A transcription of the document is shown below, though I am unsure if it is a full transcription since a longer, more detailed version of the "Uldo-gi" is stored in the Koryo University Library. I cannot explain why the transcription below is shorter and different from the Koryo University Library version, which seems to have an addendum that makes it, at least, three pages longer.
鬱島記
鬱島 古稱于山國 未知羅朝何代之建國 而文獻無徵亦不可考 至智證王 亂徒窃據恃險不服 命帥臣異斯夫 船載木獅子 往于山紿之曰 ‘爾若不服 多放此獸噬殺爾輩於是.’ 國人大惧而乃降云. 此乃野史之所傳而亦無國乘所載 自此以後空廢其地 幾百年而史無傳焉. 至我朝 龍蛇之變 三陟鄭氏幾人避兵於此
肅廟朝 搜出金丸等七十餘人 載於史冊 而此後 命三陟副使 越松萬戶 間三年搜討 使之不得居生 蓋慮絶島中若有無賴 成群或作禍胎也.
粵在皇上 踐祚聖德巍蕩遐通 一體率土之濱莫非王民 頃於壬午 命帥臣李奎遠爲開拓使 在前潛渡日人一千五百餘名 盡爲撤歸後 關東人七八家先入 而嶺南人十餘家 隨入倚巖 爲屋放火菑田 自此以後 八路之人 稍稍移來 漸成村落 然而鼠灾甚酷 田穀無遺 其時島長徐敬秀 告狀政府 領議政沈舜澤 筵奏劃下 三陟蔚珍平海三邑 還穀中三百石 以賑島民 自是以後 生齒日蕃 土地漸闢 儼成一都會 然挽近日人 浸浸潛越 侵虐居民亂斫木料 島監裵季周 自丙申到任以後 禁止不得 屢度報告 內部大臣李建夏 深慮弊源 上年九月 以本部視察官 爲調査委員 使之前往詳察該島情形之意 上奏裁可 而余以不才猥承此 命又與日本公使 會辦外部 迺於本年五月卄五日 發向仁港. 越七日 與日本警部補渡邊鷹治郞 搭乘木曾川丸 直向釜山港. 卄九日 午後 到泊會同 監理署主事金冕秀 海關稅務士法人羅保得 同幫辦金聲遠 日本副領事赤塚正輔 同警部渡邊鷹治郞 我國保護巡檢申泰炫 金亨郁 日本保護巡檢二人 共搭本國蒼龍丸. 三十日 發向鬱島 越翌日 上午八点 遠見本島 峯巒羅列 而雲靄矇籠 至下午一時 始泊道洞浦口 此是本島監私室處也. 其翌日 卽六月一日 與日領事 會同調査 稅務司則在傍參聽一連. 三日 査問日人與島監而所供相反 盖日人則本是潛越犯法 一直飾辭 發明所致更無可査問. 翌日 會同更搭輪船 巡察全島 而住輪下陸 則天府洞之古仙浦 玄圃洞 台霞洞 三洞 而台霞洞洞壑圓開 地勢平鋪 有官舍八間 赤有前人題銘 依舊例致誠于山神堂 曉諭洞民 而日已沉西 故悤悤還島. 五日 各洞民人等狀禀目告訴 還至左酬右應少無間隙且 輪船不可多日留泊 石炭亦告乏 島中民雖欲挽留 事機無奈.
