A study of the territorial dispute between Japan and Korea over Liancourt Rocks, a small cluster of barren, rocky islets in the Sea of Japan that Japanese call Takeshima and Koreans call Dokdo.
Yes, I also want a Recent Post list, but Blogger does not have a good system for doing that. I tried to set something up a couple of days ago, but I got an error message. I will try again tonight after work.
English documents 1951 August 10 Rusk documents http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Rusk_documents
1954 Report of the Van Fleet Mission to the Far East (26 April - 7 August 1954) http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Report_of_Van_Fleet_mission_to_the_Far_East
Japanese news articles 2005 April 28-May 02 - "竹島に波高し 見出し一覧 - San-in Chuo Shimpo (山陰中央新報) http://www.sanin-chuo.co.jp/tokushu/modules/news/index.php?storytopic=127
July 27-Nov, 06 - "発信竹島 ～真の日韓親善に向けて～" 見出し一覧 - San-in Chuo Shimpo (山陰中央新報) http://www.sanin-chuo.co.jp/tokushu/modules/news/index.php?storytopic=145 http://www.sanin-chuo.co.jp/tokushu/modules/news/index.php?storytopic=145&offset=1
I think documents below are most important among numerous documents since they clearly show Japanese has been recognised Takeshima(Liancourt Rocks) since the early 1600s and legally incorporated in 1905. I put an explanation of each documents.
1667 隠州視聴合記 by 斉藤豊仙 (Japanese Document) http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/takeshima/wa29091-1667/ "隠州在北海中故云隠岐島、従是、南至雲州美穂関三十五里、辰巳至伯州赤碕浦四十里、未申至石州温泉津五十八里、自子至卯、無可往地、戍亥間行二日一夜有松島、又一日程有竹島、俗言磯竹島多竹魚海鹿、此二島無人之地、見高麗如自雲州望隠州、然則日本之乾地、以此州為限矣" Japanese considered 竹島(present Ulleundo) as a limit of their territory.
1779 新刻 日本輿地路程全圖 by 長久保玄珠 (Japanese Map) http://www2.library.tohoku.ac.jp/kano/kochizu/CJA08342001/CJA08342001-P1.html 竹島(present Ulleundo) and 松島(present Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks) are described in this map. The sentence labelled on the 竹島(present Ulleundo) reads "見高麗猶雲州望隠州". This sentence was cited from above 「隠州視聴合記」. In conclusion, Japanese in Edo era clearly thought Ulleundo is inside their territory, hence naturally 松島(present Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks) as well. There are lots more Japanese maps in Edo period that describe 松島(present Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks). http://toron.pepper.jp/jp/take/jpn/tizujlist.html
1904 Sep. 29 "領土編入願" by 中井養三郎 (Japanese Document) http://www.tanaka-kunitaka.net/takeshima/teikokuhanto-1904/index.html Proposal for official incorporation of Takeshima(Liancourt Rocks) by Yosaburou Nakai who was running private fishery business on the island.
1905 Jan, 28 "竹島の島根県編入閣議決定" http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/takeshima/2a11rui981-1905/ The Cabinet of Meiji government determined to officially incorporate the island to the territory of Japan and named the island 竹島(Takeshima).
1905 Feb. 24 "竹島の島根県への編入を伝える記事"San-in Shinbun (山陰新聞) http://www2.pref.shimane.jp/kouhou/photo/161/05.html This newspaper article reports the official incorporation of Takeshima by Shimane prefecture, Japan. (In 22th Feb.,1905 a public notice of incorporation by Shimane prefecture was announced.."島根県告示第四十号 北緯三十七度九分三十秒東経百三十一度五十五分隠岐島を距る西北八十五浬に在る島嶼を竹島と称し自今本県所属隠岐島司の所管と定めらる 明治三十八年二月二十二日 島根県知事 松永 武吉")
Here is an article about the Kimono with the mallow-shaped crest, the proof of Tokugawa Shogunate, which was given to Jinkichi Oya by the then Shogun Hidetada Tokugawa.
http://www.nnn.co.jp/news/050502/20050502001.html
This is one of the proofs that the Shogunate encouraged Oya to fish in Ulleungdo and Liancourt rocks (Takeshima and Matsushima in those days). It is possessed by San-in Rekishi Kan (San-in History Museum).
