竹島問題の歴史

17.7.08

1696c.a. - "Illustrative Map of Takeshima submitted by Kotani Ihei(小谷伊兵衛より差出候竹嶋之絵図)"

In 1635, the Edict of third series of isolationist (Sakoku) policies was issued by Edo Bakufu(Shogunate) and all the contacts, especially trades with foreigners without permission were stricktly prohibited in Japan.

Foreign trades were conducted only with China through the Ryukyu(琉球), with Korea(朝鮮) via Tsushima-han(対馬藩), and with the Ainu people(アイヌ) through Matsumae Han (松前藩). Takeshima(Ulleugdo) and Matshushima(Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo) were considered within Japanese territory, not Choson(Korea), thus the licence to trade with those islands were not issued to Tshushima, but the civilian merchant clans of Oyas and Murakawas in Yonago.

The abalones were presented to Shogunate every year, and the audience to Tokugawa Shogun was specially permitted exceptionally as a civilian tradesman. Murakawa clan, especially, was the one who went to today's Takeshima intensively as a sole destination, but later, Ohya clan did joined the plan.

"Illustrative Map of Takeshima submitted by Kotani Ihei(小谷伊兵衛より差出候竹嶋之絵図)" is one of the crucial evidences that Japanese had already established the effective control over the island and considered Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo to be within her territory. On the other hand, there is absolutely no Korean old maps like this which depict today's Takeshima/Dokdo accurately. Apparently, Korean didn't know the location, geography and vegetation of Takeshima/Dokdo. In other word, they had no effective control over the island before 1952, when president Rhee forcefully grabbed the island from Japan.

To follow is the translation of "The Analysis of Japanese Illustrative Maps " by Associate professor Funasugi Rikinobu (Shimane University)

3. 「Illustrative Map of Takeshima submitted by Kotani Ihei(小谷伊兵衛より差出候竹嶋之絵図)」(1696 c.a.). (Property of Tottori Museum : no.8443).

It is considered to be made in Jan. 1696. Kotani Ihei was a official of Tottori clan(鳥取藩) and he was in the duty of staying at the house of the Lord of Tottori in Edo. It is a copy of the map which Tottori clan submitted to Edo Bakufu. It was formerly owned by Ikeda clan of Tottori. It seems that he copied it from the illustrative map owned by Oya and Murakawa clan in Yonago who were engaged in voyaging to Takeshima and Matsushima.

It describes the route from Kumozu in Izumo(出雲国雲津) to Oki islands(隠岐諸島), and from Fukuura in Oki to Matushima(today's Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo), from Matsushima to Takeshima(today's Ulleundo) and to Choson peninsula with the distances, respectively. On Takeshima, names of the inlets, such as Hamada-ura(浜田浦), Awabi-ura(鮑浦), Oosaka-ura(大坂浦),  Kita-ura(北浦), Yanagi-ura(柳浦) and Take-ura(竹浦) are labelled.

It has description of sea lion hunting and abalone gathering on each inlets. The small huts are drawn on the inlets which shows that Japanese are using those huts as a base for hunting sealions and collecting abalones. It seems that the Japanese who went to Ulleundo had something to do with places like Hamada(浜田), Osaka(大坂), Hokkoku(北国). Addition to trees, bamboo fields are described on Takeshima. Those bamboo fields are drawn near Take-ura, Yanagi-ura and Awabi-ura, and we can see Takeshima was bamboo islands as it's name says. By the way, the name of the island was labelled as
Isotakeshima(磯竹嶋), not Takeshima.

There is one island on the east side of the island, and it was labelled as "Mano-shima(まの嶋)". It seems to be today's Jukdo. The bamboo fields are drawn on Manoshima. The Choson maps which was made by Choson dynasty in the same period also describes "海長竹田" on today's Jukdo. This "海長竹" is same with Japanese "女竹". Since there are few bamboo fields drawn on Ulleundo, it is noticeable that bamboos on the islands are recognized in both countries. There is some descriptions of the islands and cape, which has no name. For example, "Ikashima", "Takekosima" and "Tatukahana" has description that abalones were collected there, but no location was described. It is possible that the original map which this map based on had more precise explanation.

There is one hut described on the shore of eastern island of Matsushima, today's Takeshima, and near the inlet, there is a description "the place(doc) for ships." There is only one big inlet on exact same place of today's Takeshima. It seems that Murakawa and Ohya family were engaged in seal hunting and abalone harvesting, using the hut as a base just like they did on Ulleundo.

The maps is a very important historical record which tells us not only Japanese recognized both Matsushima and Takeshima geographically, but also they were engaged in economical activity on both islands.