越六日 上午十時 草草勘簿 仍搭輪船回棹 則本島山川形勝土産風俗 雖未可詳知 然留連五日 公事之暇 召入各洞父老 詳論開拓以後事實 間亦有異聞. 槩全島長可爲七十里 廣可爲四十里 周廻亦可爲一百四五十里 而自壬癸開拓以後 至今居民爲四百餘家 男女共爲一千七百口 起墾火田爲七千七百餘斗落 而厥土沃 腴播穀豊 登所種則大小麥黃豆甘藷 家家足粮水利 則採藿爲主至於綿花麻布紙屬等物 不待外至而自足 若或値災年 則幸有鶴鳥與茗夷草 可免飢餓 此是上天好生之德 若有意 而生此物於此土耶. 鶴鳥則鷹喙 而鳧足毛皜而鳩 大晝則翶翔乎海面 啄食魚種 暮則歸於山間而穴處 人欲捕得用火山中 則向明來集 因以捕獲全不費力 味如鳧肉 而尤佳茗夷 則一莖兩葉 莖如蒜穗 而葉如玉簪 其花如葱穗之種 而味亦如之 盖以此禽此草 經年喫過 亦無飢荒之色 甚異事也. 山勢則層巒聳翠 奇巖怪石 或如人立或似獸 遵千態萬象 雖以描寫 而樹木參天 有槻木․紫檀․栢子․甘湯等木 無非堅密 紋緻可供珍皿也 尤有異焉者 峯壑若是深邃 而無虎豺蛇虺之害 樹木若是茂盛 而亦無荊棘剌膚之 若莫非靈氣所鍾除祛 害人之物也. 島人之稱小金剛宜也 非虛譽也 所恨者 奉命來此公事煩劇 不得對此名勝 一敘幽懷 而此生亦不可再見 甚可歎惜 而亦見笑於山靈也.
巡島日謾吟一絶
海中鬱島久聞名 挺立奇峯不世情 鍾得千年淸淑氣 山無虎蛇樹無荊
Gerry,
ReplyDeleteAlthough I can't all the text accurately but I understand it mentions that Uldo (欝島) was Usan country in the ancient times. It also mentions the legend of wooden lions. But I'm afraid the text doesn't mention Usan or Jukdo.
Sorry, my mistake...
ReplyDeleteAlthough I can't "translate" all the text accurately ...
Gerry,
ReplyDeleteWhere did you get the image of the document? Are there more pages? I'm especially interested in the description on the shapes of Ulleundo, which seems to be not open to public or missing in Korea.
There are Chinese writing on toron's site.
http://toron.pepper.jp/jp/take/hennyu/koujou1.html
Ⅳ。{鬱島記}(禹用鼎)
(270) 禹用鼎の {鬱島記}(1) {鬱島記}
鬱島 古称于山国 未知羅朝何代之建国 而文献無徴亦不可考
至智証王 乱徒拠恃険不服 命帥臣異斯夫 船載木獅子 往于山砠之曰
'爾若不服 多放此獣殺爾輩於是.' 国人大而乃降云。
此乃野史之所伝而亦無国乗所載 自此以後空廃其地 幾百年而史無伝焉。
至我朝 竜蛇之変 三陟鄭氏幾人避兵於此 肅廟朝 捜出金丸等七十余人 載於史冊
而此後 命三陟副使 越松万戸 間三年捜討 使之不得居生 蓋慮絶島中若有無頼 成群或作禍胎也。
洵在皇上 践祚聖徳巍蕩遐通 一体率土之濱莫非王民 頃於壬午 命帥臣李奎遠為開拓使
在前潜渡日人一千五百余名 盡為撤帰後 関東人七八家先入 而嶺南人十余家 隨入倚巌 為屋放火
田 自此以後 八路之人 稍稍移来 漸成村落 然而鼠
甚酷 田穀無遺 其時島長徐敬秀 告状政府 領議政沈舜沢 筵奏画下 三陟蔚珍平海三邑 還穀中三百石 以賑島民 自是以後 生歯日蕃 土地漸闢 儼成一都会 然挽近日人 浸浸潜越 侵虐居民乱斫木料 島監裴季周 自丙申到任以後 禁止不得 屡度報告 内部大臣李建夏 深慮弊源 上年九月 以本部視察官 為調査委員 使之前往詳察該島情形之意 上奏裁可 而余以不才猥承此 命又与日本公使 会辧外部 於本年五月廿五日 発向仁港。
I'm tired today, so I'll try to translate it when I get back to Tokyo tomorrow.
