text:
Mensural notation

Mensural notation is the musical notation system used for polyphonic European vocal music from the late 13th century until the early 17th century. The term "mensural" refers to the ability of this system to describe precisely measured rhythmic durations in terms of numerical proportions between note values. Its modern name is inspired by the terminology of medieval theorists, who used terms like musica mensurata ("measured music") or cantus mensurabilis ("measurable song") to refer to the rhythmically defined polyphonic music of their age, as opposed to musica plana or musica choralis, i.e., Gregorian plainchant. Mensural notation was employed principally for compositions in the tradition of vocal polyphony, whereas plainchant retained its own, older system of neume notation throughout the period. Besides these, some purely instrumental music could be written in various forms of instrument-specific tablature notation.

Mensural notation grew out of an earlier, more limited method of notating rhythms in terms of fixed repetitive patterns, the so-called rhythmic modes, which were developed in France around 1200. An early form of mensural notation was first described and codified in the treatise Ars cantus mensurabilis ("The art of measured chant") by Franco of Cologne (c. 1280). A much expanded system allowing for greater rhythmic complexity was introduced in France with the stylistic movement of the Ars nova in the 14th century, while Italian 14th-century music developed its own, somewhat different variant. Around 1400, the French system was adopted across Europe, and became the standard form of notation of the Renaissance music of the 15th and 16th centuries. Over the course of the 17th century, mensural notation gradually evolved into modern measure (or bar) notation.

The decisive innovation of mensural notation was the systematic use of different note shapes to denote rhythmic durations that stood in well-defined, hierarchical numerical relations to each other. While less context dependent than notation in rhythmic modes, mensural notation differed from the modern system in that the values of notes were still somewhat context-dependent. In particular, a note could have the length of either two or three units of the next smaller order, whereas in modern notation these relations are invariably binary. Whether a note was to be read as ternary ("perfect") or binary ("imperfect") was a matter partly of context rules and partly of a system of mensuration signs comparable to modern time signatures. There was also a complex system of temporarily shifting note values by proportion factors like 2:1 or 3:2. Mensural notation used no bar lines, and it sometimes employed special connected note forms (ligatures) inherited from earlier medieval notation. Unlike in the earliest beginnings of the writing of polyphonic music, and unlike in modern practice, mensural notation was usually not written in a score arrangement but in individual parts.

Mensural notation was extensively described and codified by contemporary theorists. As these writings, like all academic work of the time, were usually in Latin, many features of the system are still conventionally referred to by their Latin terms.

Note values
The system of note types used in mensural notation closely corresponds to the modern system. The mensural brevis is nominally the ancestor of the modern double whole note (breve); likewise, the semibrevis corresponds to the whole note (semibreve), the minima to the half note (minim), the semiminima to the quarter note (crotchet), and the fusa to the eighth note (quaver). Very rarely, mensural notation also used yet smaller subdivisions, such as the semifusa (corresponding to the sixteenth note or semiquaver). On the other hand, there were also two larger values, the longa (quadruple whole note or long) and the maxima (or duplex longa, called a large in Britain), which are no longer in regular use today.

Despite these nominal equivalences, each note had a much shorter temporal value than its modern counterpart. Between the 14th and 16th centuries, composers repeatedly introduced new note shapes for ever smaller temporal divisions of rhythm, and the older, longer notes were slowed down in proportion. The basic metrical relationship of a long to a short beat shifted from longa–breve in the 13th century, to breve–semibreve in the 14th, to semibreve–minim by the end of the 15th, and finally to minim–semiminim (i.e., half and quarter notes, or minim and crotchet) in modern notation. Thus, what was originally the shortest of all note values used, the semibreve, has become the longest note used routinely today, the whole note.

Originally, all notes were written in solid, filled-in form ("black notation"). In the mid-15th century, scribes began to use hollow note shapes ("white notation"), reserving black shapes only for the smallest note values. This change was probably motivated by the change from parchment to paper for the most common writing material, as paper was less suited to holding large dots of ink.

Rests
As with the notes, the shapes of the rest symbols in mensural notation are already similar to their modern descendants (with the smaller values being successively introduced in the course of the period of mensural notation). The rest symbols of the larger values had a clear visual logic reflecting their time durations, based on the breve rest being a vertical stroke the length of one staff space. For the longa rests, a visual distinction was made depending on whether the longa was imperfect (two breves long) or perfect. Accordingly, their signs were visually twice or three times the length of a breve rest respectively, while the semibreve rest was half that length. Maxima rests, in turn, were groups of two or three longa rests combined. If several longa rests followed each other, groups of either two or three of them were written together on the same staff line to indicate whether they were supposed to be grouped into perfect or imperfect maxima units. (The modern forms of the maxima and longa rests refer to their use in traditional multimeasure rests.)

Ligatures
Ligatures are groups of notes written together, usually indicating melismatic singing of the same syllable over several notes. Ligature forms exist only for the larger note values from the semibreve upwards. Their use in mensural notation was a holdover from the earlier modal rhythmic system, of which they inherited some of their rhythmic meaning.

The rhythmic values of ligatures in modal notation had been based on a metric reinterpretation of the ligature neumes used since much earlier in the notation of Gregorian plainchant. In modal notation, ligatures represented stereotyped rhythmic sequences of short and long notes, typically involving groups of one or more initial short notes (i.e., breves) and one final long note (i.e., a longa). In mensural notation, this rule was generalized, with all other rhythmic combinations being classified in terms of deviation from this basic pattern. In medieval terminology, a ligature possessed perfectio ("perfection") if its final note was a longa (L), and it had proprietas ("propriety") if its first note was a breve (B).

Accordingly, a note pair of B–L (cum proprietate et cum perfectione) could be written with the most basic of ligature shapes, those inherited from plainchant, namely the descending clivis and the ascending podatus. Likewise, three-note groups of B–B–L could be written with some of the inherited ternary neumes, such as the porrectus (, direction down–up), the torculus (, direction up–down), or the scandicus (, direction up–up).

If, by way of exception, the first note was to be a longa, this was signaled by a reversal of initial stems: the descending clivis had its downward stem removed, while, conversely, the ascending podatus had one added to it ( or ).

On the other hand, if the final note was to be a breve (sine perfectione), this was signaled by a change in the noteheads themselves: the descending sequence of square heads was replaced with a single diagonal beam, while the ascending podatus had its second note folded out to the right. Both sequences correspond to the initial B–B segments of the ternary porrectus and torculus respectively.

If both exceptions co-occurred (sine proprietate et sine perfectione), both graphical alterations were combined accordingly.

In addition to sequences of longa and breve, ligatures could also contain pairs of semibreves (but not normally a single one). These were called cum opposita proprietate, and always marked by an upward-pointing stem to the left of the note pair.

There were also some alternate versions of the ascending ligatures. Thus, the basic ascending B–L podatus shape was replaced by one where the second note was both folded out to the right and marked with an extra stem, as if these two modifications were meant to cancel each other out. The ascending L–L (sine proprietate) was modified accordingly.

Ligatures could contain any number of notes. In multi-note ligatures, the rules about initial and final values are applied in analogy to those in the binary forms. In addition, the following rules hold for notes in all positions:

 * Any notehead with an upward stem to its left is the first of a pair of semibreves (cum opposita proprietate).
 * Any medial notehead with a downward stem to its right is a longa.
 * A prolonged, double-width notehead with or without a downward stem to its right is a maxima.
 * Any other notehead not covered by any of the rules above is a breve.

Mensurations
Mensural notation distinguished between several basic metric patterns of a piece of music, which were defined as combinations of ternary and binary subdivisions of time on successive hierarchical levels and roughly correspond to modern bar structures. The division of the semibreve into minims was called prolatio, that of the breve into semibreves was called tempus, and that of the longa into breves was known as modus. The division of the maxima into longas was called modus maximarum or modus maior; in the modern literature it is also sometimes called maximodus. Each of these levels could be either perfect (ternary) or imperfect (binary). The two types of prolatio were also known as "major prolation" and "minor prolation" respectively.