1) Japan recognised Ulleungdo and Liancourt rocks to be Japanese territory in the 17th century.
evidences: Onshu Shicho Goki（穏州視聴合記）by Hosen Saito, permission of fishing in Ulleungdo given to Oya's and Murakawa's families by the Tokugawa Shogunate (the crest of Tokugawa Shogunate, family documents of Oya's family etc)
2) After the dispute over the ownership of Ulleungdo, the Shogunate banned Japanese fishermen to tresspass on Ulleungdo (Takeshima) in 1696. But it didn't include Liancourt rocks (Matsushima). To follow is the document to prohibit Oya and Murakawa from going to "Takeshima" (Ulleungdo) but it didn't refer to "Matsushima" (Liancourt rocks, Takeshima/Dokdo):
3) Japanese fishermen began sealion hunting in the 1880's at Liancourt rocks (Takeshima/Dokdo).
It was described in some local books. (For example, "New Study of Shimane Prefecture's Takeshima" by Seizaburo Tamura) And the report by Tadashige Hashimoto (11th October 1945) mentions, "My father Yujiro Hashioka and my uncle Yoshitaro Ikeda and some friends from Kumi-ku of Gokamura village went to Takeshima(Dokdo) every year before the year 36 of Meiji (1903) and got sealions and sea products".
4) Yozaburo Nakai, who managed sealion hunting company at Takeshima/Dokdo, requested Japanese government in 1904 to incorporate "Ryanko-to" (Liancourt rocks) into Japan and to lend him the island for 10 years.
reference:"りゃんこ島領土編入並に貸下願"
Japanese government investigated it and confirmed that it didn't belong to no other country, and decided to incorporate it into Shimane Prefecture in 1905.
5) USA recognised that Liancourt rocks (Takeshima/Dokdo) was not Korean teritory after WWII.
2. 22nd June 1946 - SCAPIN 1033 (blocked Japan from exploiting the adjacent ocean resources)
3. 16th September 1947 - SCAPIN 1778 (the islets for use by the Allied Powers as a bombing range for the Far East Air Force)
4. 19th September 1949 - SCAPIN 2046 (Abolished SCAPIN 1033)
5. 14th November 1949 - a telegraph from William Sebald to W. Walton Butterworth: “Article 6: Recommend reconsideration Liancourt rocks (Takeshima), Japan’s claim to these islands is old and valid. Security considerations might conceivably envisage weather and rader stations thereon”.
6. 19th November 1949 - a letter from Butterworth to the Secretary of the State: “With regard to the dispositon of islands formerly posessed by Japan in the direction of Korea it is suggested that Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima) be specified in our proposed Article 3 as belonging to Japan. Japan’s claim to these islands is old and appears valid, and it is difficult to regard them as islands off the shore of Korea. Security considerations might render the provision of weather and radar station on these islands a matter of interest to the United States”.
7. 29th December 1949 - 6th amendment of the treaty draft: “Article 3 1.The Territory of Japan shall comprise the four principal Japanese islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido and all adjacent minor islands, including the islands of the Inland sea(seto Naikai); Tsushima,Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks), Oki retto, Sado, Okujiri, Rebun, Riishiri and all other islands in the Japan Sea (Nippon Kai) within a line connecting the farther shores of Tsushima, Takeshima and Rebun; the Goto archipelago, the Ryukyu Islands north of 29° N. Latitude, and all other islanls of the East China Sea east of longtude 127° east of Greenwich and north of 29°N. Latitude; the Izu Islands southward to end including Sofu Gan (lot’s Wife) and all other islands of the Philippine Sea nearer to the four principal islands than the islands named; and the Habomai group and Shikotan lying to the east and south of a line extending from a point in 43°35′ N.Lati- tude, 145°35′ E. logitude to a point in 44°N. latitude, 146°30′ E. longitude, and to the south of a line drawn due east on the parsllel in 44° N. Lati- tude. All of the islands identified above, with a three-mile belt of territorial waters, shall belong to Japan”.
