Talk:Chiyou

Note:

I think that the Chi Woo myth doesn't belong here. It is about Chi You, a Chinese and Miao deity not about a Korean mythical emperor. It should be moved to Korean Mythology , since this is like focusing on Ammon in the Zeus article! In other words, the article has become Out Of Topic. As a Chinese, I feel quite offended about the nationalism (or even jingoism?) in Japanese (Empress Jingo) and Korean mythology (think of the vast Korean empire of the mythical ages). Well, Chi You's tomb is in Shandong? This reminds me of Korean ultra-nationalists who claim that this region was actually Korean... Hmm... Is this a racist myth,, claiming that Chinese are inferior (and not equal) to Koreans?!? I am afraid that this is the case.

wow, many errors to point out for you. o.d.s.t. : feet first into hell (talk) 07:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

References and other concerns

Aside from the absolute lack of references in this article, does anyone else think that the inclusion of a korean soccer team support group and comics is straying a bit much from the mythology article?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.205.21 (talk) 09:41, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Another angle of the picture

From the folklores that my father and uncles and grandpas have told to me, they mentioned that koreans and miao/hmong among other ethnic groups were from the same *tribe* ruled by chi you in ancient times. also told to me was that japanese origin were from the same group of tribes under chi you's ruling/guidance before war broke out between chi you and huang di. they told me of the many tribes that chi you brought together, and the groupings that they made to distinguish the different clans. i believe 7 groups were eventually established. if considering this, it could very well have been the same one (chi you) mentioned in the korean mythology. i, being half hmong/half bouyei, pronouce the name chi you as txiv yawg, which sounds pretty much like chi you, meaning grandpa. since as long as i can remember, my father has told me that our clan group was that of the 5th group. being that asia has one of the oldest record history, many things were for sure lost/distorted because they were initally passed down orally, from father to son, and so on. separation for 1000s of years would yeild difference in folklore but from researching about korean mythology, the korean version of chi you does resemble that of the one that was told to me. i wouldn't just throw out the notion that the korean version is out of whack because of its almost overwhelming similarity to my own.

Just because some legend is nationalistic, racist, or otherwise offensive, doesn't mean it's not a factual legend. There is plenty of scope in this article for both perspectives — but not for POV accusations. -- Perey 23:51, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Chi Woo and Chi You are referred to using the same characters and have their sources from the same texts. They ought to be in the same article.--thevizier 12:35, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Furthermore

And, when you are speaking of high-antiquity, it would be rather meaningless to refer to the tribes under Huang Di and Chi You as Chinese, Hmong, Korean etc... Perhaps they were culturally and genetically the ancestors of the current people, but given population movement, culture exchange, intermarriage, even that isn't a clear and fast way to determine things. That the Koreans trace their ancestory to the Dong Yi people in Shandong, I think, does not mean China nowadays is any less of what it is. The Dong Yi tribes, merely being the ancestors to later proto-Korean peoples (and proto-Chinese) does not mean they were either Chinese or Korean, as both those terms are grossly anachronistic in reference to something around 3000-1000 BCE. --thevizier 12:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Touch-ups

Koreans did worshipped Chi You as a war deity, but I see the things about Baedal and Hwangoong as a different mythology. I divided the article into sections and clarified the statements for the NPOV. --Puzzlet Chung 15:31, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for clarifying the whole thing (I am the original author of this article; I apologize for overreacting and being so whiny). I think that factual accuracy and NEUTRALITY are assured now, and no one should be offended now. It`s a shame that mythology has often been politically abused (I`ve to admit that I stepped into this peculiar trap). Oh, and sorry for my horrible English.

17:31, 2 Jul 2005, "Li Siwen"

(removed by owner)

I'd like to point out one thing. The fact that Koreans traditionally worshipped Chi You is rather irrelevant to the present ultra-nationalistic popularity of "Chi Woo." After all, Koreans also worshipped(?) Guan Yu (Korean: 관우). In Seoul, there is a temple for Guan Yu, called Dongmyo (동묘). (There's also a subway station of the same name.) Nobody with half a sense claims that Guan Yu was Korean based on that. It's just like that Europeans' worship of Jesus doesn't make them Jewish.