The perfect modus and maximodus became rare in practice after the 14th century. Of most practical importance were the subdivisions from the breve downwards, as by that time the semibreves rather than the breves had taken over the function of the basic counting unit. The four possible combinations of tempus and prolatio could be signaled by a set of mensuration signs at the beginning of a composition: a circle for tempus perfectum, a semicircle for tempus imperfectum, each combined with a dot for prolatio maior, or no dot for prolatio minor. These correspond to modern measures of, , , and respectively (assuming a reduction factor of 1:4 in transcription, i.e., mapping mensural minims to modern quavers), or alternatively , ,  and  respectively (with a reduction factor of 1:2). In each case, one breve corresponds to one modern bar. In addition, each of these basic patterns had a diminished (diminutum) variant, indicated by a vertical stroke through the sign. These so-called "cut signs" indicated a reduction of all temporal values by a factor of two. (The signs and  are the source of the modern "common time" and "alla breve" signatures  and  respectively.) A reversed semicircle  was usually understood to be the same as.

There were normally no special signs for indicating the higher divisions of modus and maximodus. However, groups of longa rests at the beginning of a piece (which occurred frequently, as often some voices in a polyphonic composition would enter later than others) could be used as an indicator of the intended meter. If longa rests were written across three staff spaces, they were perfect; moreover, if they occurred in groups of three written together on the same staff line they indicated perfect maximodus. Occasionally, if no voice happened to have a sufficiently long rest at the beginning of the piece, a dummy rest symbol of one maxima's worth of longae would be written to the left of the mensuration sign; in that case it was understood as part of the time signature and not actually executed as a rest.

Imperfection and alteration
The time value of some notes could change according to their immediate context in certain situations. The rules for this were developed on the basis of the typical rhythmic nature of music in the 13th century. Most music at that time followed the same basic metric pattern, which in modern notation would be written as a swift (or ) meter. Thus, melodies consisted mainly of ternary long notes (in modern notation, dotted minims), or alternating sequences of binary long notes and short notes (minims and crotchets), or groups of three short notes. In the 13th century, all of these were notated using only the longa and breve notes. A longa was automatically understood to fill a whole ternary metric group whenever it was in the neighborhood of other notes that did the same, i.e., whenever it was followed either by another longa or by a full group of three breves. When, however, the longa was preceded or followed by a single breve, then both filled a ternary group together. Thus, the longa had to be reduced to a value of two (it was "imperfected"). When, finally, there were only two breves in between two longae, then the two breves had to fill up a metrical group together. This was done by lengthening the second breve (brevis altera) to a value of two, while the first (brevis recta) kept its normal value.

At the earliest stage, this basic principle applied only to the relation between longa and breve. Beginning with Franco of Cologne, the same pattern was also applied between breves and semibreves, and finally, with Philippe de Vitry's theory of the Ars nova, it was taken yet another level down, to the newly introduced minims. From that time onwards, imperfection and alteration could happen on the level of breves and semibreves whenever the piece was in tempus perfectum, and it could happen between semibreves and minims if the piece was in prolatio maior. The divisions below the minim were invariably binary. Theorists developed an intricate set of precedence rules for when and how to apply imperfection, together with a complex terminology for its different types.

Normally, a note was imperfected by one of the next smaller order, e.g., a breve (B) by a semibreve (Sb), and thereby lost one third of its own nominal value (ex. [a–c]). This was called "full imperfection" (imperfectio ad totum). It could be induced either backwards (a parte post), or forwards (a parte ante, ex. [c]). If both readings were possible, backwards imperfection took precedence. The smaller unit could also be replaced by a group of yet smaller notes of equivalent length, e.g., a semibreve's worth of minims or semiminims (ex. [d]). Imperfection could also apply recursively, for instance with an Sb imperfecting a preceding B and being itself imperfected by a following minim (ex. [e]), if the meter was suitable (e.g., tempus perfectum and prolatio maior).

Imperfection typically occurred if two larger notes were separated by a single smaller unit, as in a sequence of B–Sb–B–Sb. If, however, they were separated by a group of either two or three of the smaller units, there was no imperfection: in the case of two, alteration was applied instead (ex. [f]); while in the case of three the group was simply left to fill the space of a perfect unit by themselves (ex. [g]). If, in turn, there was a longer sequence of four or more smaller units before the next longer value, then the first of them induced imperfection (ex. [h]). Imperfection was barred on any note that was followed directly by another of the same order (similis ante similem perfecta). Thus, the middle part of a sequence like could only be written using alteration (as shown in ex.[f]); the use of imperfection like in ex.(c) was excluded, because the presence of the subsequent breve blocked it.

The normal reading of the groups could be overridden by placing a separator dot (punctus divisionis) between the notes to indicate which of them were meant to form a ternary unit together (ex. [i]). If the separator dot was placed after a potentially ternary note (e.g., a breve in tempus perfectum), it typically had the effect of keeping it perfect, i.e., overriding an imperfection that would otherwise have applied to it. In these cases it was also called punctus perfectionis. Besides this, a dot could also be used in the same way as today: when it was placed after a note that was nominally binary (e.g., a breve in tempus imperfectum), it augmented it by one half (punctus augmentationis).

In some situations, imperfection could be induced not by a note of the next smaller order but by an even smaller one. For instance, a breve in prolatio maior, which could be thought of as being composed of two perfect semibreves, could be imperfected by an adjacent minim, taking away one third of one of its two halves, thus reducing its total length from 6 to 5 (ex.[j]). This was called "partial imperfection" (imperfectio ad partem). Imperfection involving note values two orders apart (e.g., a breve by a minim, or a longa by a semibreve) was called "imperfection of an immediate part" (ad partem propinquam); while the (rarer) case where it occurred across even greater distances (e.g., between a longa and a minim) was known as "imperfection of a remote part" (ad partem remotam, ex. [k]). Finally, partial imperfection could also apply from both sides of a long note at once (ad partes, ex [l–m]). In this way, a note that was nominally 9 beats long could be reduced to any value down to 4, or a note that was 12 beats long to any value down to 7.

Rests, unlike notes, had an invariable duration and could not be imperfected or altered; however, they could induce imperfection or alteration on a neighboring note.

Proportions and colorations
An individual composition was not limited to a single set of tempus and prolatio. Meters could be shifted in the course of a piece, either by inserting a new mensuration sign, or by using numeric proportions. A "3" indicates that all notes will be reduced to one-third of their value; a "2" indicates double tempo; a fraction "$3⁄2$" indicates three in the time of two, and so forth. The proportion 2 is usually understood to have the same effect as the use of a cut sign with a vertical stroke ( = ).

The use of numeric proportions can interact with the use of different basic mensurations in fairly complex ways. This has led to a certain amount of uncertainty and controversy over the correct interpretation of these notation devices, both in contemporary theory and in modern scholarship.

Another way of altering the metrical value of notes was coloration. This refers to the device of literally marking a note as rhythmically exceptional by writing it in a different color. In the earlier period, when normal notes were black, the exceptional ones were written in red, or sometimes hollow. In the later period, the practice was reversed; as the normal notes were now hollow, the exceptional ones were filled out in black. In either case, "colored" notes are understood to have $2/3$ of their normal duration, and are always imperfect with respect to their next smaller sub-divisions.

Coloration applied to a group of breves (ex. [a]) was known as color temporis, while that of a group of semibreves (ex. [b–c]) was called color prolationis. The resulting rhythmic effect, as expressed in modern notation, differs somewhat according to whether the affected notes were normally perfect or imperfect according to the basic mensuration of the music. Applied to perfect notes (ex. [a–b]), coloration creates the effect of a hemiola: three binary rhythmic groups in the space normally taken up by two ternary ones, but with the next smaller time units (semibreves in [a], minims in [b]) remaining constant. When applied to notes that were already imperfect according to their normal values (ex. [c]), coloration results in the effect of a group of triplets, with all rhythmic units reduced by two thirds. Another special form of coloration was that applied to a group of a single semibreve and a following minim, called minor color (ex. [d]). Whereas it would logically be expected to result in a triplet group, it was instead conventionally executed as a dotted group equivalent to a dotted minim and a semiminim (note that in the context of white notation, the colored – i.e., blackened – version of the minim in the minor color group happened to look just like a normal semiminim anyway, even though nominally it was considered a different type of note.)

The use of colored notes (at that time written in red) was introduced by Philippe de Vitry and flourished in the so-called ars subtilior of the late 14th century.