8. July 1950 - Commentary on Draft Treaty of Peace with Japan: (It also says that takeshima belongs to Japan)
9. 19th July 1951 - Korea wants amendment. Korean ambassador had a meeting with John Foster Dulles: “Mr. Dulles then inquired as to the location of the two islands, Dokdo and Parangdo. Mr. han stated that these were two small islands lying in the Sea of Japan, he believed in the general vicinity of Ullungdo. Mr. Dulles asked whether these islands had been Korean before the Japanese annexation, to which the Ambassador replied in the affirmative. If that were the case, Mr Dulles saw no particular problem in including these islands in the pertinent part of the treaty which related to the renunciation of Japanese territorial claims to Korean territory”.
10. the last draft of treaty: “In the document footnote 2 above, Mr. Rusk continued : “As regards the island of Dokdo… this normally uninhibited rock formation was according to our information never treated as part of Korea and, since about 1905, has been under the jurisdiction of the Oki islands Branch Office of Shimane Prefecture of Japan. The island does not appear ever before to have been claimed by Korea”. (Korea had in the meantime withdrawn the claim to Parangdo.)
11. 8th September 1951 peace Conference - (treaty coming into effect on 28th April 1952) The SF Peace Treaty didn't include Liancourt rocks (Takeshima/Dokdo) in the list of islands which Japan had to return to Korea.
12. 18th January 1952 - President I Seung-man declared 海洋主権宣言 and made I Seung-man line, which included Takeshima/Dokdo inside the line. (Japan made an objection on 28th January 1952)
13. 1954 - “Report of Ambassador James A. Van Fleet” “Unilateral proclamation of sovereignty over the seas (Syngman Rhee line) is illegal. The United States had concluded Japanese sovereignty over the rocks. The dispute over the rocks might properly be referred to the International Court of Justice”.
Do you know anything about "松島への渡航許可 in 1656" ? http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/takeshima/ I googled it, but it sounds very doubtful.
There are lots of Japanese documents that were translated into Japanese on Occidentalism. I think we should sort them out and list here. They could be very useful resources.
I agree, there is no definite document to prove that. I may have read somewehre that one of Oya's or Murakawa's family documents referred to the permission to go to Matsushima (Liancourt rocks) but no document of permission itself was witnessed.
But in 1618 (the 3rd year of Genwa) the Shogunate gave a permission to go to Takeshima (Ulleungdo) and Ulleungdo was thought to be Japanese territory in the 17th century. So it is no doubt that they believed that Liancourt rocks (Takeshima/Dokdo) to be Japanese territory.
I found the following newspaper article from 1952: http://ww1.enjoy.ne.jp/~yonagosehara/asahi-sinnbunn.htm
It is about the Oya family's document: It says that Oya's family discovered "Matsushima" (Liancourt rocks, Takeshima/Dokdo today) in 1643. In the era of Tokugawa Iemitsu, they reported about this island to the Shogunate and they gave the family a permission as same as the permission concerning "Takeshima" (Ulleungdo)
It says that the small island en route of Takeshima (Ulleungdo) was owned by the then chief retainer (家老） of the Shogunate Abe Shiro-goro and he gave permission to go to the island 25 years before (of the document date), that is (1681-25 =) 1656?, very near to 1643 - the year the previous document indicated.
The document also mentioned that the island (Takeshima/Dokdo) is about 60-ri from Fukuura of Oki island.
Thank you for all the comments and links. I will have to include the information and links slowly because because I want to be sure of the names and dates. Also, I need time to figure out where to put them and how to format them. Please look at the following page for the format I am considering for the document links.
If you could post links in that format, it would help me a lot. Also, if you could put in parentheses the English name of the Japanese document or map and the English name of the author or mapmaker, it would help our English readers, including me, to better reference them.
Also, for the Japanese article links, I would like to write a brief 1-line summary of the article below the link, so if you could give me a brief summary of the newspaper article I have already listed, it would be great.
Okay Gerry, we will make the best document links day by day.
BTW, according to the last three postings I made, the Oya family discovered Liancourt rocks in 1643 and they got the permission to go there in the era of Iemitsu Tokugawa, that was 1623 - 1651. So the permission was not given in the year 1656, as Kaneganese doubted.
The figure 1656 may have been extracted 25 from the year written in the second document (1681) as I have calculated. (1681-25 = 1656) But the 25 years in the document would not always be exact, the original word for it was "廿五年以前" (25 years before) but I think it may have meant "over 25 years before", because the word 以前 means before a certain time. It may be 26 years before, or 28 years before....
So if all these documents were right, I assume the permission was made during 1643 - 1651. But as long as the document of permission itself has not found, it remains as an assumption.