I for one am disgusted at this endless parade of ignorance by some Koreans. (I know Puzzlet Chung is not one of them... I'm just disgusted at those whose parade of ignorance is so widespread that they deserve an entry on their own in Wikipedia.) Yongjik 09:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Can someone cite any sources to demontrate the Goguryeo worship Chi You?

I doubt the authencity.--Ksyrie 00:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

It is possible, but, no one is sure. Jtm71 03:39, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Just for my education, can anyone cite any other sources than Hwandan Gogi to demontrate that Chi You was an ancestor of Korean?

because it is unbelieveable that there was no text record until 1910's if Korean really regarded him as an ancestor for thousands of years.

I agree that ancient Korean might worship Chi You, but it does not mean he was regarded as an ancestor, just like the case of Guan Yu, mentioned by a Korean friend above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nobori (talk • contribs) 06:35, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

(It should be noted that this account is the direct opposite of Chinese accounts.)

I was wondering at the end of the Korean account why it said that it is the direct opposite of Chinese accounts? They actually match up quite well. Chinese sources also said that Huangdi lost many if not most of the initial battles with Chiyou. It was only the last battle that Huangdi won with the chariot that proved to be a decisive victory for the Huaxia tribe, which matches the Korean account which stated that they lost a battle. The only difference between the two accounts is the the amount of emphasis place on the outcome of the last battle. From a Chinese perspective, the victory was a big deal because they gained new land and the tribes oof Dia nd Yan merged to become one. For the Korean account, the defeat at the last battle wasn't very significant to them because they didn't lose any of their original territory, all they lost was a foreign territory they invaded and occupied. If its OK, I'd like to remove that comment and maybe explain the differences between the emphasis of the two accounts. I have contacted most of the major contributors of the articles. I hope to get all your input on the matter. The users I have contacted are:

• User talk:Odst, User talk:Jtm71, User talk:Ksyrie, User talk:Deadkid dk, User talk:Kprideboi, User talk:PuzzletChung, User talk:Benjwong, User talk:Historiographer, User talk:Yongjik

whipsandchains (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Honestly,the korean myth about Chi You seems to be apocrypha,the earliest book recording it is a 1911 one,for the date,it cann't to be a myth which requires to be more ancient,maybe hundreds of years ago.--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 09:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

This article is poorly referenced even on the most basic things. I don't know if it's ready for conflicting materials. Benjwong (talk) 03:15, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I can probably help clean this up a bit by adding references from Shanhaijing and other mythological sources. But annals and historical references is out of my league though. And I know next to nothing about Korean history except for the Imjin Wars so I can't really help with adding references to the Korean account either.whipsandchains (talk)

The Korean myth about Chi You is believed to be developed in late 20th Century, since a bunch of people comes up with Hwandan Gogi advocating that it was a true history. It isn't the history, nor widely believed myth before like 50 years. --Puzzlet Chung (talk) 03:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Puzzlet, so is it widely believed now by Koreans? whipsandchains (talk) 04:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Classical Chinese Citations and Quotations

Extended content

軒轅教熊、羆、貔、貅、抃、虎，以與炎帝戰於阪泉之野，蚩尤不用帝命。（《史記·五帝本紀》）

黃帝乃征師諸侯，與蚩尤戰於涿鹿之野，遂擒殺蚩尤。而諸侯鹹尊軒轅為天子，代神農氏。（同上）

黃帝與蚩尤戰於涿鹿之野，蚩尤作大霧，兵士皆迷。於是作指南車以示四方，遂擒蚩尤而即帝位，故後常建焉。（《古今注》）

黃帝氏平蚩尤，因大霧，作指南車，飾以文玉，其文作蚩尤形。車飾以黍尺度高一尺四寸二分，下長七寸四分，管立木口，圓徑三寸四分。琢玉為人形，手常指南。足底通圓竅作旋轉軸，踏於蚩尤之上。（《古玉圖考》）

