竹島問題の歴史

19.8.07

1693-1696 The Takeshima incident: the 1st dispute between Japan and Korea

1693 – 1696 The Takeshima incident: the negotiation about Takeshima (Ulleungdo)

After the deportation of the two Koreans including Ahn Yong-bok, the both countries negotiated about the possession of Takeshima (Ulleungdo).

So, the lord of Tsushima, warned Chosun government not to permit their fishermen to trespass onto Takeshima any more in September 1693.

To follow is a letter from Chosun’s official to the lord of Tsushima which was sent in December 1693:

From Chosun’s礼曹参判権皆

To the lord of Tsushima

(greetings at the beginning were not translated.)

Our country strictly inhibited to go to the sea and restrain the
fishermen of the east coast from making a voyage on the ocean. (They can’t go
easily to) even
蔚陵島
(Ulleungdo) which is our border because it’s too
far and they are not permitted to go there voluntarily, let alone outer place
than the island. But now these fishing boats went to Takeshima in your
territory. And you sent them back to us from the far place. We thank your
friendship. Fishermen have the nature of going far crossing border to catch fish
if there was no wind and could drift with the current. We will punish them
severely. These criminals committed a sin. We will strictly control the coast,
instructing each of them. Thank you very much for your kindness. We hope you
will be alright.

Yours sincerely.

This letter is a kind of trick because it says that Ulleungdo and Takeshima are different islands so that Chosun governs Ulleungdo while Japan governs Takeshima. This wouldn’t be a problem for a while because Chosun was doing the “empty island” policy in those days, but it was a deceptive resolution.

(Note: Ahn Yong-bok was to be punished at this moment as a criminal, although he escaped from it later.)

Tada Yozaemon, the messenger from Tsushima, was dissatisfied with the letter. He stayed in Busan for 4 months and kept negotiating with Chosun but didn’t reach an agreement.

To follow is from a document made by Tsushima officials after this. (From the book “竹島紀事” 1726)

Concerning Takeshima, it is no doubt that it
has been ruled by Inaba (of Japan) since the
years of Tokugawa Ieyasu (the founder of the Tokugawa shogunate). That country (Chosun) has left the island alone and kept indifferent about it for many years and it is almost right to say that it is in our country. So we can’t overlook
the deceptive letter using two names for one island. Soon we sent a reply to ask
to erase the word of
蔚陵島
(Ulleungdo), and to send the rewritten letter
back to us. (some sentences abbreviated)

We would dispatch a messenger to Chosun as the
communication between Japan and Chosun is important.


Then, Tada Yozaemon went to Busan again in May of the 7th year of Genroku (1694) and claimed them to delete the word. But there was a political change in the Chosun’s government. The three major posts,
領義政, 左義政 and 右義政 were changed from 権大運, 睦来善 and 閔黯respectively to南九万, 朴世采 and 尹趾完. With this political change, hard-liners were on the rise. A new official wrote a new letter on 12th September and refuted the Takeshima-Japan’s territory theory.

From Chosun’s official (朝鮮国礼曹参判李番)

To the lord of Tsushima

(greetings at the beginning were not translated)

There is an island belonging to 江原道 蔚珍県in our country. Its name is 蔚陵 and is located in the east sea of this area. Wind
and waves are very rough and there is no service to go there. So the island is
uninhibited all through the year. But officials are occasionally visiting there
for inspection. The peaks of this island are thickly wooded and they can be
clearly seen from the homeland. The mountains and rivers are meandering, and the land is narrow.

There are ruins of human residence. Productions from the soil
are rich. It’s written in the book
輿地勝覧
of our country. They have passed the information
successively about the island and the remains are evident. Now this time our
country’s fishermen went there and met your countrymen who crossed the border.
They caught two people who resisted and transported them to Edo. Fortunately, the feudal lord (Shogun?) of your
country recognized the situation and helped them. This friendship of neighbors
looks enormous. We moved very much. However, the place where our people engaged
in fishing was
蔚陵島 (Ulleungdo), it was also called as 竹島 (Takeshima, Jukdo) as it produces lots of bamboo.
There are two names in one island, and this was not only written in our
country’s books but also people in your country know all about this. But in your
letter, you wrote that you make Takeshima your country’s region and you want our
country to inhibit our fish boats from going there. You didn’t say that your
countrymen invaded over our border and you worry about our people to go there.
Isn’t this out of the right way of life? We hope you will forward our intention
to the Shogun and let him know that your country’s fishermen come and go to
蔚陵島 without permission. ・・・
(the greetings in the end were
abbreviated.)