There may be a possiblity that the Shogunate didn't issue the permission as a document, it is possible because they already issued a permission to go to Ulleungdo and Liancourt rocks located en route of Ulleungdo and there was no need to issue another permission.
They are very interesting documents. Especially second document. By the way, I happened to find the site below and no.30 seems like 大谷clan's old documents. The name of the holder is same as the sister in the news paper. http://www.kyouiku.city.suginami.tokyo.jp/bunkazai/ichiran.html
By the way, I am going to help Gerry to build Japanese part of this site. But I think I need your help especially translation. I think we should start presenting important Japanese documents so that nobody could distort the fact.
Thanks for the offer. I'm not so sure if I can manage to do it as I'm not used to blog things, but yes, I'm interested. Anyway, I would be glad if I could do something for your site.
I have sent you an invitation to be a "Contributor."
What we need to do is to do is to collect and translate old Japanese documents into English. We also need to translate Japanese articles into English. I realize that is asking a lot, especially in regard to the old Japanese documents, but there may already be some English translations of Japanese documents out there, which means we just have to collect them and organize them on the blog. If you do translate something, I can edit the English for you.
Also, maybe you can help Kaneganese create a Japanese glossary of people's names and titles, placenames, document names, and old terminology. For example, I cannot read Japanese names, so it would be help to have a glossary that has something like the following:
Nagakubo Sekisui (長久保赤水) - 19th century Japanese mapmaker
What I would like to do is create an easy-to-search database of all the documents and maps related to Dokdo/Takeshima, and then tell an easy-to-understand history with links to posts with original documents and more detailed explanation of particular incidents. I want to give the reader a choice to read more detail only if he or she wants.
Anyway, that is just a rough idea of my grand scheme.
If Ponta would like to participate, he is welcome, too.
How about to show the recent posts, like Occidentalism?
ReplyDeleteSoon it will be hard to search for new oipinions scrolling down all the site.
Pacifist,
ReplyDeleteYes, I also want a Recent Post list, but Blogger does not have a good system for doing that. I tried to set something up a couple of days ago, but I got an error message. I will try again tonight after work.
Pacifist,
ReplyDeleteI have added a "Recent Comments" section just below my summary for the "Purpose of this Blog."
Thanks, Gerry.
ReplyDeleteIt's getting better!
English documents
ReplyDelete1951
August 10
Rusk documents
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Rusk_documents
1954
Report of the Van Fleet Mission to the Far East (26 April - 7 August 1954)
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Report_of_Van_Fleet_mission_to_the_Far_East
Japanese news articles
2005
April 28-May 02 - "竹島に波高し 見出し一覧 - San-in Chuo Shimpo (山陰中央新報)
http://www.sanin-chuo.co.jp/tokushu/modules/news/index.php?storytopic=127
July 27-Nov, 06 - "発信竹島 ～真の日韓親善に向けて～" 見出し一覧 - San-in Chuo Shimpo (山陰中央新報)
http://www.sanin-chuo.co.jp/tokushu/modules/news/index.php?storytopic=145
http://www.sanin-chuo.co.jp/tokushu/modules/news/index.php?storytopic=145&offset=1
2006
Feb. 11-19 - "2.22 竹島の日の向こう側" 見出し一覧 - San-in Chuo Shimpo (山陰中央新報)
http://www.sanin-chuo.co.jp/tokushu/modules/news/index.php?storytopic=159
2007
May 29 - "「従来にないボリューム」竹島問題研究会が最終報告書を提出" Sankei WEB (産経新聞)
http://www.sankei.co.jp/chiho/sanin/070529/sni070529000.htm
I think documents below are most important among numerous documents since they clearly show Japanese has been recognised Takeshima(Liancourt Rocks) since the early 1600s and legally incorporated in 1905. I put an explanation of each documents.
ReplyDelete1667 隠州視聴合記 by 斉藤豊仙 (Japanese Document)
http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/takeshima/wa29091-1667/
"隠州在北海中故云隠岐島、従是、南至雲州美穂関三十五里、辰巳至伯州赤碕浦四十里、未申至石州温泉津五十八里、自子至卯、無可往地、戍亥間行二日一夜有松島、又一日程有竹島、俗言磯竹島多竹魚海鹿、此二島無人之地、見高麗如自雲州望隠州、然則日本之乾地、以此州為限矣" Japanese considered 竹島(present Ulleundo) as a limit of their territory.