Gerry,
ReplyDeleteIn this page , you can see 鬱島記 Korean language translation.
http://plaza.snu.ac.kr/~bigbear1/m3-1-7.htm
You need hwp viewer .
Thank you Pacifist & Kaneganese,
ReplyDeleteThe document was in Lee Sang-tae's book, "Historical Evidence of Korean Sovereignty over DOKDO," which I bought today, and there is only that one page of the "Uldo-gi" in the book.
By the way, the Samcheok Museum map is not in the book, but the 1711 map is.
Thank you Yabutarou. I should have checked there.
ReplyDeleteBy the way
ReplyDeleteThis Uldo-gi鬱陵記 by 禹用鼎 is same doccuments with below or different contents?
http://www.ullungdo.com/dokdo/cmusem.htm
No.4
전적류
32. 鬱島記附建議書 : 1904(광무 8). 5. 7, 中樞院, 1점 , 필사본 복제
GTOMR,
ReplyDeleteI would think the documents are different since they were written on different dates; however, I do not know anything about the 1904 document.
Below is 禹用鼎’s 『鬱島記』picked up from Toron Talkers site introduced by pacifist.
ReplyDeletehttp://toron.pepper.jp/jp/take/hennyu/koujou1.html
Original text on Toron Talkers site is in three parts, but I arranged and put some numbers to understand easily.
The text is about 1300 letters in Chinese Character.
(270) 禹用鼎の {鬱島記}(1)
① 鬱島 古称于山国 未知羅朝何代之建国 而文献無徴亦不可考 至智証王 乱徒 拠恃険不服 命帥臣異斯夫 船載木獅子 往于山砠之曰'爾若不服 多放此獣 殺爾輩於是.' 国人大 而乃降云。此乃野史之所伝而亦無国乗所載 自此以後空廃其地 幾百年而史無伝焉。
Introduction and history of old age.
② 至我朝 竜蛇之変 三陟鄭氏幾人避兵於此。肅廟朝 捜出金丸等七十余人 載於史冊。
而此後 命三陟副使 越松万戸 間三年捜討 使之不得居生 蓋慮絶島中若有無頼 成群或作禍胎也。
洵在皇上 践祚聖徳巍蕩遐通 一体率土之濱莫非王民 頃於壬午 命帥臣李奎遠為開拓使 在前潜渡日人一千五百余名 盡為撤帰後 関東人七八家先入 而嶺南人十余家 隨入倚巌 為屋放火 田 自此以後 八路之人 稍稍移来 漸成村落。 然而鼠 甚酷 田穀無遺 其時島長徐敬秀 告状政府 領議政沈舜沢 筵奏画下 三陟蔚珍平海三邑 還穀中三百石 以賑島民 自是以後 生歯日蕃 土地漸闢 儼成一都会。
History in Chosun dynasty. Here we can see 李奎遠’s inspection.
③ 然挽近日人 浸浸潜越 侵虐居民乱斫木料。 島監裴季周 自丙申到任以後 禁止不得 屡度報告。 内部大臣李建夏 深慮弊源 上年九月 以本部視察官 為調査委員 使之前往詳察該島情形之意 上奏裁可 而余以不才猥承此 命又与日本公使 会辧外部 於本年五月廿五日 発向仁港。
(271) 禹用鼎の {鬱島記}(2)
越七日 与日本警部補渡辺鷹治郎 搭乗木曽川丸 直向釜山港。
廿九日 午後 到泊会同 監理署主事金冕秀 海関税務士法人羅保得 同戎辧金声遠 日本副領事赤塚正輔 同警部渡辺鷹治郎 我国保護巡検申泰炫 金亨郁 日本保護巡検二人 共搭本国蒼竜丸。三十日 発向鬱島 越翌日 上午八点 遠見本島 峯巒羅列 而雲靄情篭 至下午一時 始泊道洞浦口 此是本島監私室処也。
禹用鼎was adopted as a inspector in September 1899.