The example above, the chanson "Belle, bonne, sage" by Baude Cordier, written in a heart-shaped manuscript, is a rhythmically complex piece of ars subtilior. It uses several notation techniques for shifting between rhythms:
 * red notes: diminution $2/3$
 * shift to prolatio maior: here with implied augmentation minim→semibreve
 * white notes: diminution $1/2$ (two breves in the time of one)
 * proportion "3": diminution $1/3$
 * proportion "$8⁄9$": eight notes in the time of nine notes of the preceding bar

Mensural canons
Sometimes, music was written in such a way that the same line of music had to be performed under two or more mensuration schemes, typically leading to slower (augmented) and faster (diminished) versions of the same passage. In such cases, the music was typically notated only once, and several different mensuration signs were placed in front of it together, often supplemented with a verbal instruction of how it should be executed (called a "canon").

This technique could be applied both successively and simultaneously. Successive mensural canons were a characteristic feature of late 14th and early 15th century isorhythmic motets. A famous example is Nuper rosarum flores by Guillaume Dufay, where the tenor (notated all in longa and a few breve values) is performed first as tempus perfectum, then tempus imperfectum , then tempus imperfectum diminutum , and finally tempus perfectum diminutum , leading to length relations of 6:4:2:3 between the four repetitions.

Pieces that demanded simultaneous execution of versions of the same music, i.e., contrapunctal canons, were written by several composers of the Franco-Flemish school in the late 15th and early 16th century, such as Josquin des Prez, Johannes Ockeghem or Pierre de la Rue. Ockeghem's Missa prolationum is famous for systematically exploring different ways of combining pairs of voices in mensural canons. In the example given below, from the first "Kyrie" of this mass, both upper voices sing the same notated line, one reading it as "tempus imperfectum" and the other as "tempus perfectum". The two lower voices are similarly coupled with each other. Each of the four voices thus starts the piece in a different mensuration, leading to different bar length in the modern transcription. (The lower voices, which are written in prolatio maior, later shift to a meter where all semibreves are imperfected through black coloration, which means they end up having the same length as those of the upper voices after all.)

Pitch notation
Whereas the rules of notating rhythm in Mensural notation were in many ways different from the modern system, the notation of pitch already followed much the same principles. Notes were written on staves of five (sometimes six) lines, prefixed with clefs, and could be altered by accidentals.

Clefs
Mensural notation generally uses C and F clefs, on various lines. G-clefs, while used infrequently throughout the period, did not come into completely routine use until the later 16th century. Clefs were generally chosen to match the vocal range of a given voice, so as to avoid the need of ledger lines. Since middle C lies within that range for most voices, the C-clef is the one most frequently used. For mixed voices, a typical combination of clefs would have the bass clef (F on the fourth staff line) in the lowest voice, and tenor clef, alto clef and soprano clef (middle C on the fourth, third, and first staff line respectively) in the remaining voices. An alternative arrangement, known as chiavette, had the range of each voice shifted one third up, leading to a combination of F3, C3, C2 and G2 clefs.

Clefs originally bore shapes more or less closely resembling the letter they represented, but came to develop more ornamental shapes over time. In the F-clef, the two arms of the "F" were changed into two dots sitting to the right of a vertical stem. All three elements could be further modified; in particular, they were often styled as if they were note heads. The C-clef remained a simple, often square, "C"-like shape in most manuscripts, but its arms tended to become hollow rectangles or rhomboids in later manuscripts and especially in music prints of the 16th century. The G-clef developed a curved ornamental swash typically attached to the top of the letter, which ultimately evolved into the loop shape of the modern form.

Accidentals
The use of accidentals in medieval and renaissance music differs significantly from modern practice. Medieval notation used two accidental signs, the "b molle" and the "b durum". While the former was identical in form to the modern flat sign (♭), the latter could be written in forms that resemble either the modern sharp (♯) or the modern natural (♮), but these functions were not distinguished from each other as they are today. The b molle served to pick out the lower of two alternative semitone steps for a given note (e.g., a B♭ as opposed to a B♮), while the b durum served to pick out the higher one (e.g., B♮ as opposed to B♭, but also F♯ as opposed to F♮, etc.). The meanings of both signs thus overlaps with that of the natural sign today. Until the 16th century, only the flat signs regularly occurred as key signatures at the beginning of a staff (one or at most two flats). Both forms of accidentals could occur as temporary accidentals elsewhere; however, in practice they were often not written but left to the performer to infer according to the rules of counterpoint and musica ficta.

Miscellaneous symbols
Mensural notation may contain a number of other symbols.

Custos
The custos (pl. custodes, from the Latin for guard) appears at the end of the staff on or between the staff lines. It indicates the pitch of the first note that occurs on the following staff that belongs to that part relative to the clef of the current staff. This helps performers to prepare to sing the next note without having to look away from the current passage (analogous to the catchword in older printed books). If the next staff for the part occurs on the following page, two custodes may appear immediately next to each other.

In the earliest manuscripts, custodes appear as thin or small notes (somewhat like modern cue notes). By around 1500 a separate sign resembling a 'w' with a long upward tail had been developed, which briefly survived into the more modern musical notation of the early Baroque period (early 17th century).

Corona
The corona appears above the last note of the piece (or section). It is similar to the fermata in modern notation. It typically appears above the last note at each part of a piece to indicate the note should be held longer that its value indicates. If it appears somewhere other than at the end of a piece, typically a short pause is expected before proceeding with the notes after the note with the corona.

Signum congruentiae
The signum congruentiae indicates the position of entry of another voice. This is used to denote canons and rounds. Instead of writing out all parts, only one part is written out. The signum congruentiae indicates the point in each part where the following part must start from the beginning.

There is some variation in the way signa congruentiae are denoted.

History
The most important early stages in the historical development of mensural notation are the works of Franco of Cologne (c. 1260), Petrus de Cruce (c. 1300), and Philippe de Vitry (1322). Franco, in his Ars cantus mensurabilis, was the first to describe the relations between maxima, longa and breve in terms that were independent of the fixed patterns of earlier rhythmic modes. He also refined the use of semibreves:, while in earlier music, one breve could occasionally be replaced by two semibreves, Franco described the subdivision of the breve as ternary (perfect), dividing it either into three equal or two unequal semibreves (resulting in predominantly triplet rhythmic micro-patterns.)

Petrus de Cruce introduced subdivisions of the breve into even more short notes. However, he did not yet define these as separate smaller hierarchy levels (minim, semiminim etc.), but simply as variable numbers of semibreves. The exact rhythmic interpretation of these groups is partly uncertain. The technique of notating complex groups of short notes by sequences of multiple semibreves was later used more systematically in the notation of Italian Trecento music.

The decisive refinements that made notation even of extremely complex rhythmic patterns on multiple hierarchical metric levels possible were introduced in France during the time of the Ars nova, with Philippe de Vitry as the most important theoretician. The Ars nova introduced the shorter note values below the semibreve; it systematicized the relations of perfection and imperfection across all levels, down to the minim, and it introduced the devices of proportions and coloration.

During the time of the Franco-Flemish school in Renaissance music, use of the French notation system spread throughout Europe. This period brought the replacement of black with white notation. It also brought a further slowing of the duration of the larger note values, while introducing even more new small ones (fusa, semifusa, etc.). Toward the end of this period, the original rules of perfection and imperfection became obsolescent, as did the use of ligatures. During the 17th century, the system of mensuration signs and proportions gradually developed into the modern time signatures, and new notation devices for time measurements, such as bar lines and ties, were introduced, ultimately leading toward the modern notation system.

Modern use
Today, music from the mensural period is normally transcribed into modern notation for performance or study, using a modern score layout, bar lines and often a modernized choice of clefs. A number of special editorial conventions for such transcriptions are common, especially in scholarly editions, where it is desirable that the basic characteristics of the original notation should be recoverable from the modern text.

While 19th and early 20th century editions of Renaissance music often preserved the large note values of the originals, including breves and longs, most modern editions will use scaled-down note values in order to match modern reading habits regarding tempo and beat structure. For 16th century music, a frequent scheme is diminution by a factor of 2 (i.e., rendering semibreves as modern minims), in a modern alla breve bar. Older music might be diminished by a factor of 4 (rendering semibreves as crotchets) or sometimes 8 (rendering breves as crotchets). For 13th-century pieces, diminution by 16 (rendering breves as quavers) is also common. For 15th and 16th century music, bar divisions are usually chosen to match the time of a breve, while 14th century Ars nova pieces may be written in measures the length of a longa, and 13th century music in measures the length of a maxima.