1779 新刻 日本輿地路程全圖 by 長久保玄珠 (Japanese Map)
http://www2.library.tohoku.ac.jp/kano/kochizu/CJA08342001/CJA08342001-P1.html
竹島(present Ulleundo) and 松島(present Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks) are described in this map. The sentence labelled on the 竹島(present Ulleundo) reads "見高麗猶雲州望隠州". This sentence was cited from above 「隠州視聴合記」. In conclusion, Japanese in Edo era clearly thought Ulleundo is inside their territory, hence naturally 松島(present Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks) as well.
There are lots more Japanese maps in Edo period that describe 松島(present Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks).
http://toron.pepper.jp/jp/take/jpn/tizujlist.html
1904 Sep. 29 "領土編入願" by 中井養三郎 (Japanese Document)
http://www.tanaka-kunitaka.net/takeshima/teikokuhanto-1904/index.html
Proposal for official incorporation of Takeshima(Liancourt Rocks) by Yosaburou Nakai who was running private fishery business on the island.
1905 Jan, 28 "竹島の島根県編入閣議決定"
http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/takeshima/2a11rui981-1905/
The Cabinet of Meiji government determined to officially incorporate the island to the territory of Japan and named the island 竹島(Takeshima).
1905 Feb. 24 "竹島の島根県への編入を伝える記事"San-in Shinbun (山陰新聞)
http://www2.pref.shimane.jp/kouhou/photo/161/05.html
This newspaper article reports the official incorporation of Takeshima by Shimane prefecture, Japan.
(In 22th Feb.,1905 a public notice of incorporation by Shimane prefecture was announced.."島根県告示第四十号 北緯三十七度九分三十秒東経百三十一度五十五分隠岐島を距る西北八十五浬に在る島嶼を竹島と称し自今本県所属隠岐島司の所管と定めらる 明治三十八年二月二十二日 島根県知事 松永 武吉")
Good job, Kaneganese!
ReplyDeleteHere is an article about the Kimono with the mallow-shaped crest, the proof of Tokugawa Shogunate, which was given to Jinkichi Oya by the then Shogun Hidetada Tokugawa.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nnn.co.jp/news/050502/20050502001.html
This is one of the proofs that the Shogunate encouraged Oya to fish in Ulleungdo and Liancourt rocks (Takeshima and Matsushima in those days). It is possessed by San-in Rekishi Kan (San-in History Museum).
The evidences for Japan:
ReplyDelete1) Japan recognised Ulleungdo and Liancourt rocks to be Japanese territory in the 17th century.
evidences: Onshu Shicho Goki（穏州視聴合記）by Hosen Saito, permission of fishing in Ulleungdo given to Oya's and Murakawa's families by the Tokugawa Shogunate (the crest of Tokugawa Shogunate, family documents of Oya's family etc)
2) After the dispute over the ownership of Ulleungdo, the Shogunate banned Japanese fishermen to tresspass on Ulleungdo (Takeshima) in 1696. But it didn't include Liancourt rocks (Matsushima).
To follow is the document to prohibit Oya and Murakawa from going to "Takeshima" (Ulleungdo) but it didn't refer to "Matsushima" (Liancourt rocks, Takeshima/Dokdo):
先年松平新太郎因州伯州領知之節相窺之伯州米子之町人村川市兵衛大屋甚吉
竹嶋江渡海至爾今雖致漁候向後竹島江渡海之儀制禁可申付旨被仰出之候間可被存其趣候
恐々謹言
正月廿八日
土屋相模守
阿部豊後守
大久保加賀守
松平伯善守殿
右御奉書之趣村川大屋両人江 申聞竹島渡海相止候事
3) Japanese fishermen began sealion hunting in the 1880's at Liancourt rocks (Takeshima/Dokdo).
It was described in some local books. (For example, "New Study of Shimane Prefecture's Takeshima" by Seizaburo Tamura) And the report by Tadashige Hashimoto (11th October 1945) mentions, "My father Yujiro Hashioka and my uncle Yoshitaro Ikeda and some friends from Kumi-ku of Gokamura village went to Takeshima(Dokdo) every year before the year 36 of Meiji (1903) and got sealions and sea products".