This is from the Final report by Takeshima Research Center, 2007 (竹島研究会最終報告書 2007)
"Takeshima in Illustrative Maps and Maps Vol.II " (絵図・地図からみる竹島(II)) 
3. The analysis of Japanese illustrative maps ( 3.日本側作製の絵図の分析) by Funasugi Rikinobu (Shimane University) (舩杉力修 島根大学法文学部・歴史地理学)

Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.

94 comments:

  1. sorry if my english-grammar is poor. but i'll try my best.
    and since there are so many comments on 'map of joseon', allow me to write comment here.

    'usando(jasando)' is known as 'ullengdo'. EVERY Korean knows that. since that is what written in historical records(samguksagi, joseon wangjo-silloc), and even shown in myth and song. and some ullengdo locals are still using that name. 'usando' is also known as 'usanguk' at korea. (it's the name of a small country used to located among today's ullengdo and dok-do, and united with silla(or sinla) dynasty at 512 A.D)
    and that's why the map of Joseon draw 'usando' at north-west.
    because that's where usando REALLY locates. north-west of dok-do(takesima).
    so, the island located east of usando-which you guess it as ullengdo-, is actually looks like, dok-do(or takeshima).
    and plus. I'm very sorry but, 'theory' out of ancient maps....not powerful to 'any' of academic world. (I'll explain it below)

    Japan, on the other hand, didn't even named does islands until 19th century. they sometime called usando as takesima, or sometime, matsusima. or even, 'liancourt'. confusing isn't it?
    on 1883, one Japanese published a map and wrote 'ullengdo' as 'takesima'. and 'matsusima' for dok-do. (the map's name is 朝鮮國全圖) but other map, published at 1855, by U.S navy, wrote ullengdo as 'matsusima'. (author: Maury, William L)
    plus, at 1903, at 最新韓國實業指針, Japanes wrote; '....ullengdo and Liancourt, is own by kangwonddo-joseon...'. (liancourt was the name of the franch ship, that found dok-do first time ever, as western. and it's one of the other name of dok-do-or takesima-, today.)
    so, the point is this; Japanes didn't have proper name of usando, nor dok-do. they sometime called usando as takesima, or sometime, matsusima. or even, liancourt. they 'draw' those islands at maps, and didn't even know the name? if japan 'already' ruled dokdo(takesima), or actually lived there, why they didn't even gave the island a proper name in a first place? nor at least, report the proper name?
    and one more plus. Japanese most 'historically' trustful map are known as the 'government's map'. (Korean pronounce it as 'guan-chwan Gi-do' or 'Guan-In Gi-do', but I don't know in Japanese.) they are the 'most powerful' maps at territorial dispute, 4 maps been published by Dokugawa Bakkuhu幕府. and guess what? 'none' of them depict nor wrote about ullengdo or dokdo as their territory. the first Japanese government's map that depict 'Takesima' as their island, was published at 1989. (hmm?)

    And, I have to say another words; in academic world, 'no' historian believes 100% about every ancient map. and this is the most important part, as you become a historian. we mostly see ancient map as 'drawing' or 'pictures'. (more like psychological description, than realistic description.) so just because there are 'takesima' or 'matsusima' on lot of maps(pictures), it can't be the 'true' nor evidence. what you need is, 'whether Japanese government announced or not'. so? Dokugawa Bakkuhu denied dokdo as their territory; not just by the map, they even ordered to Japanese sailors 'not' to go near the matsusima nor takesima. (at least twice in history.) why? because "it's foreign land." game over.
    if you still believes these maps-which you collected- are 'scientifical' and 'historical', than I can give you tons of maps made from china, depict Japan 'much smaller' than Korea peninsula. and I can give you the maps from Korea(Joseon) where 'tsusima' drawn right next with Joseon. So, are you going to assert that Japan is smaller than Korea? are you going to say that tsusima is belongs Korea? you can think that on your own, but not in public. specially in academic way.

    thank you.

    are you trying for an objection to these 'facts'?
    then do that to professor 'naito saichu' at simane university, or professor 'choi saw-meon' at Myeung-Ji university. basis of what i said earlier, came from their article or forum. oh, don't worry. they lives in Japan.
    and did you knew? they are not the only one who asserting these things.
    not one historian article telling 'takesima belongs to Japan' were being announced. not even at Japan. remember that.




    p.s
    Japan actually colonized joseon, starting from colonialization of dok-do at 1905. (and achieve their final goal at 1909.)
    so, what Korean feels for 'dokdo or takeshima' problem, is, FEAR.
    Korean fears 'colonialization' almost same as Japanese fears Nuclear bomb.

