. To be more blunt; this article is a piece of sh*t. I suggest a complete rewrite. 77.250.25.165 (talk) 19:42, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

WonKyun did not get killed by the japs, he was executed by the king for losing most of Yi Soon Shin's navy, i should know because i myself am korean and know my history —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.46.43.100 (talk • contribs)

Do you have a source for that? He may have had it coming, but my sources indicate that the other side got to him first. -- Visviva 04:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

The one who wrote this article must have watched 'Bulmyul ei Yi Sun Shin(불멸의 이순신)' which is also called 'The Immortal Yi Sun Shin' and firmly believes in the drama. Wake up. The drama was one of the historic shows that have sooooooooooooo many historical inaccuracies. Won Gyun? Great general? Most of Koreans who are well educated enough to figure out that drama was dramatizing Won Gyun would laugh at the editor's face. Also there is no proof that he was killed by the Japanese. The last time anybody saw him during the war was when he was alive. Even though he may got killed by Japanese, there was nobody around, which means no witness. In the contrary, if you look into the Joseon Wangjo Silok, which is the historical record of Joseon dynasty, there were witnesses who saw Won Gyun after Chilchunryang. Visviva, I don't know where you got that source, but I don't think it is accurate. If you are Korean, why don't you go into this link? http://warfog.net/main.html It has the one of the most accurate and vast source for Yi Sun Shin and the Seven Years War. senei1019

Wow, I didn't realize that website was for Koreans only... Guess I must not be permitted to read it. Anyway, here are two online encyclopedias asserting that Won Gyun fell in battle: Empas Naver As tertiary, unreferenced sources, these aren't ideal, but they are fairly reliable. My much-older 인명국사대사전 (1993) concurs with them, citing the Seonjo Sillok. Interestingly, the 새國史事典 (1983) says that Won Gyun was captured and slain while fleeing the Japanese, which rings a bit more true. At any rate, all of these sources agree on who killed him.... Thus, from the sources available to me -- which are somewhat inadequate -- it seems that there is a strong consensus that he was killed by the Japanese.

Re the Joseon Wangjo Sillok, could you please specify where those entries are? I don't dispute your claim, but the main Seonjo Sillok alone has more than 100 entries referring to Won Gyun, and I don't have quite enough time to look through all of them right now. Cheers, -- Visviva 13:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, some of the things that you said was right. You were right that the internet encyclopedias are unreferenced sources and they are not ideal. Just like wikipedia, those are not writings of the scholars, but netizens. I went to the links you gave me. Those were written in Korean. I wonder how you read them. Also if you get access to the 'English' version of Joseon Wangjo Sillok, then I don't see any reason why you would use internet encyclopedia. You asked me to give you the sources for Won Gyun. Here are the sources. The recordings of July 22, 1597, Kim Sik reported to King. He said Won Gyun was too old to walk, so he was left back. The only thing Kim Sik saw was that the 6-7 Japanese soldiers attacked Won Gyun, but Kim Sik didn't see the actual death of Won Gyun. Then later in July 26, 1597, Kwon Yul reported that Choi Young Gil, the general under his commend, saw Won Gyun was heading to Jinju, which is not around sea at all. Choi Young Gil talked to Won Gyun as well. After that, there is no witness or talk of Won Gyun. Now, I guess you can actually 'look up' Joseon Wangjo Sillok since I gave you the date. The debate over Won Gyun's death is not that important comparing to the whole content of the article of Won Gyun. The article almost praises him as a great soldier, but the truth is he is one of the most incapable soldier and a coward in Korean history. If you actually looked up or study or read Joseon Wangjo Sillok, which I doubt you did since you bring your sources from 'unreferenced sources', then you should know Won Gyun was no great general at all. senei1019