4) Yozaburo Nakai, who managed sealion hunting company at Takeshima/Dokdo, requested Japanese government in 1904 to incorporate "Ryanko-to" (Liancourt rocks) into Japan and to lend him the island for 10 years.
reference:"りゃんこ島領土編入並に貸下願"
Japanese government investigated it and confirmed that it didn't belong to no other country, and decided to incorporate it into Shimane Prefecture in 1905.
5) USA recognised that Liancourt rocks (Takeshima/Dokdo) was not Korean teritory after WWII.
1. 29th January 1946 - SCAPIN 677 (placed Takeshima/Dokdo outside Japanese)
2. 22nd June 1946 - SCAPIN 1033 (blocked Japan from exploiting the adjacent ocean resources)
3. 16th September 1947 - SCAPIN 1778 (the islets for use by the Allied Powers as a bombing range for the Far East Air Force)
4. 19th September 1949 - SCAPIN 2046 (Abolished SCAPIN 1033)
5. 14th November 1949 - a telegraph from William Sebald to W. Walton Butterworth:
“Article 6: Recommend reconsideration Liancourt rocks (Takeshima), Japan’s claim to these islands is old and valid. Security considerations might conceivably envisage weather and rader stations thereon”.
6. 19th November 1949 - a letter from Butterworth to the Secretary of the State:
“With regard to the dispositon of islands formerly posessed by Japan in the direction of Korea it is suggested that Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima) be specified in our proposed Article 3 as belonging to Japan. Japan’s claim to these islands is old and appears valid, and it is difficult to regard them as islands off the shore of Korea. Security considerations might render the provision of weather and radar station on these islands a matter of interest to the United States”.
7. 29th December 1949 - 6th amendment of the treaty draft:
“Article 3 1.The Territory of Japan shall comprise the four principal Japanese islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido and all adjacent minor islands, including the islands of the Inland sea(seto Naikai); Tsushima,Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks), Oki retto, Sado, Okujiri, Rebun, Riishiri and all other islands in the Japan Sea (Nippon Kai) within a line connecting the farther shores of Tsushima, Takeshima and Rebun; the Goto archipelago, the Ryukyu Islands north of 29° N. Latitude, and all other islanls of the East China Sea east of longtude 127° east of Greenwich and north of 29°N. Latitude; the Izu Islands southward to end including Sofu Gan (lot’s Wife) and all other islands of the Philippine Sea nearer to the four principal islands than the islands named; and the Habomai group and Shikotan lying to the east and south of a line extending from a point in 43°35′ N.Lati- tude, 145°35′ E. logitude to a point in 44°N. latitude, 146°30′ E. longitude, and to the south of a line drawn due east on the parsllel in 44° N. Lati- tude. All of the islands identified above, with a three-mile belt of territorial waters, shall belong to Japan”.
8. July 1950 - Commentary on Draft Treaty of Peace with Japan:
(It also says that takeshima belongs to Japan)
9. 19th July 1951 - Korea wants amendment. Korean ambassador had a meeting with John Foster Dulles:
“Mr. Dulles then inquired as to the location of the two islands, Dokdo and Parangdo. Mr. han stated that these were two small islands lying in the Sea of Japan, he believed in the general vicinity of Ullungdo. Mr. Dulles asked whether these islands had been Korean before the Japanese annexation, to which the Ambassador replied in the affirmative. If that were the case, Mr Dulles saw no particular problem in including these islands in the pertinent part of the treaty which related to the renunciation of Japanese territorial claims to Korean territory”.
10. the last draft of treaty:
“In the document footnote 2 above, Mr. Rusk continued : “As regards the island of Dokdo… this normally uninhibited rock formation was according to our information never treated as part of Korea and, since about 1905, has been under the jurisdiction of the Oki islands Branch Office of Shimane Prefecture of Japan. The island does not appear ever before to have been claimed by Korea”. (Korea had in the meantime withdrawn the claim to Parangdo.)
11. 8th September 1951 peace Conference - (treaty coming into effect on 28th April 1952)
The SF Peace Treaty didn't include Liancourt rocks (Takeshima/Dokdo) in the list of islands which Japan had to return to Korea.
12. 18th January 1952 - President I Seung-man declared 海洋主権宣言 and made I Seung-man line, which included Takeshima/Dokdo inside the line.