September 1694

(Note: The Chosun government brought the book 輿地勝覽 to prove that Ulleungdo was their territory. But 300 years later, the South Korean government brought the same book again to prove that Liancourt rocks were their territory. The same sentence was once used to prove that Ulleungdo was their territory and it was used again to prove that another island (Liancourt rocks) were their territory. This is unreasonable.)

In response to this letter, Tada Yozaemon cross-examined Chosun government giving four items:

#1: Your (Chosun) government says that you keep sending officials
for inspecting Ulleungdo on the regular basis. But our fishermen from Tottori or
Izumo have never met the Chosun officials in 81 years. Why?

#2: Your (Chosun) government says that “Your (Japanese) countrymen
invaded over our border”. Some of the Japanese fishermen who set off for
Ulleungdo have drifted ashore to Chosun three times in the past, and you sent
them back with letters. You all knew that these fishermen were engaging in
fishing at that island. If you truly thought that these fishermen invaded your
territory, why didn’t you write about it in these three letters? You have never
ever claimed of “invading over our border” in these letters.
Why?

#3: As to Ulleungdo and Takeshima, the recent letter does not only
say that there are two names to one island but it also says that our countrymen
all knew this. You mentioned that it was written in the books and you say that
our countrymen all knew this. Then, why did the first letter say that there are
two names to two islands, stating “Your country’s Takeshima and our Ulleungdo”?
If you didn’t know that Ulleungdo was Takeshima at first and wrote about two
names to two islands, why does the recent letter say that it was written in the
books and all of our people know that there are two names to one
island?

#4: There are three letters concerning Iso-takeshima (Ulleungdo)
that were sent from Chosun to Tsushima in the past. When Tsushima tried to confirm the belonging of the island 82 years ago, a letter from the
東莱府
said that “This island is so-called Ulleungdo of ours. Although it is uninhibited, we won’t let others invade or occupy it”. The second letter also mentioned the same. But when Japanese fishermen who headed for Ulleungdo drifted ashore to your country 78 years ago, you sent them back with the letter written by a Chosun official, saying “Seven Japanese were caught by the local officials. When asked, they said that they went to Ulleungdo for fishing but high wind made them drift ashore. We send them back with the Japanese ship to your island (Tsushima)”. You
wrote that you wouldn’t let others invade it 82 years ago and you permitted them
after hearing that they engaged in fishing at the island 78 years ago, but this
is inconsistent. We can’t keep from cross-examining you about this.

There was a reply from Chosun government on 12th June 1695:

It says about the first topic, “The inspection was written in the book 輿地勝覧 and a Japanese called Sobe-e said to the Chosun official 朴再興 ‘After reading輿地勝覧, Ulleungdo belongs to your country”. It also says, “In these days, officials has not been there and inhibited fishermen from going far because of danger of voyaging”.

As to the 2nd topic, it says that they were so in hurry to send them back that they didn’t have time to ask about details. And as for the 3rd and 4th topics, it says that the former official who wrote the first letter didn’t know about history.

Tada Yozaemon refuted again;

He pointed out that to argue relying on the old book which was written 200 years ago is not right. He also stated that the island has belonged to Japan for 80 years, it was not 200 years ago, and that Japanese people keep fishing at Ulleungdo every year but they haven’t seen Chosun officials at all. He also referred to a Chosun book that mentioned about Japanese occupation of Iso-takeshima (Ulleungdo). He insisted that it was just the same as Chosun gave the island to others (Japan) if they knew that other country’s people occupied the island and permitted them to do so, and if they knew that other country’s fishermen engaged in fishing at the island and permitted them to do so.

And in the end, the negotiations broke down. Tada Yozaemon returned to Tsushima in June 1695. During the negotiations, the former lord of Tsushima, So Yoshitsugu, died of illness in September 1694 and So Yoshimichi succeeded to the lord in October 1695. After the breakdown of the negotiations, there were arguments in the shogunate but after all, they decided to give up the island and forbade the Japanese fishermen to go to Takeshima (Ulleungdo) in January 1696.

[Note: The Shogunate banned to go to Takeshima (Ulleungdo) but not to Matsushima (Liancourt rocks). The latter had not ever been disputed between the two countries.]