This article contains very wrong information about Won Gyun

First of all, it says that Won Gyun demonstrated good military skill from his young age. I'll tell you what. He passed the military exam by using his father's money and connection. Also when he was in North, his job was to supplying Yi Il and Yi Sun Shin's troups. He didn't fight in the front at all. The reason for his rapid promotion was that he was bribing the ministers. Also he was relative to high ministers which gave him the connection. The reason he had only three or four ships at the beginning of the Seven Years War was because he destroyed his ships when he heard that Japanese were coming. (That was even before Japanese came into his province) Why he destroyed his ships? Because he was ready to run away to Yi Sun Shin's province which was well prepared for the war. He couldn't run away, leaving the ships behind, because Japanese will take the ships. Did he fight with Yi Sun Shin? No. As he did in the Northern boundary, all he did was supplying at the back. One of the reason why Yi Sun Shin was arrested was becaues Won Gyun was constantly sending very 'biased' reports to degrade Yi Sun Shin. After he became the commander of the navy, he refused to fight. (It's funny, because he defamed Yi Sun Shin because he refused king's order)He went to war after he was punished by Gwon Yul. That was the war of Chilchunryang where he lost about 300 ships which Yi Sun Shin built for many years. He didn't even fight in the war. During the night when Japanese attacked, he left the ship and ran away. (He was even drunken at that time) It's a shame that his subjects such as Yi Eok Gi and few left and fought died, while the top commander ran away and caused the caos. This article is well written in terms of organization, however, it doesn't contain the right information.senei1019

Rename

Someone please rename this article back to Won Gyun as that is the most widely used spelling. Taeguk Warrior 12:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Reverting the Article Back and my justifications

As a scholar of Korean history, I found this current revision of this article to be offensive and narrow-minded. This is not to say that Yi Sun Shin was not a great military leader, but the following linked past article is actually the more representative of Won Gyun as a military leader: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Won_Gyun&oldid=91097439

1. Won Gyun was the subject of intense historical revisionism during the Park Chung Hee administration. President Park Chung Hee is known to have greatly admired Yi Sun Shin and King Sejong as Korea's representative historical 'icons' and did his best during the dictatorial years to distort history to make things work to his vision of Korea. Yi Sun Shin's apotheosis was done partially through the degradation of Won Kyun (Won Gyun) who was also an important military figure at the time who received honors posthumously from the Korean monarchy. While it is true that he was involved in a catastrophic loss against the invading Japanese, that was more a symbol of the sheer incompetence of the Yi Dynasty court that was seeing signs of growing factional strife that resulted in historical calamity later on in its history.

2. There's a lot of dramatization in Korea on this topic for obvious reasons. Yi Sun Shin has long been taught to be one of Korea's national heroes, while Won Kyun has been relegated as a national antagonist. Also, a close inspection of Yi Sun Shin's writings suggest that Won Kyun wasn't as incompetent as taught in Korean schools and perpetuated through academia. Look at the sources cited for this article - they are either written during the Japanese occupation, or during Park Chung Hee's administration. There are virtually no historical first sources beyond Yi Sun Shin's memoirs (which I do not see any citations from in the article itself) and are understandably more antagonistic.

3. The accusations launched against Won Kyun such as his appointments in the military are unsubstantiated at best.

4. I admit that there is a tragic dearth of translations of first-hand accounts and records that are currently available in classical Chinese, and for various political and marketing reasons, not widely circulated beyond the narrow scope of Korean academia, and even then, finding sources in English pertaining to this topic remains impossible to find - more the reason that the only article in existence pertaining to the topic at hand in English is not bogged down by what has been effectively dictatorship-era propaganda lite. This includes a scholarly translation of the inscriptions at Won Kyun's burial grounds and shrine, also in a far less epic scale than the one for Yi Sun Shin.

5. While it is a somewhat raw source, there is one English website that does offer raw translations of the markings and inscriptions at the site. I'm not pleased at the quotes, but I have a sinking suspicion that they're actually quotes on the little signboards explaining the cultural sites being referenced and photographed near Pyongtaek that are government sponsored.

6. I also take offense at the contributor below who stipulates that most educated Koreans would be shocked to hear about the possibility that Won Kyun is not as bad as he is displayed in children's history books. In my experience with people who lived in the Park Chung Hee Era all have a certain dose of healthy skepticism that is lost today in a world cluttered by misinformation.

7. This is the link to the website. Some of the sources I will admit here are dubious but the historical marker sign quotes should be considered historical document in fact. http://kalaniosullivan.com/OsanAB/OsanSongtanKorHist.html and please scroll down to the article pertaining to 'Won Kyun.'

8. You can see that the site is actually very well taken care of, and of particular interest:

"Won Kyun (Hwan Gun) won the Battle of Dangpo by "recruiting the dispersed Army inspite of the unfavorable situation in the early phase of the war." He scored victories at Happo, Chokchinpo, and other skirmishes. (Source: Historical Marker at Admiral Won Kyun's Tomb)"

"Along with Gen Kwon Yul and Admiral Yi Sun-shin, he was granted posthumous honors by King Seonjo in 1603. (Source: Historic Marker at Admiral Won Kyun's Tomb)" (Direct quotes from the website)

Gwon Yul, Yi Sun Shin, and Won Gyun are the trio of famous generals during the Japanese invasions and slightly prior - but considerable animosity between the Deoksu Yi family and the Wonju Won family that seemed to have existed in history made Won Kyun an attractive target for historical distortion.