(Japan made an objection on 28th January 1952)
13. 1954 - “Report of Ambassador James A. Van Fleet”
“Unilateral proclamation of sovereignty over the seas (Syngman Rhee line) is illegal.
The United States had concluded Japanese sovereignty over the rocks.
The dispute over the rocks might properly be referred to the International Court of Justice”.
pacifist,
ReplyDeleteDo you know anything about "松島への渡航許可 in 1656" ?
http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/takeshima/
I googled it, but it sounds very doubtful.
There are lots of Japanese documents that were translated into Japanese on Occidentalism. I think we should sort them out and list here. They could be very useful resources.
Kaneganese,
ReplyDeleteI agree, there is no definite document to prove that.
I may have read somewehre that one of Oya's or Murakawa's family documents referred to the permission to go to Matsushima (Liancourt rocks) but no document of permission itself was witnessed.
But in 1618 (the 3rd year of Genwa) the Shogunate gave a permission to go to Takeshima (Ulleungdo) and Ulleungdo was thought to be Japanese territory in the 17th century. So it is no doubt that they believed that Liancourt rocks (Takeshima/Dokdo) to be Japanese territory.
Kaneganese,
ReplyDeleteI found the following newspaper article from 1952:
http://ww1.enjoy.ne.jp/~yonagosehara/asahi-sinnbunn.htm
It is about the Oya family's document:
It says that Oya's family discovered "Matsushima" (Liancourt rocks, Takeshima/Dokdo today) in 1643. In the era of Tokugawa Iemitsu, they reported about this island to the Shogunate and they gave the family a permission as same as the permission concerning "Takeshima" (Ulleungdo)
Kaneganese,
ReplyDeleteI also found another document:
巡見使宛請書 written by Kyuemon Oya (1681)
勝信代延宝九年（1681年）酉５月 御巡身様＊１御宿仕り其節竹島之様子に就き御尋ね御請書差出写し
（中略）
一 厳有院様御代＊２ 竹嶋の道筋廿町斗り廻り由候小嶋御座候 草木御座無く候て岩山にて御座候 廿五年以前阿倍四郎五郎様御所持をもって拝領 即ち 船渡海仕り候 右小嶋は隠岐国島後福浦より海上六拾里余も御座候事
五月十三日
It says that the small island en route of Takeshima (Ulleungdo) was owned by the then chief retainer (家老） of the Shogunate Abe Shiro-goro and he gave permission to go to the island 25 years before (of the document date), that is (1681-25 =) 1656?, very near to 1643 - the year the previous document indicated.
The document also mentioned that the island (Takeshima/Dokdo) is about 60-ri from Fukuura of Oki island.
http://homepage2.nifty.com/oppekepe/takeshima/jpn/JPN_HIS/JPN_HISTORY.html
Another document: a letter from Shozaemon Kameyama to Kyuemon Oya (1661):
ReplyDelete村川市兵衛殿昨十五日首尾能 御目見へ相調被罷帰候付一筆令啓候 此表別
条無之権八郎堅固被罷在候 我等儀も無恙罷過候間可安御心候 先以先日之御飛脚海陸無事着申し候哉無心元存候
然者来丑ノ年竹嶋松嶋へ弥貴様
御舟御渡被成候筈市兵方と今度申談候左様ニ御意得年内より御支度可被成候 御
仕合能帰朝之時分可預御左右候
将々竹嶋より桐之木御取寄大坂迄御届可被下候 大坂ニテ相良壱岐守殿蔵屋舗
迄御届可被成候 彼御留守居衆
深水仁兵衛殿川原又兵衛殿と申仁両人御座候 彼御方へ内々申遣置御断候ハゝ無
相違請取可被申遣存候 権八方
へ二本程我等も一本可申受候 遠路乍御六借資入候 此方二而珍敷木ニテ御座候
間御無心申入候 壱岐守殿御屋
舗者今度村川市兵衛御存知ニて御座候 尚御参府之時分可得御意候 恐惶謹言
亀山庄左衛門
（花押）
十 一 月 十 六 日
大屋九右衛門様
猶々今度も村川と弥其段申談候 明丑ノ年ハ貴様両嶋ヘ舟御渡候筈仕候兼而より申渡候通少も相違無之候間左様ニ御心得可被成候 以上
There is a part relating about 竹嶋松嶋 (Takeshima Matsushima), and the last part included the word 両嶋 (Two islands).