11 comments:

  1. Anonymous20/8/07 22:50

    This is wrong, you should source more documents before making such strong generalizations Pacifist.

    Tsushima asked permission from Korea to settle on Ulleungdo in 1417 and Chosun flatly refused, This was recorded on March 16th 1407. Here is the document.
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/1407-tsushima-doc.jpg
    To say Tsushima thought Ulleungdo was Japanese territory is dead wrong.

    Anyongbok explicitly declared Takeshima and Matsushima as part of Gangwando Province Korea in this document. Japan never objected to this request. Whatever Takeshima lobbyists say the Matsushima in this document was, to the Japanese of this era there could be no other Takeshima-Matsushima in the middle of the North Sea.
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/anyongbok-doc15.jpg

    Japanese didn't ban voyage to Matsushima because with the loss of Ulleungdo they had no reason to go. In fact, there is no records of Japanese voyaging to Matsushima as a sole destination.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous (or toadface?)

    I wrote this topic based on the documents around 1693-1696. I didn't refer to the 1417 documents, we are talking only about the 1693-1696 incident.

    Korean people have been informed one-sided information which made Ahn Yong-bok a national hero. But truth was that he was a criminal at first. The Chosun government admitted that at first.

    And the second government also admitted at last that they didn't go to Ulleungdo for inspection for many years. (It had been 200 years ago when they regularly inspected the island.)

    You wrote that Ahn Yong-bok declared Takeshima and Matsushima as part of Korea in the 15th century document. But it can't be true because Ahn came to Japan in the late 17th century. How could Ahn declare so 280 years before his visit to Japan?

    Anyway, I will put up the third version concerning his second trip to Japan (1696) with various documents. Wait for a while.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous21/8/07 00:12

    Pacifist, Anyongbok was not alone. This is a misnomer by Japanese Takeshima lobbyists to distort the facts. Anyongbok protested Japanese intrusions on Chosun lands with 10 other men including 5 monks. Their story was confirmed as true in both Korean and Japanese documents.

    The issue with the 1696 "Anyongbok Incident" is that it confirms Jasando was Matsushima (Dokdo) not Jukdo Island. The distance quoted was much too far.

    I didn't say Anyongbok declared Matsushima in 15th Century. I said Tsushima asked permission to settle on Takeshima (Ulleungdo) in 1407 and Chosun refused. The document is above.

    tsushima permission

    This document was the Japanese record of Anyongbok's testimony found in the Murakawa's achives in 2005. Here it is recorded that Anyongbok stated Matsushima was Jasando and that Takeshima (Ulleungdo) and Matsushima (Dokdo) were part of Gangwando.

    anyeongbok

    Pacifist, you are using Japanese documents to make generalizations about Chosun. The Koreans visited Ulleungdo every 2 or 3 years this was the rule. Even in times of poor harvest they conducted inspections of Ulleungdo. For example this Chosun document shows Chosun conducted these inspections as a rule here it says "biannually" but I've also read every three years.

    1794 Inspection

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous (toadface),

    I referred to both of Japanese and Korean documents. I included letters written by Chosun officials.

    And about his visit in 1696, I will put up it shortly and will show you the truth. Please wait for a while.

    (BTW, I will be out for about two weeks time. So I will put it up in early September.)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Pacifist,

    Enjoy your holiday ! Your hard work deserves long vacation.

    Toadface,

    Please do not post under the name of Anonymous. Gerry had already warned you, didn't he? Could you at least follow the basic rule?
    And you shouldn't jump to the conclusion that Ahn's Jusando was Dokdo so quickly or blindly, since Matsushima was extremely popular name for islands in Japan. There are more than 100 Matsushimas in Japan(http://uub.jp/nam/matsushima.html), moreover , there are 14 Matshushimas in Shimane prefecture and among those, 7 are in Oki. So, to identify the geographical location of Ahn's so-called Japanese Matsushima, you need to give us more information to support your claim. But in reality, Ahn testified Jusando locates in "North-east" of Ulleundo and it is "bigger" than Ulleundo. And he recognized the island as "habitable" place. None of his claims supports you and Korean's claim. I think Pacifist shows you detail of Ahn's testimony later.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Kaneganse, Anyongbok stated "Matsushima and Takeshima in the middle of the North Sea," not in Oki Province. He also called it Jasando (Usando) and stated it took a day to reach Matsushima from Ulleungdo. It also took about two days to reach Oki from Matsushima this rules out "other Matsushimas"

    An did not say Matsushima was habitiable. Japanese said they were staying on Matsushima for how long they did not say.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "not anonymous"...Well, it is really good to show everyone how crooked your logic is, unless you are joking. If you are not a Toadface, it is acceptable as long as you visit here occasionally. But if you are and you want to comment frequently, it is silly to debate on the same issue with same people with anonymous IDs, even if it is on other blog. By the way, I welcome Toadface comment frequently here. I hope myCoree will do the same.