9. So with that, I've restored this page to how it originally was at the above posting. If you look at the text prior to my editing, you will see that everything 'good' mentioned about Won Kyun has been irresponsibly replaced with something remarkably 'bad' about Won Kyun. The article was also fraught with inconsistencies as the editors themselves did not have a full understanding of Won Kyun as a three-dimensional historical figure, preferring to report Won Kyun in the article as an antagonist caricature. Statement about often being drunk is taken from a source that is outdated and also very single-sided on the matter. There was no cite at all pertaining to Won Kyun concurring with the Japanese spy to get Yi Sun Shin arrested - and the paragraph right after explains in fact Won Kyun KNEW the Japanese spy was lying and only proceed with his cause of action due to the court and their orders. Senei's argument about Won Kyun's appointments are also incorrect - partially. Yi Sun Shin was also from a very distinguished family - a family that I descend from. (Deoksu Yi). Won Kyun prior to his military assignments was already a government magistrate.Whitearbiter 06:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Re-reverting and adding some more meat to the bone

Too bad there are some people who actually care about the truth behind the political agenda inserted by historians merely seeking attentions by misleading the uneducated public. Dan Kim 06:29, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Inserting no relevant footnotes and reciting state propaganda from the Park Chung Hee administration is not caring for the truth. Why would Seongjo glorify Won Gyun if he was a traitor? The Wonju Won family has never been of prominant political stature nor an overwhelming presence in the royal court to necessitate that sort of posthumous honor without Won Gyun deserving some sort of praise. What possible political agenda is available by misleading the uneducated public about Won Gyun? Above criticisms have been noted, but the article has been reverted back to its uneasy ambivalence about Won Gyun to better reflect both sides of the argument and South Korea's own rather schizophrenic interpretations of Won Gyun and Yi Sun-Shin. I am no fan of revisionist history, particularly the NE Asia project by China and continued attempts to sweep under Japanese atrocities in Korea, but there is sufficient evidence to suggest that the overtly negative portrayals of Won Gyun to the point of becoming a caricature is hardly appropriate within an attempt at consolidating world knowledge. Anecdotally, some Deoksu Yi descendants I know have conceded that the portrayal of Won Gyun has been excessively vilified in order to provide a juxtaposition for Yi Sun-Shin, who in all aspects, violated a royal directive. In contrast, anecdotally, it is appreciated generally by those of the Wonju Won clan that Yi Sun-Shin did a better job as a military leader and was a national hero.Whitearbiter 11:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Few quick notes - Since Won's family never had any form of major political power, it was easy for the king to uphold Won's family without worrying about any negative effects. Let's not forget King Seonjo needed to distract the public and the royal court to prevent them from seeing his own faults during the war. One of them was removing Yi from his post and instating Won. Now, by supporting and glorifying Won's case, the king was able to "argue" though not necessarily convince anyone that Won was am extraordinary combat leader with substandard subordinates. Let's not forget it is that same fleet Won almost completely lost in single naval engagement held undefeted record under Yi's command. I am not arguing that Won's case has been viciously attacked and dishonored thought the centuries and thus it may look like he is getting what he did not deserve. However, this is the rare case where one individual can be counted almost totally responsible for never-before-seen military disaster which he and only himself and the king is responsible for. You also said Won's clan member said "that Yi Sun-Shin did a better job as a military leader and was a national hero." and this is quite astonishing because Won's family published a biography of Won Gyun shortly after the war which glorified Won's military service beyond belief, and this biography is frequently quoted by Won's supporter in resent days. You also mentioned that the general consensus of Won and Yi are "rather schizophrenic interpretations". Those are quite strong words and I am now concerned if you are approaching this issue with neutral viewpoint - and for the record, I wasn't merely reciting President Park's propaganda, for that I personally do not favor him and most of my formal education was done nearly a decade after his death. I am going to revert the article back and I will revise it to more neutral stand within couple of days. In fact, why don't you help me edit this entry rather than just reverting it to your own version an living it in that way. What's the fun in that? Dan Kim 11:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