To account for these editorial changes, scholarly editions often print a brief notation fragment in the original form in front of each staff at the beginning of a piece, called an "incipit", including the original clefs, mensuration signs, accidentals, and often the first few notes. Alternatively, an annotation defining the mapping scheme may be provided over the staff, e.g., "=".

Where ligatures occur in the original text, this is conventionally marked by square brackets over the transcribed notes, while the use of coloration is sometimes marked by broken brackets (⌜...⌝). Flats or sharps that are not written in the original but suggested by the editor are typically indicated by placing them above the note rather than in front of it.

A special issue in representing Renaissance music is how to deal with its characteristic free-flowing rhythms, where modern bar lines can seem to overly highlight what is part of the natural articulation points of the melodic units. To avoid the excessive use of ties and to allow for a notation more closely reflecting the original, some editions will print bar lines not across the staves, but only in the intermediate spaces between them (a convention sometimes referred to by the German term Mensurstrich), allowing notes to be read as lasting across a bar line.

For quoting mensural notation symbols in inline text, a number of characters have been included in the character encoding standard Unicode, in the "musical symbols" block. They are located at character codes U+1D1B6 through U+1D1CE.

References and further reading

 * [=Apel 1961, in German.]
 * [=Apel 1961, in German.]

title: Mensural notation


text:
Schönborn (state)

The County of Schönborn is a former principality (i.e. Herrschaft) of the Holy Roman Empire that held imperial immediacy and that was ruled by the House of Schönborn.

The state of Schönborn was located to the south of Bamberg and to the southeast of Würzburg.

The Schönborn family, originally from Schönborn, Rhein-Lahn, owned several fiefs in Southern Hesse. In 1661, Philipp Erwein, Baron von Schönborn (1607–1668), of Freienfels Castle near Weinbach, since 1654 also owner of Geisenheim, purchased the Herrschaft (territory) of Heusenstamm and built the new castle. In 1671 his son Melchior (1644-1717) acquired the fief of Reichelsburg and in 1701 inherited the Herrschaft Wiesentheid which was a small Imperial State and raised to a County in 1701. In 1717, his estate was partitioned into the state of Schönborn-Wiesentheid and the territory of Schönborn-Heusenstamm.

The state of Schönborn-Wiesentheid was mediatised in 1806; the House of Schönborn thus retained a partial sovereignty as well as sovereign rank. The Counts of Schönborn-Wiesentheid are still today residing at Wiesentheid Castle.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Schönborn (state)


text:
Talk:Mel Brooks

Voice Acting Roles
This may seem like an odd request, but where can I find a list of voice acting roles Mel Brooks did? I already know a few, such as Bigweld from Robots, Wiley the Sheep from Jakers!, and Grandpa Mel from Special Agent Oso, but I want to know his full voice acting discography so 1: I can see if he was in anything else because I think I heard him in other projects but don't know for sure, and 2: so I can include them on this page. If that's not too much to ask. If it is, don't bother. I mean that. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 03:28, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * See the list article Mel Brooks on screen and stage, and note the roles marked as "voice". Dimadick (talk) 11:09, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you kindly, friend. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 21:37, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

There is No Filmography on this page
Someone as famous and prolific as Mel Brooks should have a filmography on his Wikipedia page.

I was going to add it myself, but every time I edit/add to a Wikipedia page, it gets undone by admins. Dwilliamsiddall (talk) 17:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

 * You will find it on Mel Brooks on screen and stage, which the page links too.CRBoyer 18:19, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I just spent several minutes looking for it. The link could be displayed more prominently in the article, rather than buried under "Acting credits and accolades." Given that Mel Brooks is well known as a filmmaker, his filmography is incredibly well hidden. 81.105.46.48 (talk) 19:08, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Did you look under Acting Credits and Accolades?CRBoyer 19:40, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is perfectly clear from my comment, and the point stands. 81.105.46.48 (talk) 09:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Mel Brooks--Military Service
In the bio of Mel Brooks in the passage concerning his military service, there is this: " Brooks says he boarded the SS Sea Owl at the Brooklyn Navy Yard around February 15, 1945. A reporter for the United States Department of Defense writes that Brooks arrived in France in November 1944, and later to Belgium, serving with the 78th Infantry Division as a forward artillery observer. In December 1944, a short while later, Brooks was transferred to the 1104th Engineer Combat Battalion as a combat engineer, participating in the Battle of the Bulge." This makes no sense. He could not have boarded a ship in NY in Feb. 1945 and arrived in France in November, 1944 and then fought in the Battle of the Bulge in December 1944." I think that he arrived in Europe in 1945 and worked on clearing mines from the area where the Battle of the Bulge was fought, but I am not certain. 173.64.76.25 (talk) 01:23, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * This passage is based on two sources, one by Brooks and the one by David Vergun. They are correctly cited, but it seems one of them must be erroneous.In the article written by Brooks he says "AND THEN ONE NIGHT—I think it was around February 15 or 16, 1945—together with three or four hundred other guys, I boarded a troop transport at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, the SS Sea Owl." Later in that article, he says "I was lucky to get through Belgium on my way to Germany a couple of months after the Battle of the Bulge. Had I been born six months earlier, I probably would have been fighting in that and who knows what would have happened?"The Vergun article says In November 1944, he arrived in France and then Belgium, serving as a forward artillery observer with the 78th Infantry Division. A short time later, he was transferred to the 1104th Engineer Combat Group, participating in the Battle of the Bulge. He was sent to the forward edge of the battle areas, helping to clear German land mines so Allied forces could advance. On five occasions, Brooks' unit had to fight as infantry and suffered casualties doing so. I don't see any conclusion other than that either Brooks or Vergun is mistaken. The Vergun article is published in DOD News (Dec 29, 2021), so one would think it would be based on Dept. of Defense records. Brooks published his article on April 8, 2022. He might have forgotten the exact date of his departure for France, but it would be odd if he forgot fighting in the Battle of the Bulge. I guess our article should simply acknowledge that the sources disagree. CodeTalker (talk) 03:40, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mel Brooks


text:
Waitara, New South Wales

Waitara is a suburb in the Upper North Shore region of Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia 19 kilometres north-west of the Sydney central business district, in the local government area of Hornsby Shire.

History
Waitara is a word in the Māori language that means hail, pure water or hail, wide steps. (There is also a town in New Zealand named "Waitara".) The suburb takes its name from the Waitara River in New Zealand, where Australian troops fought as Imperial volunteers during the New Zealand Wars.

European settlement
Myles McRae once owned land in Southern Sydney, near Hurstville. When he sold that land to a development company, the manager used the name Waitara for the subdivision project. McCrae later bought land near Hornsby and when the railway station opened in 1895 he suggested the name Waitara, which was formally adopted.

Waitara Post Office opened on 1 October 1913 and closed in 1986. Waitara East Post Office opened on 1 June 1966 and closed in 1994.

Transport
Waitara railway station is on the North Shore railway line of the Sydney Trains network. It was originally known as Sandy Bank.

CDC NSW operates five bus routes through the suburb of Waitara:

 * 575: Macquarie University to Hornsby
 * 587: Westleigh to Hornsby
 * 589: Sydney Adventist Hospital to Hornsby
 * 591: St Ives to Hornsby
 * 600: Parramatta to Hornsby

Commercial and community facilities
Waitara is a centre for all things automotive, car dealerships both new and used, car maintenance and smash repairers.

Waitara has just one hotel, the Blue Gum Hotel. There has been a hotel on the site since 1884, but two fires have destroyed the older buildings. The current building dates from 1962. Waitara also has a Rugby League Club, called Asquith Rugby League Club, and a gym, called Millennium Health Club.

Police and Community Youth Clubs run a Performing Arts Centre in Edgeworth David Avenue (the latter is named after the scientist Edgeworth David).