http://matsu.rcks.kyushu-u.ac.jp/p/study/08takeshima/siryo-list/kameyama.html
Pacifist & Kaneganese,
ReplyDeleteThank you for all the comments and links. I will have to include the information and links slowly because because I want to be sure of the names and dates. Also, I need time to figure out where to put them and how to format them. Please look at the following page for the format I am considering for the document links.
http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2007/05/docs-maps.html
If you could post links in that format, it would help me a lot. Also, if you could put in parentheses the English name of the Japanese document or map and the English name of the author or mapmaker, it would help our English readers, including me, to better reference them.
Also, for the Japanese article links, I would like to write a brief 1-line summary of the article below the link, so if you could give me a brief summary of the newspaper article I have already listed, it would be great.
Anyway, thank you again for your contributions.
Okay Gerry, we will make the best document links day by day.
ReplyDeleteBTW, according to the last three postings I made, the Oya family discovered Liancourt rocks in 1643 and they got the permission to go there in the era of Iemitsu Tokugawa, that was 1623 - 1651.
So the permission was not given in the year 1656, as Kaneganese doubted.
The figure 1656 may have been extracted 25 from the year written in the second document (1681) as I have calculated. (1681-25 = 1656)
But the 25 years in the document would not always be exact, the original word for it was "廿五年以前" (25 years before) but I think it may have meant "over 25 years before", because the word 以前 means before a certain time. It may be 26 years before, or 28 years before....
So if all these documents were right, I assume the permission was made during 1643 - 1651.
But as long as the document of permission itself has not found, it remains as an assumption.
There may be a possiblity that the Shogunate didn't issue the permission as a document, it is possible because they already issued a permission to go to Ulleungdo and Liancourt rocks located en route of Ulleungdo and there was no need to issue another permission.
Thank you, pacifist
ReplyDeleteThey are very interesting documents. Especially second document.
By the way, I happened to find the site below and no.30 seems like 大谷clan's old documents. The name of the holder is same as the sister in the news paper.
http://www.kyouiku.city.suginami.tokyo.jp/bunkazai/ichiran.html
By the way, I am going to help Gerry to build Japanese part of this site. But I think I need your help especially translation. I think we should start presenting important Japanese documents so that nobody could distort the fact.
Pacifist,
ReplyDeleteIf you would like to help develop the Japanese section of the blog, I can add you as a "Contributor." Are you interested?
Gerry,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the offer.
I'm not so sure if I can manage to do it as I'm not used to blog things, but yes, I'm interested.
Anyway, I would be glad if I could do something for your site.
Kaneganese,
Thanks, I hope I will be some of your help.
pacifist,
ReplyDelete私も今教えてもらいながらよたよたやっています。pacifist氏なら、もっと早いと思いますよ。重要な文書やニュースをsummeryでもよいので翻訳して投稿されては如何でしょう?ぜひぜひ。
Pacifist,
ReplyDeleteKaneganese and I can help you learn how to post and format on the blog. Also, I can edit any posts you make.
What do you think?
Gerry,
ReplyDeleteOkay, I will accept your offer. Please let me know what I can do.
BTW, where is ponta? I think he can do more than I do.
Thanks for offerring to help Pacifist.
ReplyDeleteI have sent you an invitation to be a "Contributor."
What we need to do is to do is to collect and translate old Japanese documents into English. We also need to translate Japanese articles into English. I realize that is asking a lot, especially in regard to the old Japanese documents, but there may already be some English translations of Japanese documents out there, which means we just have to collect them and organize them on the blog. If you do translate something, I can edit the English for you.
Also, maybe you can help Kaneganese create a Japanese glossary of people's names and titles, placenames, document names, and old terminology. For example, I cannot read Japanese names, so it would be help to have a glossary that has something like the following:
Nagakubo Sekisui (長久保赤水) - 19th century Japanese mapmaker
What I would like to do is create an easy-to-search database of all the documents and maps related to Dokdo/Takeshima, and then tell an easy-to-understand history with links to posts with original documents and more detailed explanation of particular incidents. I want to give the reader a choice to read more detail only if he or she wants.
Anyway, that is just a rough idea of my grand scheme.
If Ponta would like to participate, he is welcome, too.