On May 25th 1900, he left Seoul to Inchon. At Pusan 赤塚正輔 and other members joined, and the Korea- Japan joint inspection team reached Ulleungdo 道洞on 31th of May.
④ 其翌日 即六月一日 与日領事 会同調査 税務司則在傍参聴一連。三日 査問日人与島監而所供相反 盖日人則本是潜越犯法 一直飾辞 発明所致更無可査問。
翌日 会同更搭輪船 巡察全島 而住輪下陸 則天府洞之古仙浦 玄圃洞 台霞洞 三洞 而台霞洞洞壑円開 地勢平鋪 有官舍八間 赤有前人題銘 依旧例致誠于山神堂 曉諭洞民 而日已 西 故 還島。
五日 各洞民人等状 目告訴 還至左酬右応少無間隙且 輪船不可多日留泊 石炭亦告乏 島中民雖欲挽留 事機無奈。
(272) 禹用鼎の {鬱島記}(3)
越六日 上午十時 草草勘簿 仍搭輪船回棹
Inspection took place on June 1st to 3rd. (three days)
On 4th of June, they got on a ship and went around the island.
Here we can see names of 天府洞之古仙浦 玄圃洞 台霞洞 三洞
6th of June, they left the island homeward.
⑤ 則本島山川形勝土産風俗 雖未可詳知 然留連五日 公事之暇 召入各洞父老 詳論開拓以後事実 間亦有異聞。
吠全島長可為七十里 広可為四十里 周迴亦可為一百四五十里
而自壬癸開拓以後 至今居民為四百余家 男女共為一千七百口 起墾火田為七千七百余斗落 而厥土沃 播穀豊 登所種則大小麦黄豆甘藷 家家足粮水利 則採 為主至於綿花麻布紙属等物 不待外至而自足 若或値災年 則幸有鶴鳥与茗夷草 可兔飢餓 此是上天好生之徳 若有意 而生此物於此土耶。鶴鳥則鷹喙 而鳧足毛筥而鳩 大昼則 翔乎海面 啄食魚種 暮則帰於山間而穴処 人欲捕得用火山中 則向明来集 因以捕獲全不費力 味如鳧肉 而尤佳茗夷 則一茎両葉 茎如蒜穂 而葉如玉簪 其花如 穂之種 而味亦如之 盖以此禽此草 経年喫過 亦無飢荒之色 甚異事也。山勢則層巒聳翠 奇巌怪石 或如人立或似獣 遵千態万象 雖以描写 而樹木参天 有槻木・紫檀・栢子・甘湯等木 無非堅密 紋緻可供珍皿也 尤有異焉者 峯壑若是深邃 而無虎豺蛇紅之害 樹木若是茂盛 而亦無荊棘剌膚之 若莫非霊気所鍾除 害人之物也。島人之称小金剛宜也 非虚誉也 所恨者 奉命来此公事煩劇 不得対此名勝 一 幽懐 而此生亦不可再見 甚可歎惜 而亦見笑於山霊也。
巡島日 吟一絶
海中鬱島久聞名 挺立奇峯不世情 鍾得千年清淑気 山無虎蛇樹無荊。
What they heard from the old residents of Ulleungdo.
Here we can see 全島長可為七十里 広可為四十里 周迴亦可為一百四五十里。
・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・
I am wondering if this is a whole text of 禹用鼎’s report「鬱島記」or not.
I heard original text has already been lost, and Koryo university’s 1904 version is a hand write copy, which I am not sure yet. This Toron Talkers text which are from 独島学会’s site, I suppose it may be a print version of Koryo university’s text.
As 禹用鼎writes 於本年五月廿五日発向仁港( I started for Inchon on 25th of May THIS YEAR), so this report was certainly written in 1900.
As you see, there is no description about the islands, nor 石島。
Thank you, Matsu.