Schools

 * The public school is Waitara Public School, which has two O.C (opportunity class) classes. (Located in Wahroonga).
 * The Catholic school is Our Lady of the Rosary Primary School. It was established in approximately 1918 and was located on the Pacific Highway opposite the railway station. It has since been relocated to Yardley Avenue.

Churches

 * Our Lady of the Rosary Catholic Church was originally situated on the Pacific Highway opposite Hornsby railway station. It was later relocated to 27 Yardley Avenue. It has since become the cathedral church of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Broken Bay and is known as Our Lady of the Rosary Cathedral, Waitara. It is the namesake of the hymn tune Waitara.
 * Waitara is home to a large Korean Catholic Community Church, which has produced the youth activity group WCKYS. The latter can be divided into three subgroups: Kerygma, J.O.Y. and Youth Legion of Mary. Kerygma group organises the youth mass, while J.O.Y. (Jesus Others and You) consists of teachers of Waitara Korean Sunday School.
 * The Anglican Church of Waitara (All Saints) is located on the corner of Burdett Street and Palmerston Road. In addition to church services, there are a number of other events during the week including ESL classes, children's groups, youth groups and Bible studies.
 * The Seventh-day Adventist Church, located at the corner of Park Avenue and Alexandria Parade, was established in 1903.

Population
The 2021 census community profile for Waitara revealed roughly equal proportions of men (48.4%) and women (51.6%) in a total population of 7,837. The median age of the Waitara population was 36 years of age, which was similar to the national median of 38. The most common ancestries in Waitara were Chinese 25.5%, Indian 17.0%, English 12.3%, Australian 10.3% and Korean 4.8%. 31.4% of people were born in Australia, the next most common countries of birth were India 16.2%, China 14.7%, South Korea 3.6%, Philippines, 3.5% and Iran 3.4%. 30.6% of people spoke only English at home. Other languages spoken at home included Mandarin 15.5%, Hindi 7.0%, Cantonese 6.2%, and Persian (excluding Dari) 3.8%. The average household had 2.4 people. The most common responses for religion were No Religion 34.3%, Hinduism 19.2%, and Catholicism 13.6%.

title: Waitara, New South Wales


text:
Quinhamel

Quinhamel is a city in Guinea-Bissau and the capital of the Biombo Region. It has a population of 2,887 (2008 est).

title: Quinhamel


text:
Talk:Glueball

Comments
This page has been converted to a redirect to exotic mesons. If in future there is more information on glueballs, then this page could before an article in itself. Bambaiah 08:19, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Glueball gravity
Add data on the main article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:410A:DC00:6806:7598:BC5C:AA56 (talk) 04:20, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

"that has not been confirmed experimentally"
Isn't the claim that the existence of glueballs has not yet been confirmed experimentally contradicted in the next paragraph, which links to a paper that says the odderon was observed experimentally with a high degree of certainty (5.3 sigma)? 2601:801:480:3F90:556:D9C0:71DC:684A (talk) 07:10, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Ablikim et al detection over 11 sigma
See “Determination of Spin-Parity Quantum Numbers of X(2370)as 0−+ from J/ψ→γK0SK0Sη′” by Ablikim et al of the BESIII consortium. Looks solid but I’m far from a cutting edge particle physicist…

https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.181901

Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 05:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Glueball


text:
Talk:Tang Soo Do

Alleged copyright infringement does not exist
Peter Rehse blanked the page on June 4, 2012 claiming copyright infringement from http://www.btsdi.co.uk/tanghistory.html. He also archived the entire talk page of this article. The page he listed very clearly states the source of the material being in the creative commons i.e. public domain. Most likely, the website copied the material from wikipedia. More care should be given before indiscriminately deleting articles on wikipedia. Now we have to investigate if any other articles were improperly deleted by this user. Gx872op (talk) 15:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Restored although there is a clear statement of copyright to Jeff Cockram at the bottom of the page.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:28, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The website copyright has "Unless otherwise stated" in itty bitty font and the "otherwise stated" citation was located at the top linking to the creative commons. So we should be able to get rid of the warning box on the article now? 67.165.86.197 (talk) 05:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure - removed. I still think both the History and Ranking sections could do with a re-write. Right now both read very heavy.Peter Rehse (talk) 05:53, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

HA. Thanks for removing... I think the whole article is crap. I try to make edits on source material and people revert it back. I've given up. Hell, even the guy who put himself up as a notable practitioner has linked his own name to a page about someone else..... Thanks for putting effort into it, the TSD world isn't ready for it yet though! 67.165.86.197 (talk) 04:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Understood but I also will take the cowards way out and just limit myself to nudging in the right direction. It really is hard for some people to understand what is good in an encylopedia and what belongs in a manual or club website. I choose my battles and this isn't one of them. Cheers.Peter Rehse (talk) 06:12, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Tang Sou Dao
I have recently, with my son, joined a Tang Sou Dao club near our home in Oxfordshire, UK. 'Tang Sou Dao' is the spelling used by the club, or rather, family of clubs. One thing that I noted to my surprise - because I had constantly encountered T.S.D. referred to as Korean martial art, and had assumed as much for the first few weeks - is that this specific style lays emphasis in its (indirect) Chinese heritage, via Korean T.S.D. In particular, as stated in the link below, there was a deliberate aim to re-introduce Chinese techniques and ideas into Korean T.S.D.

http://www.tangsoudao.com/history.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.175.183 (talk) 21:00, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct. Although you can pronounce the Hanja/Kanji for Tang Soo Do in a Chinese way, this school is basically a descendant art of Tang Soo Do. This concept on the history page that the art owes everything to China is a stylistic creation of the website you mention, and isn a one-sided misrepresentation of the history of Tang Soo Do. This school teaches Tang Soo Do with some additional changes, and then calls it's art "Tang Shou Dao Ren Yi Yu Kwan". Rees (talk) 19:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Funakoshi changing Kara charachter from Tang to Open
The section attributing the change of Karate from Tang to Open is inaccurate or misleading at best. Although Funakoshi was a proponent of this change, he was not the only one to suggest it. During a meeting in 1936 of Okinawa's most elite masters, they supported the idea that Karate should become more universal and a world wide practiced art - and supported the notion that Karate was more than just kicking and punching. Hence they agreed with the motion to change the meaning of "Karate" by changing the first Hanja or Kanji to Kara - "Open".

Furthermore, this division between "Tang" and "Open" can be seen in the fist Kwan's in Korea: Some like Hwang Kee supported Won Kuk Lee's use of "Tang Soo Do" while others that were Toyama's students seemed to have preferred using "Kong Soo Do". This is a strange irony, as I believe Funakoshi began using "open hand way" before Toyama did!

I believe this section gives the impression that Funakoshi regarded the Tang/China reference as "degrading" is misleading. It gives the impression that he was referring to the Chinese people or their culture, or had a political motive for the change, but instead to the idea that Karate as simply a punching/kicking art instead of a way or "do" was degrading as it did not fully capture the essence of the art as being a path to enlightenment.

See this groundbreaking translation of the 1936 meeting minutes between the Okinawan Karate Masters: http://irkrs.blogspot.ca/2013/08/the-1936-meeting-of-okinawan-karate.html

I think it's important to make sure that mistakes are not made as many of Funakoshi's students were Korean and studied at universities in Japan (Won Kuk Lee for example). Others were Kanken Toyama's students (Yoon Byung-in) and were hugely important in post-WW2 Korea.