    I am not sure if I should even respond to someone like you anymore or not, but...

    Yes, Ahn did say Matsushima was habitable. I fact, he didn't question Japanese that the island which called Matsushima was not habitable when Japanese lived on the island. It clearly shows he naturally thought the island was habitable. Don't streach from what written in the document. It is Korean, not Japanese document.
    “渠倡言欝島本我境、 倭人何敢越境侵犯、汝等可共縛之、仍進船頭大喝、倭言吾等本住松島、偶因漁採出来、今当還往本所、松島即子山島、此亦我國地、汝敢住此耶「粛宗実録 巻三〇 二十二年九月戊寅」”

    And he said it was lager than Ulluendo.
    “安龍福招内、山形草木等辭縁一様、而末端良中、矣身被捉入去之時、経一夜、翌日晩食後、見一島在海中、比頗大云云、縁由馳啓。状録、無回下。「國史編纂委員會編「邊例集要」巻17 鬱陵島」”

    All we can tell from his statement definately is, he was not sure the exact location. But the point is, he saw the huge island lager than Ulleundo(比頗大) with his own eyes and he believed that this is the Jasando/Matsushima where people can live.

    "Kaneganse, Anyongbok stated "Matsushima and Takeshima in the middle of the North Sea," not in Oki Province. He also called it Jasando (Usando) and stated it took a day to reach Matsushima from Ulleungdo. It also took about two days to reach Oki from Matsushima this rules out "other Matsushimas" You made too much mistakes in this statement, but I will point them out after pacifist make a new post about Ahn's second visit to Japan.

    I hope next time, you will use proper ID (it doesn't have to be Toadface, as long as you make it clear you use a new ID.) so that we can debate more constructively.

    Gerry,
    I couldn't read your comment. Did you find the area of 絶影島? It is called differently now.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Kaneganese,

    Thank you for your comment. (I will be out from tomorrow morning!)

    toadface or whoever,
    I will write about this in the next posting in September. So please wait.

    P.S. I added some comments at the "1693 First visit" story. lease read them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. not anonymous23/8/07 21:37

    Kaneganese.

    The original document of Anyongbok's 1696 testimony is here. There is no mention of Matsushima being habitable nor being to the Northeast. The Japanese document makes no mention of those facts either. The time frames of Anyongbok's travels match Dokdo and Ulleungdo.

    Here are the original Chosun records. I suggest that primary documents are used whenever possible. Don't use digitizal transcripts, they are subject to misinterpretations and manipulations.

    doc1
    doc2
    doc3

    Kanganese, I stand corrected. Anyongbok's "map" said Takeshima and Matsushima were 2 islands in the middle on the way to Gangwan Province. Read the original documents please.
    anyongbokdoc

    ReplyDelete
  10. not anonymous,

    Have you dicided to use "not anonymous" as your ID? Unlike you, I can read original document in Chinese caracter and almost always check this site to see if it is right. (It became one of my favorite sites. Sometimes, I have to replace the Chinese caracter of the docs since we don't use some of them anymore, though.) Or are you saying digitalized site by Korean officials are subject to misinterpretations and manipulations? I checked your document but I couldn't find the mistake in my post. He said Matsushima was habitable in your originals,too. Can you point out which part you think is exactly different from original? Thank you.

    By the way, I realized that in this statement, he didn't say "Jasando was Japanese Matsushima", but only "Matsushima is Jasando which is also the territory of my country. (松島即子山島此亦我国地)" You can read it in second doc of your "original".

    ReplyDelete
  11. pacifist, kaneganese,

    where are your informations that you were saying you were gonna provide shortly?

    by the way.. anyone can use any name he wants..? isn't that right?

    i hope you focus on the main subject please..

    ReplyDelete