ReplyDeleteThe text in your comment is not the whole text of the Koryo University version of the Uldo-gi based on a KBS News video that shows part of the Koryo Univ. text. If you are registered on the KBS News site, you can watch the video HERE. If not, you can look at the pictures I took of the video below:
Uldo-gi Cover
The following picture shows that some of the text in the Koryo Univ. version is different from the text copied from Toron's site:
Picture of Different Text
The following picture shows the little poem at the end of Toron's text outlined in red, but there are, at least, three more pages after that.
巡島日謾吟一絶
海中鬱島久聞名 挺立奇峯不世情 鍾得千年淸淑氣 山無虎蛇樹無荊
Thank you, Gerry,
ReplyDeleteI could see through your picture, there are more pages after U Youg Jong’s poem. And another information which we haven’t read yet.
I could also read鬱島記附建議書 on the front page.
So, long version (hopefully complete version) in Koryo University includes his 建議=suggestion.
This suggestion must have done before “1900 edict 41”, so we might find some information about 石島 in his “suggestion”.
Gtomr mentioned about鬱島記附建議書(1904) in Dokto Museum.
It says「筆写本 複製」(hand write copy, replica) 中樞院.
Two books can be the same version and can be another version.
We can read ６月１日(June 1st),６月３日( June 3rd) after U Youg Jong’s poem. This part may be related with Joint-inspection.
The text Gerry has posted is much more better compared with Toron’s version.
Wow! Good job, guys!
ReplyDeleteAnd I realized that I was dumb that I didn't noticed the meaning and the importance of GTOMR's finding before. I agree with matsu that "建議書" is very possible to be the record of a proposal for the promotion of Ulluendo to Uleudo County by 禹用鼎.
I'd like to read the rest of the book.
U Yong Jeong禹用鼎's report about their voyage on the 4th of June tells us something interesting.
ReplyDeleteGerry's text
翌日 會同更搭輪船 巡察全島 而住輪下陸 則天府洞之古仙浦 玄圃洞 台霞洞 三洞.
Toron's text
翌日 会同更搭輪船 巡察全島 而住輪下陸 則天府洞之古仙浦 玄圃洞 台霞洞 三洞.
On the next day(the 4th of June), we got on a ship together, and went to see the whole island.
We stopped and landed at Three Villages, which are 天府洞之古仙浦 Chon-bu Dong's Guseon-Po, 玄圃洞 Hyoen-po-Dong, and 台霞洞 Tae-ha-Dong.
Before that day, they were staying at 道洞 Do-Dong ,where the ship from Pusan蒼龍號 reached.
（禹用鼎：始泊道洞浦口 此是本島監私室處也.）
（赤塚正助：機密京第一七號 翌三十一日着上陸。翌日ヨリ三日間、島監・裵季周ノ邸ニ於テ、受命調査事項ニ就キ、雙方立會、日本人及島監ヲ取調ヘ）
So, on the 4th of June, they started from 道洞to天府洞之古仙浦. That is the course to the northward from 道洞, so they could see 竹島and島牧 and 三本立before they reached 天府洞之古仙浦.
As you know, 天府洞 is located at the north side of the island. This is very important thing.
And then, they went westward to玄圃洞 Hyoen-po-Dong, and again westward to台霞洞 Tae-ha-Dong.
台霞洞 Tae-ha-Dong later becomes the capital of the Uldo county by 勅令４１号.
We can imagine U Yong Jeong was impressed by the village as he writes,
Gerry's text
而台霞洞、洞壑圓開、地勢平鋪。有官舍八間 赤有前人題銘。 依舊例致誠于山神堂 曉諭洞民。
Toron's text
而台霞洞、洞壑円開、地勢平鋪。 有官舍八間 赤有前人題銘。 依旧例致誠于山神堂 曉諭洞民。
And 台霞洞 has a big open land. There is a government house which has 8 gan size,and also (赤should be亦) there is an ancient peoples's inscription. Depending on old tradition, village people serve honestly to a Mountain-God's shrine山神堂(This may not be read as于山), which gives people good teaching.