Rees (talk) 18:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Romanization
Why is it Tang Soo Do? I can see why for historical reasons in the school itself, but to properly romanize it, it should be Tang Su Do or Dang Su Do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:100:8600:4E20:DD3F:92AD:4EA9:9B39 (talk) 12:16, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * JohnM.jpg

Under-the-radar names
There's recently been persistent attempts by anonymous editors trying to put TSD practitioners of lacking notability. Particulary one User:74.94.200.49 is hell-bent on throwing names like John Mogart Jr, who - while is a somewhat reputable TSD artist - I'm not convinced of this and other names should be thrown in here. Per practises of wikipedia, it'd be prefferable if these names like John W. Mogart Jr and others would have *good entries* to justify there inclusion on the notable practitioners list. Otherwise me and others are simply forced to remove these over and over again, even at risk of admins getting involved. TrickShotFinn (talk) 07:05, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Irrelevant material
A large amount of material in the 'History' section (about the development of the kwans and taekwondo) is not directly relevant to the history of tang soo do, which has now evolved largely independently of taekwondo. In the section 'Present', a subsection labelled 'Other' is garbled to the point of incoherence. It seems to be a puff piece, designed to promote the agenda of an unnamed practitioner and to belittle taekwondo and traditional tang soo do. Billtkd (talk) 19:21, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tang Soo Do


text:
Talk:Tamna

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tamna. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040926154529/http://english.jeju.go.kr/ to http://english.jeju.go.kr/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:43, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Stop please
Princepsofeurope and Future Perfect at Sunrise, stop deleting things I put which are correct, Tamna’s name means island country, and Guernsey Is an island country, and the rest were actual ancient countries. Vecnussybadussy (talk) 06:36, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, Vecnussybadussy, please stop putting those things there. Saying that something is both "a state ... based on an island" and "an island country" is useless pedantry at best, even more useless tautology at worst. Same for all those additions of "an empire and a country" in other articles. None of those additions are of any value. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, Future Perfect at Sunrise, if it’s useless pedantry than why do you allow people to describe Jersey and Isle of Man as island countries and that’s not useless pedantry?? Also you told an editor to “f off” before. FavonixanIsMyFavorite (talk) 16:08, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Also I don’t know who Vecnussybadussy is but I don’t know how you can call one thing pedantry and another thing not pedantry. FavonixanIsMyFavorite (talk) 16:11, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

List of Tamna rulers needs citations
Will look into this, but we can't get any verification yet on the list of Tamna rulers (Which is extensive and doesn't seem the most reliable). Sunnyediting99 (talk) 19:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

 * At least a good chunk of it is listed on Samguk Sagi, to my knowledge Miffedpenguin (talk) 08:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tamna


text:
User talk:Petrus4

Steve Hassan
Hi Petrus, I left a note for you about it on Talk:Steve Hassan. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 08:21, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Richard Stallman
You recently added two comments to the Talk:Richard Stallman page. They are in response to archived discussion that refers to material that has now changed on the article. You previous post to the page was to more recently posted material.

It may be more effective to start a new section responding to the existing material on the page rather than clutter the discussion page with off-topic material. -- 21:05, 21 January 2006 User:216.114.169.1

I noticed you deleted my link to ESR's article. I'm curious...if I hadn't included the comment about wondering when it'd be reverted, would you have left it there?

I suppose there's more than one ingredient in the recipe for flamebait. Cheers, --Ashawley 00:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC) [aka User:216.114.169.1]

 * 1) Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed undone by an automated bot. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. If you feel you have received this notice in error, please contact the bot owner  // Tawkerbot2 14:14, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 and the reversion of your edit(s)
Hello, Petrus4. You may have noticed User:Tawkerbot2 reverted one or more of your edits and perhaps left a message on your talk page. Wikipedia recently experienced a database malfunction, causing Tawkerbot2 to misidentify legitimate edits; hence the reversion of your edit(s) and the message. The bot has been temporarily disabled until the problems are rectified. Thanks. —Wayward Talk 18:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Lets Talk Bogan
Hey, Just left you a note on Talk:Bogan-- DennyCrane Talk 05:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Bogan
If you are still unhappy with the content in contention being removed, can you please discuss what to do with it on the talk page? If it is original research, as I and Asa01 assert it to be, we are justified in removing it. Wikipedia policy stipulates that statements subject to dispute must have sources and speculation and original research should not be added. Thank you. 02:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Batman Begins as Hard SF
For me, Batman Begins is Hard SF. See my comment on the Talk page: Talk:Hard_science_fiction. Davichito (talk) 16:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: The tragedy that has befallen Wikipedia
I'm not sure why you're leaving these messages on my talk page but I thought I'd let you know that I can't do anything to help you, and probably won't be reading them. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Petrus4


text:
Skirö

Skirö is a small village in Vetlanda Municipality in Sweden. It lies 25 km from the town of Vetlanda in the southeastern part of Jönköping County and has a population of about 70 (2010). Situated in a beautiful setting around Lake Skirö, it was dubbed Smålands trädgård ("The Garden of Småland") by Carolus Linnaeus. It was also the birthplace of botanist Eric Ragnar Sventenius (1910–1973).

From 1952 to 1970 Skirö was part of Nye Municipality. Since 1971 it has been in Vetlanda Municipality. The village is about 12 km across and 7 km wide with a total area of ca 44 hectares. There are some large mansions such as Wallby and Gölberga not far from the village.

title: Skirö


text:
Glaciated rock

A glaciated rock is a rock that shows evidence of having been exposed to a glacier. Generally it has striations or deep scratches, caused more by the debris being carried by the glacier than by the ice itself. Glaciated rocks may also be erratics - that is, not belonging to the local rocks but having been transported there by the glacier.

Where a present-day glacier is retreating, its former extent can be measured by distribution of the glaciated rocks. More significantly, glaciated rocks in any area mean that it has been under ice at some stage. Thus, they have produced evidence that Saudi Arabia was once covered by an ice sheet.

title: Glaciated rock


text:
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Prophet Yahweh

It looks like the majority have voted keep, with only one vote for delete. I have no idea why the debate should continue...


text:
Talk:Philip Crane

oops, just noticed this page duplicates Phil Crane. I guess it needs to be made a candidate for deletion, or maybe merging. 08:25, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Philip Crane


text:
User:Antares33712/Nichole Arsenault

Nichole Elizabeth Arsenault, born April 9 1985 in Flint, Michigan, is an American model of French-Canadian and German descent. Note that her name is pronounced Nicole (IPA: [neː cθl] ), with the 'h' being silent (as in the male counterpart, Nicholas). Nichole is best known for her "thick", ethnic like body shape, with fuller breasts and wider hips than most Caucasian female models. A sharp, distinct departure from the anorexic sub-zero sized body shapes of current Hollywood, Nichole has embraced her womanly curves. Nichole took time off in 2003 to give birth to her first child, daughter Alexis Marie.

title: User:Antares33712/Nichole Arsenault


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Literature about Dar al-Manasir

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was merge. Ingoolemo  talk  04:55, 2005 Jun 20 (UTC)

Literature about Dar al-Manasir
This article has no encyclopedic content. RickK 08:27, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC) you are right, it is now merged to Dar_al-Manasir David Haberlah 09:30, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to Dar_al-Manasir or Dar_al-Manasir. Nateji77 08:38, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Already merged. JamesBurns 11:29, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * If it has been merged then this page should be turned into a redirect . - SimonP 21:11, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * It's safe to delete; the author who contributed all of the information to the article under consideration is the same one who merged the articles. Thus the authorship information is preserved, and we don't have GFDL problems. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 22:46, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.  Please do not edit this page .


text:
Talk:Korean martial arts

Korean original forms of martial arts
Glad to hear it is outdated with poor facts, why don't you work on improving it now??

Ancient Korean martial art existed before Japanese military occupation. Even though Japanese military government outlawed Koreans practicing Korean art. Koreans still practiced Korean martial art. Reader must always remember during 36 or 40 years of Japanese military occupation over Korea. Japanese outlawed everything People, Language, Culture, Food, History, and Martial arts. Japanese tried very very hard to erase everything Korean as much as possible. In the end look at the reality. Korean race still exist, Korean language and culture still exist, Korean food and martial art still exist. Japanese history changed so many times its really hard to believe that Japanese martial art influenced Korean martial arts. If Japanese culture has given Koreans that much of strong impact then Korean language, Korean food, Korean culture, and Korean history, Korean art must have strong Japanese influence. But it does not. So how can Japanese Karate influence Korean Taekwondo?? The word Taekwondo is modern and simplified form of combining all ancient Korean martial arts into one. Korean Pumse ( Kata Jpn), Korean Kicks, Korean hand strikes, are very different from Shotokan Karate. Only similiarity would be both are Stand position fight martial arts and they have similiar uniform.

Taekwondo is divided into two system. North and South Korean styles.

ITF Taekwondo ( North Korean style): Full contact sparring system. More self defense oriented martial art. Much emphasize on accuracy and discipline.

WTF Taekwondo ( South Korean style): Point system contact sparring system. Morea health sport oriented martial art. Much emphasize on flexability and discipline.