黃帝用車戰，蚩尤用騎戰。蚩尤作霧，黃帝作指南車。（《廣博物誌》）

黃帝執蚩尤，殺之於中冀，名之曰「絕轡之野」。（《汲塚周書》）

蚩尤，庶人之貪者也。（《大戴禮記》）

涿鹿，竿人顙也。（《尚書刑德仿》）

帝既殺蚩尤，因立台榭。（《黃帝內傳》）

李白《北風行》：燭龍棲寒門，光曜猶旦開。日月照之何不及此，惟有北風號怒天上來。燕山雪花大如席，片片吹落軒轅台。（《李翰林集》）

蚩尤兄弟八十一人，並獸身人語，銅頭鐵額，食砂石子，造五兵仗刀戟大弩，威振天下。（《龍魚河圖》）

葛盧之山發而出水，金從之。蚩尤受而製之，以為劍鎧矛戟，是歲相兼者諸侯九。雍狐之山發而出水，金從之。蚩尤受而製之，以為雍狐之戟芮戈，是歲相兼者諸侯十二。（《管子》）

蚩尤作亂，逐帝而居於涿鹿。帝參盧弗能征，乃帥諸侯委命於有熊。於是暨力牧、神皇、風後、鄧伯溫之徒，厲兵稱旅，熊羆貔貅以為前行，雕鶡雁鸇以為旗幟，及尤嘬兵涿鹿之山。（《路史》）

九黎之君號曰蚩尤。（《孔氏尚書傳》）

蚩尤天符之神，狀類不常，三代遺器多著其象。漢孔氏謂是「九黎之君」。考黃帝滅蚩尤於涿鹿之野，乃在北鄙，九黎三苗皆南蠻。蚩尤、九黎，非一種也。（《說略》）

畫本以飛獸有肉翅者謂之蚩尤。（《古器圖》）

蚩尤氏頭有角，與黃帝鬥，以角抵人。今冀州有樂名《蚩尤戲》，其民兩兩戴牛角而相抵。（《樂書》）

炎帝者，黃帝同母異父兄弟也，各有天下之半。黃帝行道而炎帝不聽，故戰於涿鹿之野。（《新書》）

黃帝與炎帝爭鬥涿鹿之野。將戰，筮於巫鹹。巫鹹曰：「果哉而有咎。」（《歸藏》）

蚩尤，炎帝之後，銅頭啖石，飛空走險。以馗牛皮為鼓，九擊而止之，尤不能飛走，遂殺之。（《廣成子傳》）

帝伐蚩尤，玄女為帝製夔牛鼓八十麵，一震五百裏，連震三千八百裏。又為帝製司南車當其前，記裏鼓車居其右。（《黃帝內傳》）

黃帝出師涿鹿，以鼓為警衛。其曲有十：一曰《震雷驚》，二曰《猛虎駭》，三曰《鷙鳥擊》，四曰《龍媒碟》，五曰《靈夔吼》，六曰《雕鶚爭》，七曰《壯士奪誌》，八曰《熊羆哮後》，九曰《石蕩崖》，十曰《波蕩壑》，並皆有辭。今亡考矣。（《雲笈七簽》）

蚩尤帥蝄蜽與黃帝戰於涿鹿，帝命吹角為龍吟以禦之。（《通禮義纂》）

蚩尤氏強，與榆罔爭王於涿鹿之阿。黃帝使力牧、神皇直討蚩尤氏，擒於涿鹿之野，使應龍殺之於凶黎之穀。「穀」一作「丘」。（《帝王世紀》）

蚩尤出自芊水，八肱八趾，疏首，登九淖以伐空桑。黃帝殺之於青丘。（《易坤靈圖》）

蚩尤變幻多方，征風召雨，吹煙噴霧，黃帝師眾大迷。王母乃命玄女授帝以三宮五音陰陽之略，太乙遁甲六壬步鬥之術，陰符之機，靈寶五符五勝之文，遂克蚩尤於中冀。（《玄女兵法》）