And then the sun has gone down to the west,they took the way to homeward.
Gerry's text
而日已沉西 故悤悤還島
Toron's text
而日已 西 故 還島
(this text has some more Chinese Characters which can't be appeared on the site)
We cannot know which route they took to return(to道洞 Do-Dong), but on the returning route, they could see nothing because of the darkness.
The Point is, this 禹用鼎's document proves they could see the islands of 竹島and島牧 and 三本立on their voyage. But 禹用鼎 comment nothing for the islands.
When we read the report, we can feel that their concern was not forcused on the sea or fishing,
as Akatsuka writes,
第二. 産物
海産物トシテハ、若布・天草・鮑魚ノ類ニシテ、其産額ハ多カラス。漁業ハ海底槪シテ深ク且ツ巖石多キヲ以テ、全ク見込ナシ。
there was no hope for fishery.
And 禹用鼎 side tells nothing about fishery.
One thing very strange is, the Akatsuka's Map doesn't have the name of 台霞洞.
Was that place not impressive for Japanese side?
And Two sides, Korean and Japanese, seems that they did not exchange the information.
For the Population and number of household,
赤塚 side show
島民戶數五百二十餘、人口二千五百有餘。
More than 520 households
population more than 2500
And 禹用鼎 side show
至今居民為四百余家 男女共為一千七百口
More than 400 households
population 1700
The difference of the figure very big.
These things show, thugh it was a joint-survey,but it was done very independently for each other.
pacifist's comment
(29 th of Sunday, April 13, 2008
1900 Japanese map of Ulleungdo )
禹用鼎 could never go to Liancourt rocks in this schedule
is very important.
It's a documental proof that 禹用鼎 couldn' t know about Dokto in this 7 days visit to Ulleungdo.
Why would they have to go?
ReplyDeleteThey could have just interviewed any local and been informed of the islets. We already know Koreans were aware of Liancourt Rocks in 1900 because the Black Dragon Fishing Manual of 1901 contains the passage "Japanese and Koreans call the island Yangko"
BlackDragon1901
Thank you, matsu, for the excellent explanation.
ReplyDeleteAnd it is important to point out that Korean and Japanese official record do not always match each other. It is apparent both officials were working independantly in some way in spite of joint survey.
It sounds extremely strange that U didn't mention any of islands or rocks in the report, even Jukdo which is clearly defined in 1900 Imperial Ordinance. Are there any clue in the rest of the report unrevealed? Or is it only because Korean officials were not really interested in islands nor fishery around Ulleundo as matsu explained? I don't know.
But one thing is clear that U and others definately didn't go to 竹島/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo, which Japanese and Korean both called in Japanese name, "Yanko(Liancourt)" around same period of the time this survey was conducted.
As far as reading the part of U's record available, which is official record of governmental survey, along with Japanese records, it is natural to say that both Korean officials and local residents on Ulleundo recognized this "Yanko" as outside of their territory or at least not within the Ulleundo administration.
Matsu,
ReplyDeleteThe text said that on the 4th "they sailed around the whole island and stopped at three places--Cheobu-dong' Goseon-po (天府洞之古仙浦), Hyeunpo-dong (玄圃洞), and Taeha-dong (台霞洞)--so we can assume they continued on a counterclockwise course back to Dodong.
翌日 會同更搭輪船 巡察全島 而住輪下陸 則天府洞之古仙浦 玄圃洞 台霞洞 三洞
At any rate, the text makes it quite clear that the group did not travel to Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima/Dokdo), so the "Seokdo" (石島) mentioned in U Yong-jeong's report was almost certainly not Liancourt Rocks.
I have read that "Seokdo" was mentioned in U Yong-jeong's report, but without seeing it in the context of the report, we cannot know exactly what it was referring to.
I suspect that the reason Koreans are so secretive about U's report is that it shows that Seokdo could not have been Liancourt Rocks.
Actually, I am surprised the full report has not been made public by someone, yet. I would have thought Japanese historians would have gotten a copy by now.