History between ITF and WTF is split into two ideology. Only way for me to correct and provide updated information with accuracy is first two Taekwondo association must unite and agree one united Taekwondo history. North Korea has all valuable information regarding to Ancient Korean martial art book ( Korean martial art Bible). Until Historians or Taekwondo martial art researchers need those information to provide accurate information on Korean martial arts including Taekwondo. Many Japanese nationalist get a kick out Shotokan karate influencing Taekwondo but in reality Karate was originated in Okinawa not Japan. Okinawa was under Chinese cultural influence. Please keep in mind " Kyukushinkai Karate" Mas Oyama was Korean. He was influenced by Korean and Chinese martial arts. He also incorporated Taekwondo kicks into Kyukushinkai karate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Korea4one (talk • contribs) 13:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I have read Wikipidia Taekwondo article. Its outdated with poor facts. Specially the Taekwondo history. Taekwondo is Korean martial art. Japanese military government colonialized Korea for 36 or 40 years could not even destory Korean language and culture. How can Japanese martial art take over Korean art??

Korean martial art Taekwondo existed. Tang Soo Do is Korean translation of Karate. When Korean men were drafted into Japanese army they studied Tang Soo Do / Karate. Whereas Taekwondo was practice among Korean commoners. Buddhist monk practice Taekwondo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Korea4one (talk • contribs) 14:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Glad to hear it is outdated with poor facts, why don't you work on improving it now. User5802 22:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Recent research in Korea has shown time and time again that martial arts forms in Korea were in place for centuries, and did not arise in copying of Japanese forms. The occupation of Korea by Japan and the closing down of traditional Korean art schools from 1905-1945 is little known in the west. Citations will be added showing that the Korean martial arts were originating forms, despite the very frequent errors made in claiming Japanese origination for every kind of art form in Korea: from swords to ceramics.

Citations to be appended soon.

POofYS

Should Mudo redirect here? -- Visviva 08:28, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Dubious content
There have been a lot of suspiciously POV-seeming additions to this page recently. Unfortunately, I don't know nearly enough about this area to tell fact from opinion/fiction. Please check this article for veracity and neutrality. -- Visviva 12:04, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

National origin "arguments"
Taekwondo is Korean martial art. Korean martial art Taekwondo existed in Korguyro Kingdom.

Taekondo is has two system ITF and WTF.

1) ITF Taekwondo ( North Korean sytle) Full contact. Rely on Traditional discipline and self defence, combat. Less Sport.

2) WTF Taekwondo ( South Korean style) Point Sparring, Sport excercise martial art ( Olympic Sport) Self defence. Rely on Sport Self defence. Less combative.

3) Hapkido: Korean mixed art. Some people say Hapkido is similir to Aikido. Major difference is kicks. Hapkido has many kicks that Aikido don't have. ( Similiarity: Joint Locks, Throws, Take downs, Weapons). ( Difference: Hapkido has many kicks). Sparring system Hapkido is full contact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Korea4one (talk • contribs) 14:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

 * It's kind of annoying that you keep posting at the beginning of these discussions. Why not contribute some information in the main article, and post your comments at the end of the discussion like everyone else. User5802 22:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Aryment no. 1: "The founder (in terms of techniques) of Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu as seen on lineage charts was named Shinra Saburou Minamoto no Yoshimitsu (新羅三郎源義光) - "Shinra" uses the same Chinese characters as the name of an ancient country that was on the southern part of the Korean peninsula, Shilla, indicating that he may have been of Korean descent (or at least had strong relations with Korea), and thus making this art also originally Korean."

Like I asked earlier, whom is this utterly unfounded and ridiculous "argument" credited to? To repeat, the "Shinra" of the alias of Minamoto no Yoshimitsu ( a member of the dominant Minamoto clan) was taken from the name of a shinto shrine called Shinra Myojin (新羅明神) where he celebrated his coming of age, and his lineage has nothing to do with the state of Shilla (cf. ja:源義光). This is a very basic fact of Japanese history that you could find even on regular Japanese dictionaries (cf. ). It doesn't take a historian to see the stupidity of this so-called "argument." There is a Korean newspaper article that seems to show the origin of this argument:. It is a misreading of a statement made by Kenji Tomiki (富木謙治), a professor of Waseda University. Tomiki only said that the founder of Aikido was a man by the name of "Shinra Saburou Minamoto no Yoshimitsu." The Korean reader interpreted the name as meaning a man by the name of "Minamoto no Yoshimitsu" who was a "Saburo" (supposedly the name of some office) of the state of "Shinra," although in reality "Shinra Saburou" was only an alias of Yoshimitsu derived from the name of the shrine.

 * Argument no. 2: Old Korean documents write about Yusul (written with the same Chinese characters as Jujutsu), although Yusul was no longer practiced for a long period of time; thus, Yusul may have been created in Korea, imported to Japan (transliterating the name to Jujutsu).

Here goes another ridiculous nonsense. Who said this really? To repeat again, "Jujutsu" is rather a newer term that was began to be used from around the Meiji period to group together a great variety of schools and systems that had been practiced and developed from much earlier times under their own unique names, and it's not like there has been a single martial art system called "jujutsu" from the antiquity. Black Belt magazine article writes: "All styles of jujutsu founded after 1868 fall into the modern classification... Before the name "jujutsu" was adopted, the art had various appellations such as kumu-uchi and yawara because the training was dependent on the school, which was allied with various feudal families. Kano traced the roots of jujutsu to the early 1600s. The oldest progenitor was takenouchi-ryu, reportedly originated by Takenouchi Hisamori in 1532. This branch taught kogusoku, or the art of seizing, which is different from pure jujutsu. The takenouchi-ryu may be regarded as the primal system for the teaching of arts similar to jujutsu" (Brian Jacobs, August 2004).

Now, it's only a big disgrace to the authority of Korean martial arts if you credit these two "arguments" to them. If you want to keep them on here, that's fine. But they have to be presented as bogus nonsense as they are. I wouldn't keep such nonsense if I were a big fan of Korean martial arts. Hermeneus (talk) 23:02, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

And yes, every description of Wikipedia articles ought to be well-founded and sourced. That's what "References" and "Bibliography" sections are for. It's your burden of proof to show the credibility of text if someone contested its credibility and you still want to include it in a Wkipedia article.

 * you're attacking a version i'm not defending. i changed the wording a lot to try to accomodate you.
 * where are your sources for the claims that you make? the links you provided do not support your contentions.
 * i'm not defending the pov of the argument, i just would like to see the basis for your edit. it just seems to me the article just includes an "argument," described as an "argument" not stated as fact, & i'm fine with you adding counterarguments, described as counterarguments. if you want to state something as fact, then you have the burden of proof.
 * are you saying the proper, objectively fair procedure is to change/delete first, & the burden is on people trying to restore the previous version? because if that's the principle, after i declare that i personally dispute every sentence of History of Japan, i request that you blank that page & force editors who try to restore it to source & justify every sentence. no, that's not how it works. if you want to change the existing version, YOU have the burden of proof.
 * the text is not my pov or argument, just my attempt to briefly summarize the "arguments" while also reflecting your pov. so if you have reputable sources, i have no problem at all changing or deleting it. if you have only pov sources, i have no problem adding counterarguments identified as "counterarguments." Appleby 23:19, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
 * 1. Your version is no better. In fact it could be worse since you have zero knowledge on the issue yourself and changed only the wording with no source to back up. 2. Those links substantiate my claims just fine. What part did you not get? 3.4. It's quite proper to delete utterly unfounded and ridiculous nonsense like those arguments. Hermeneus (talk) 23:29, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

did you even read my version? can you translate the japanese link? the newspaper link just retells the korean version, so actually serves as a citation for the existing argument. you didn't provide any links for the jujitsu issue. none of them support your story or conclusion that you want to put in the article. until you do, your edits look like utterly unfounded & ridiculous nonsense. will you agree to blank History of Japan if i personally dispute it?Appleby 23:41, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
 * 1. The linked page says that Shinra Saburo (新羅三郎) is an alias (異名) of Minamoto no Yoshimitsu (源義光), and that he was so called because he celebrated his coming of age (元服) at the shrine "Shinra Jinja" (新羅明神). This is from Daijirin (大辞林), one of major Japanese dictionaries in Japan, published from Sanseido (三省堂). 2. The Black Belt article says that the martial art known as "Jujustu" today was originally developed and practiced under different names, and that one of them, takenouchi-ryu, is the oldest progenitor. You are claiming that a certain Korean martial art called "Yusul" is the origin of Japanese jujutsu because "Yusul" is the Korean reading of the same word "Jujutsu" and so that this is the sign of continuity between Yulsa and Jujutsu. That the old progenitors of Jujutsu in Japan were called different name than jujutsu flatly contradicts your naive premise. 3. Go ahead and see for yourself. Whether deleting a text will be considered legitimate or an act of vandalism depends on the reasons you provide. Hermeneus (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