The point is if Won Gyun was in fact so incompetent and only a product of insider political promotion, he wouldn't be recognized by historians to be a rather successful military leader against the Jurchen, a fact that tends to be obfuscated by the fact he had indeed suffered quite stunning losses against the Japanese invasion. That said, there's a dispute in regards to the merits of blaming Won Gyun for the catastrophic loss v. considerations that the Seonjo court was in itself divided and incompetent. The fault of Won Gyun is listening to the directives of the Seonjo court in comparison to Yi Sun-Shin who refused to obey. While this may be interpreted as superior military talent by Yi Sun-Shin in comparison to Won Gyun, the counter to that interpretation considering the way Yi Dynasty politics works is that Won Gyun was at most at fault for obeying orders with a lack of flexibility to basically step into a trap.

In regards to the consideration of 'rather schizophrenic interpretations,' I qualify the matter on the basis that several historical markers regarding Yi Sun-Shin and Won Gyun, both hosted by the national gov't but under the auspices of the Deoksu Yi and Wonju Won families respectively, give very differing opinions about who was in the right in the matter. It was glaring particularly in the Yi Sun-Shin shrine in Cheonan, where it was clear that certain 'neutral' passages regarding the roles of Won Gyun and Yi Sun Shin were pasted over with a sticker grossly vilifying Won Gyun. As a descendant of both the Deoksu Yi clan and the Wonju Won clan, beyond extensive travel and historical site analysis, there is considerable anecdotal discussion regarding the historical authenticity of the Yi Sun-Shin/Won Gyun story as it is portrayed right now on both sides of the table, a linear descent from what was historical revisionism under the Park administration. This is, of course, in contrast to the more hard line groups in both families that tend to be militantly pro-Yi Sun-Shin or pro-Won Gyun.

One of the larger problems is that due to President Park's zeal to elevate King Sejong and Adm. Yi Sun-Shin as national heroes, there's a striking dearth of English-language documentation as well as really any scholarly analysis of Won Gyun's role as a military leader under the Seonjo court because it was either taboo for a decade, or the matter had become so entrenched in common history that document analysis refuting the prominence of a national hero was most likely frowned upon until more recent academic liberalizations. I don't seek to portray Won Gyun as a glorious military leader by any means, but he has had merits (as mentioned in the current version of the article) regarding the Jurchen campaigns and there's enough of a body of evidence to cast *at the very least* some doubt of the current story regarding the near-apotheosis of Yi Sun-Shin as a military hero and Won Gyun as a caricature foil. The question is, whether or not Won Gyun was an inflexibly loyal pawn of an incompetent court or if he was nothing more than a drunk, coward, incompetent military leader, etc. Just the record of his life taken as a whole suggests that for his complete lack of naval expertise, a lot of the portrayals of Won Gyun stem from historical vilification on several levels.

I'd be more than willing to work on the article together, but it seems, considering the dearth of documentation regarding Won Gyun's life, that removing some of the character judgments would be in order until we both develop an expertise in traditional Chinese and pore through court documentation, etc. or until the relevant documentation emerges. As it stands right now, the constant questioning of Won Gyun's competence from essentially birth to death lacks a balanced approach to a neutral article.Whitearbiter 03:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

It will take some time till I can conduct considerable research on this topic as I am currently engaged in more important projects that are more closely related to my trained field of experties but I'm more than willing to work on this as I find some extra time. As per the neutrality of this article, I do concur that my point of view is little distorted by my own personal view. As you mentioned, Won did achieved few successes during his service under General Yi Il. My opinion of Won as a competely incompetent naval commander will never change since his service record speaks for itself but it seems like I did, intentionally or unintentionally, ignored to note his own achivements - though there are not too many - which he rightfully deserve. When I come back to revise this article, I will try to maintain more neutral viewpoint and try not to make a direct comparson to Adm. Yi. However, I do not think Park's propaganda is entirely reponsible for the negative views towards Won. As I mentioned above Won's service record, at best, is not exactly impressive - both on land and at sea. Dan Kim 11:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Pruning of Bias

idkim has yet to offer any tangible edits to remove bias and distortion in his article, so I made considerable pruning of information that smacked of bias unless he can produce primary sources. Areas such as rumors about his death, which spanned two whole paragraphs, really had no point in an article, or at least in the size that it was produced and with the heavily anti-Won Gyun slant of the writer. I have also made several grammar edits such as the post-positive use of 'However.' Whitearbiter 09:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)