What bothers me about Korea's historians is that they seem to treat history as if it were some kind of chess game, rather than a scholarly pursuit of truth.
A Chosun Ilbo article today shows that some Korean Dokdo historians are still promoting the same old, corrupt argument. Korea has good historians, but nationalism seems to blind them.
"Korea Refutes New Dokdo Claims from Japan"
Gerry,
ReplyDelete>Actually, I am surprised the full report has not been made public by someone, yet. I would have thought Japanese historians would have gotten a copy by now. is because that
explained that "the original "Uldo-GI" was missing" and now under the serching for it"
We are longly cheated by Dokdo study center獨島学会, the wrote
"原文 紛失、追跡回復中"(original text has missing and now serching for it")
.So we thought we cannot read full text.
But these days I got replies from Koryo University library about Uldo-gi's missing and they replied they had never lost the books so far.
Dear dokdo-takeshima.com,
ReplyDeleteSo you admit U Yong Jeong 禹用鼎could not go to Dokto / Liancourt rocks within seven days schedule in Ulleungdo, when you write “Why would they have to go?”
OK, then, it is proved that “禹用鼎 never saw Dokto / Liancourt rocks on his own eyes.”
It makes one good progress.
And how do you prove
“They have interviewed some local and been informed of the islets.”
I want to know who informed 禹用鼎 about the islets, and what was the information.
Thank you Kaneganese , and Thank you Gerry,
ReplyDeleteFirst, sorry for my many miss-spellings and lacking of words and grammatical mistakes.
And please also correct my translation from Chinese documents into English.
I am wondering 独島学会 or Korean scholars have any reliable English translation of 鬱島記, which is one of the most important document in this issue.
Tron’s site has “automatic translation” into Japanese, but it is more confusing.
Gerry,
When I wrote
“We cannot know which route they took to return(to 道洞 Do-Dong), but on the returning route, they could see nothing because of the darkness.”
I meant 禹用鼎 could not become an eye witness about 5-6 islands of the Southside sea.
As he writes而日已沉西 故悤悤還島,
Because of the darkness after the sun has already set, whichever route they took, he could see nothing in the Southside sea.
On the contrary, he certainly saw the islands in Eastern and Northern side of the Ulleung Island.
Matsu, don't put words in my mouth. And don't put the onus on me to prove where he obtained all of his data. It is your assertion he never knew about Liancourt Rocks when documents show Koreans knew about dokdo.
ReplyDeleteYou are trying to imply Koreans were not cognizant of Liancourt Rocks before the Japanese illegally annexed the islands in 1905. This is wrong. Koreans were cognizant of Dokdo at the time of Ordinance 41 which was I believe in November of 1900.
Again the Black Dragon article shows us the truth.
Gerry, don't vilify the Koreans on their approach to the Dokdo issue. Look at the falsehoods perpetrated by the Japanese on this issue.
Japan's MOFA and Shimane Prefecture have been trying to tell us that Japanese of the 18th and 19th Century considered Ulleungdo part Japan. This is complete B.S. We know the Shogunate "ceded" Ulleungdo to Chosun in 1696.
GTOMR,
ReplyDeleteI think
"原文 紛失、追跡回復中"(original text has missing and now serching for it")
is true.
The 1900 original written by 禹用鼎 himself is missing.
高麗大学 Koryo University version is a hand write copy of the original made in 1904, which still remains in the uviversity.
And 独島博物館 Dokto Museum has one copy.
Whether the copy is a replica of the Koryo University version is unknown, but it has some relation with 中枢院.
Gerry,
ReplyDeleteOne more to say, 禹用鼎 could not deny if someone says there are 5 small islands in the south side of the island, because he did not see anything about the south side sea.
Thank you, Matsu.
ReplyDeleteI have a Korean translation of the document that I will try to translate into English in the next few days.