蚩尤者，炎帝之後，故祭蚩尤文雲：「將軍敢以牲牢祭爾炎帝之裔蚩尤之神。」（《陰遁甲》）

蚩尤，人身牛蹄，四目六手。涿鹿間往往掘得髑髏如銅鐵，蚩尤骨也。（《述異記》）

黃帝百戰，百戰之數，未盡聞也。與炎帝戰於阪泉之野三，與蚩尤戰於涿鹿之野七十二，其大略也。（《鶡冠子注》）

朱昆田原引《鶡冠子注》，黃帝百戰止七十五。考陸佃原注有「百戰之數未盡聞」及「大略」句，不可刪，今依原注補入。〔補〕　赤帝為火災，黃帝擒之。（《文子》）

黃帝之時，中黃直為將，破殺蚩尤。（《漢書》列傳）

〔《史記》《逸周書》《大戴禮》《文子》所雲炎帝、赤帝，皆謂蚩尤，而書傳舉以為榆罔，失之。（《路史》）

按《史記》雲「諸侯相侵伐，蚩尤最為暴」，則蚩尤非為天子也。又《管子》曰「蚩尤受盧山之金而作五兵」，明非庶人，蓋諸侯號也。（《史記索隱》）

蚩尤，古之諸侯，其性酷毒，故作五虐之刑，謂車裂人及燒銅柱使人抱，或使人緣之之類也。（《唐律釋文》）

蚩尤亂在幽州，其死在冀。（《路史注》）

黃帝戮蚩尤，遷其民善者於鄒屠，惡者於有北。《詩》雲：「投畀有北，惡可知己。」（《國名紀》）

赤帝命蚩尤宇於少昊，以臨西方。蚩尤乃逐帝，爭於涿鹿之阿。（《逸周書》）

涿鹿之野，常有五色雲氣，金枝玉葉，止於帝所，有葩華之象，因有華蓋。（《古今注》）

《山海經》雲：「黃帝令應龍攻蚩尤，蚩尤請風伯、雨師以從，大風雨。黃帝乃下天女曰『魃』，以止雨，遂殺蚩尤。」（《史記正義》）

帝征蚩尤，七十一戰不克，晝夢金人引領長頭元狐之裘，雲天帝使授符。帝寤，問諸風伯。曰：「天應也。」乃於盛水之陽築壇，祭以太牢。有玄龜銜符至壇，非皮非綈，廣三尺，袤一尺，文曰：「天乙在前，太乙在後。」帝再拜受符。乃設九宮，置八門，布三奇六儀，製陰陽遁甲式，三門發，五將具，遂斬蚩尤焉。（《太白陰經》）

〔朱昆田原按〕　說蚩尤者不一。《孔子三朝記》《大戴禮記》以為庶人，孔氏、小司馬氏以為諸侯，應劭以為古天子。或以為炎帝之後，或以為九黎之君。或謂殺之於中冀，或謂殺之於青丘，或謂殺之於凶黎之穀。傳聞異辭，並存焉可也。

　黃帝都於涿鹿。（《帝王世紀》

《輿地誌》雲：「涿鹿，黃帝初都，遷有熊也。」（《史記正義》）

黃帝都有熊，又遷涿鹿。（《通誌·都邑略》）

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.220.185 (talk) 01:56, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, @24.90.220.185: that was entirely useless. Don't dump random incomprehensible masses of Classical Chinese anywhere and especially don't dump it without providing the actual locations of the cites within the texts. — LlywelynII 15:24, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Cleaned up Chi you Controversy section

I have removed a recently added section here. There are a number of problems. First, it has no sources. Secondly it may also be more fitting as a separate Chi you controversy page, or add a korean section into Hua-Yi distinction. It is also possible to split this page into two sections, a traditional Chinese interpretration of Chi you and Korean interpretation of Chi you. Benjwong (talk) 18:49, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I see no reason to entertain what was the equivalent of independent research/soapboxing by anonymous IP. An encyclopedia is not a blog for people's personal opinions about history, which is what that section looked like. The current article already mentions the Hwandan Gogi controversy - there's no real reason to spell out the details, much less create another page, unless the claim is notable enough to warrant it, which would require that it fulfill Wikipedia:Notability in having significant coverage by reliable third-party sources.Lathdrinor (talk) 22:40, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Needs mention

of Chiyou being a culture hero in some sources responsible for inventing metallic weapons, forcing the Chinese to up their game and start the Bronze Age (or at least the Chalcolithic). — LlywelynII 15:26, 25 December 2022 (UTC)