ok, thanks, now i'm convinced. but i'm thinking you'd get a similar reaction if you edited any part of History of Japan, calling it "utterly bogus" "urban legend", without citing any publications. Appleby 00:53, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Just a few comments - I guess that I added these "arguments" to the article originally - not because I believe in them, but because a few people had seemed adamant about a "Korean origin" blurb, and so to assuage them (as they can always re-add any content that is deleted), this content was added, dubious or not. In any case, the sources that Hermeneus found are very good for argument number 1 (the Korean article and Shinra Saburo's coming-of-age). Although argument 2 is also by no means a strong argument intrinsically, it would be helpful to have primary sources (showing the oldest extant examples of usage of the word "jujutsu" in Japanese writings or "yusul" in Korean writings) so that we can more properly refute the argument (Black Belt doesn't really have a lot of clout).

Edededed 02:28, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Modern Korean martial arts
The section "Modern Korean martial arts" needs comprehensive checking regarding its claims and lack of sources. Most of the historical facts presented there have been widely spread in the KMA scene around the world but as far as I know there has never been any documented or at least unbiased source to prove them. Besides that most of the facts now marked with "dubious" or "citation needed" are historically incoherent. I myself have been trying to get some coherent fact out of these stories spread throught the KMA community (at least some solid reason other than simply artificially promoting and oversizing KMA's role in the Marcial Arts world). So far not a hint other than the obvious.

 * ALERT: During the past several years that I have viewed this page on Korean Martial Arts, I have been disappointed to to see contributions that reify the Japanese propaganda of 1910-1945, during its occupation of Korea, and seek to promote a misplaced agenda of identifying Japanese origins of Korean martial arts. It is alarming that such culturally insensitive and ignorant comments continue to be made, particularly on this page.  Please reference works that are now available in English and on the web, such as 5,000 Years of Korean Martial Arts: the heritage of the hermit kingdom's warriors by R. Barry Harmon.

 * Japanese colonialism sought to purge Koreans of their traditional culture and identity and suppressed the practice of Korean martial arts, often co-opting these as their own and obfuscating its true Korean origins. R. Barry Harmon writes, "... colonial influence may be seen studying the development of Tae Kwon Do. Tae Kwon Do is widely believed to be a continuation of Tae Kyun and Soo Bahk Ki but evidence to the contrary has been found since the [Japanese] name [Tae Kwon Do] was first used [after the occupation, while the word 'do' or 'the way' was never used in pre-colonial times].  Incorrect translations of the ancient text Mooye Tobo Tong-ji (An Illustrated History of Korean Martial Arts) referring to the term do is not uncommon and helps to propagate the incorrect history.
 * "Self-serving translations have been commissioned by regimes with agendas opposed to the traditional Korean martial art spirit and by individuals wishing to further their own interests. These have done a great disservice to Korean history by emphasizing outside influences and minimalizing indigenous culture.  Understanding the colonial influence is important not as part of an argument over what style is older or better but to make clear the distinct differences of historical standing.  The unique nature if the Korean fighting system and its impact on other martial arts becomes obvious only after intense research."
 * You can read parts of the book on Google at: . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gndr (talk • contribs) 17:05, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

There is absolutely no record of Japanese illegalizing the practice of Korean martial arts. Gungdo and Ssireum flourished under the Japanese. Tae Kwondo and Hapkido did not exist until after the liberation. All of the narrative above is nationalist propaganda that presupposes Tae Kwon Do and Hapkido existing previous to the intorduction of Karate, Aikido, and Judo to the peninsula during the occupation. For all the Kroean nationalists arguing for Japanese illegalizing Korean martial arts, the onus is on them to provide that edict. Not possioble, as there was no such edict. This is similar to Koreans in 1960s claiming that Japanese had cut down all the trees in Korea. But phoots of Korea from 1890s taken by American journalists shows even LESS trees than there were in 1945. Blaming Japan for all of Korea's shortocmings is not the way to overcome history. Krusader6 (talk) 17:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Hanja
Does anyone have a first-person source (i.e. from the creator of the style) for the Hanja for Hanmudo? The version I wrote in originally was from a magazine (in which they interviewed the said creator) - but I suppose it is possible that they made a mistake in transcription? Or he lied? In any case, they surely did not write "韓武道" in that magazine article. If someone could just go and ask him, that would be very nice. :)

Edededed 01:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about martial arts, but this official-looking website clearly uses 韓. The aforementioned site also indicates that the style was founded in the 19th century -- just how old was that magazine?  :-)
 * If the interview was in a language other than Korean, the alternate character for han might have just been a transcription error. -- Visviva 04:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

There is also hanmudo.com the style founded by Dr.He Young Kim, the style probably most famous. He also writes the name of his style with 韓. 韓 stands for Korea (see names of korea). Kbarends 06:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Subak
In the Wikipedia article Taekkyon, it says '...subak was divided into different segments, including yusul (a grappling art), kicking, and so forth, with Taekkyon being one such segment....'. So then why does Taekkyon have kicks? Keep me in touch.100110100 06:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I answered your question in Talk:Taekyon Kbarends 07:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Ugly Tables?
I dunno, but I thought the page looked better before adding tables (various reasons). Anyone else want to revert? (Also, the page content seems to be of a strong POV type, too...)

Edededed 01:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I would agree that the table doesn't add much, at least in its current form. -- Visviva 07:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Not only that, the descriptions for each style stink! Soobakdo is a "peasant style?" Tangsoodo is "just like Shaolin?" It always makes me sad to see articles degrade like this... (Add weeping sounds, please)  Anyone want to fix them up?

Edededed 06:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

The tables are terrible. Contradictory with no attempt to differentiate the notable from the trivial. I suggest we remove the Table entirely.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:44, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually I propose moving the Table to a Temp page so that the information can be accessed and incorporated into the article - and then we can delete the Temp page after some time. Tables - especially this sort are generally discouraged in Wikipedia. They are just another form of Lists.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:02, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

The table was moved to User talk:PRehse/Korean martial arts/Temp where it is rapidly being reduced as the information is being incorporated into the article.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Could Hwarang [The Pure form from Silla]]
Be considered a traditional Korean Martial Art true it was more of a Warrior teachings but they did teach Martial Arts in the training so.....? -Easternknight

 * We don't know exactly what they were taught and what they trained. So as long as you tell that as well. You could say that the military arts of the hwarang were traditional MA, but that we have no clue what they did. Kbarends (talk) 10:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Fan martial Arts
I saw/heard about this... Iron fan Korean Martial Arts. Could someone add this info?--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 07:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Assistance required
I have recently cleaned up the Asian martial arts (origins) article. I added a section for Korean martial arts, but no information currently graces the page. If anyone is knowledgeable on the subject of the origins of Korean martial arts, please feel free to add cited material to the page linked above. You can mention legends if you want (referenced of course), but please try to restrict your edits to verifiable material, preferably found in scholarly publications. Thank you. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 17:06, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Main image
I don't want to sound presumptuous here but shouldn't this article have a better lead image? Maybe something more historical, or a photo from an important match or something? Morinae (talk) 13:51, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Korean martial arts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140330215002/http://int.yongin.ac.kr/eng/academics/ma05_taekwondo.htm to http://int.yongin.ac.kr/eng/academics/ma05_taekwondo.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:10, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Deleted a lot
Just a heads up that I deleted a lot of unsourced content. It had a lot of grammar/tone issues as well. A good chunk of it had sat there for years without sources or major improvements. Decided that starting over from scratch and getting a better quality, better sourced article is better than having a low quality massive one that is not improving fast enough. toobigtokale (talk) 04:33, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Korean martial arts