Steve,
According to you, if U Yong-jeong had interviewed Koreans on Ulleungdo in 1900, they could have told him about an island with the Japanese name of "Yangko," which would suggest that the "Seokdo" (石島) in Mr. U's report was not Liancourt Rocks.
If "Seokdo" (石島) is mentioned in the Mr. U's "Uldo-gi," why have Korean scholars not posted the full report on the Internet or even quoted the sentence that mentions it? Don't you find that strange, Steve, especially when considering its significance in the debate?
I do not consider people who hide history to be true historians.
Gerry, I don't find the absence of Korean data surprising at all.
ReplyDeleteLook at the huge difference in both the quality and quantity of data in the dokdo takeshima dispute Gerry. The Japanese have ten times the data on this subject whether it be about Korean or Japanese land.
A prime example are the reams of data the Japanese have on Ulluengdo Island itslef. At the turn of the century the Japanese had maps of Ulleungdo that rival those of today. The poor Koreans were still scrawling maps that looked like a kindergarten finger painting contest while the Japanese were citing top-notch British naval charts.
Gerry, I don't find people who hide data historians either. That's why I continually post relevant data on this forum. Also I don't work for the Korean government so if you got problems with "Korean scholars" ask them.
Are the Koreans hiding data? I don't know. But the Japanese surely have. Look how long it took them to release the Dajokan's map accompanying the 1877 Inquiry to Takeshima. Also look how long it took the Japanese to release the 2005 records of the Anyongbok Incident. I'm sure they have plenty of damaging data they would rather not be public.
I went back to check where I saw that "Seokdo" (石島) was mentioned in the Uldo-gi (鬱島記), but found that the author was only surmising that the name "Seokdo" appeared about the time of U Yong-jeong's inspection.
ReplyDeleteSorry for misleading people.
Gerry,
ReplyDeleteEvery one,
Have you ever seen La Porte’s report?
I am searching his report for nearly one year, but I cannot catch it yet.
In his『鬱島記』, 禹用鼎writes, La Porte, a French法人・羅保得 who works as a 海關稅務士was with them.
於本年五月卄五日 發向仁港. 越七日 與日本警部補渡邊鷹治郞 搭乘木曾川丸 直向釜山港. 卄九日 午後 到泊會同 監理署主事金冕秀 「海關稅務士法人羅保得」 同幫辦金聲遠 日本副領事赤塚正輔 同警部渡邊鷹治郞 我國保護巡檢申泰炫 金亨郁 日本保護巡檢二人 共搭本國蒼龍丸. 三十日 發向鬱島.・・・・
其翌日 卽六月一日 與日領事 會同調査 「稅務司則在傍參聽一連」.
So he must have sent his own report to his section, in Seoul.
In 1899, La Porte was also sent to 鬱陵島, and wrote a report , which is said to be quoted on 『皇城新聞』1899/9/23, the issue which begins with famous其附属小六島中最著者于山島竹島.
But no one says about the original of his report.
So, the two reports, written in 1899 and 1900, supposedly in English or French, may exist somewhere in the world.
I hope his reports include some information about 石島, or some more geographical and political information about 鬱陵島.
Matsu,
ReplyDeleteYes, Laporte (羅保得) and Bae Gye-ju (裵季周) went to Ulleungdo in the last part of June 1999, but I have not seen Laporte's report. I have read, however, that besides the Hwangseong Sinmun (皇城新聞) article, at least, some of his report is mentioned in the 內部來去案 七 (光武 3年) 照會 第13號, which is stored in Seoul National University's Kyujanggak. Click HERE.
Yes, I would like to see the report, too.
其附属小六島中最著者于山島竹島
ReplyDelete(Small six adjunctive island and Its most prominent adjunctive island is Usando-Jukdo.)
Which is most prominent adjunctive island1?
Most prominent adjunctive island2?
Above part maybe be referenced from 大韓全図 in 大韓地誌, It seems not quoted from the la porte report.
The Western’s report itself is starting from middle part.
enjoy your vacation;d
Me neither. And I'd like to see it too.
ReplyDelete