    "they(Japanese) are trying to give away dokdo from us. we can't let them have our country again!" that's what EVERY korean is thinking right now. 'not this time' is the main issue in korea right now.
    i hope you will understands that someday. and since you various information about dokdo-takesima problem, i hope you will work on 'what japan did to korean, taiwan, and chinese' on 19th to middle 20th century. by looking around Koreaa, Chinese website and books; about how many people murdered by Japanese soldier those time, and what Japanese government is doing to those victims until today.
    as much as to tell Japanese "Japanese deserved Nuclear bomb!", saying "Japan modernized Korea! Takesima belongs to Japan!" to Korean, gives them humiliation , anger, and most of all fear.

    most Korean dont' fear Japanese citizen. what really they fear at, is, Japanese politicians, and what they 'think' about past and Japanese nationalism. and what they 'teach' at Japanese school.

    dok-do problem is not just 'Korea vs Japan' problem. but 'china, taiwan, korea vs japan' problem. this problem goes down deep in to the 2nd world war. a 'scar' that never been cured.
    I hope, you will understand that. before things get worse.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi, nekochan

    Thank you for your comment. At least, it is really good to read Korean speak logically. I was almost forced to believe Korean are crazy.

    "'usando(jasando)' is known as 'ullengdo'. EVERY Korean knows that. since that is what written in historical records(samguksagi, joseon wangjo-silloc), and even shown in myth and song."

    Good to hear that. Not only to Korean, it is crystal clear to every human being that Usando was used to be Ulleungdo's old name. Especially, before 1700s. But then why famous professor Lee Sang-te claims Jasando is Takeshima/Dokdo? Do you think he is lying?

    I'm not perfectly sure if this Jasando was Ulleungdo or not since there are coufusion of two islands in Choson, but one thing is clear that there is no Takeshima/Dokdo on the map. It locates 210 km from peninsula and consists of two main island, which is much smaller than Jukdo, respectively.

    "Japan, on the other hand, didn't even named does islands until 19th century. "

    "最新韓國實業指針" clearly wrote that the eastern limit of Korea is 130º 35' E. longitude, which exclude Takeshima/Dokdo. Japanese were sailing from Ulleungdo to Takeshima for seallion hunting, that why the confusion occured. It has nothing to do with territorial dispute. It's just a private publication which is written for Japanese businesspersons who want to do business in Korea.

    As for the Official Bakuhu map, I don't know what you are talking about, but there are lots of official maps which described Takeshima/Dokdo clearly within Japanese territory.

    As for the modern maps I guess you are talking about Choson Ilbo's stupid article by Prof. Hosaka (NO! Not again!) in 2005 , but it is totally wrong. Japanese GSI published many official maps which include Takeshima within territory. To follow are the examples.

    1957年(昭和32年)  50万分1地方図「中国及四国」 
    1958年(昭和33年) 250万分1「日本とその周辺」 
    1966年(昭和41年) 100万分1国際図「Central Japan」 
    1971年(昭和46年) 300万分1「日本とその周辺」 
    1973年(昭和48年) 2万5千分1地形図「西村」 
    1973年(昭和48年) 5万分1地形図「西郷」 
    1990年(平成2年) 20万分1地勢図「西郷」 

    The transition of the names of the island doesn't have anything to do with sovereignty. The point is, effective control, which Korean lacks, totally.

    I hope you'll bring more interesting "facts" next time. And stop using "victim card" here. It sounds you have something to hide, which is truth.

    ReplyDelete
  3. nekochan,

    Thanks for your opinion.

    You wrote,"Japan, on the other hand, didn't even named does islands until 19th century. they sometime called usando as takesima, or sometime, matsusima. or even, 'liancourt'. confusing isn't it?"

    Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima/Dokdo) had been called as "Matsushima" for a long time since the 17th century. Ulleungdo was called as "Takeshima" or "Isotakeshima".

    But confusion occured in the late 18th century to early 19th century when western maps depicted two islands in the Sea of Japan, Argonaut island (phantom island of Ulleungdo) and Dagelet island (true Ulleungdo). They thought Argonaut was Takeshima and Dagelet was Matsushima. Then confuson began. In this point, Matsushima meant Dagelet, that is Ulleungdo.

    After the western country discovered Liancourt Rocks (Hornet Rocks in UK) in the 19th century, they needed a new name for it - so they called it as Ruyankorudo-iwa (literally Japanese pronunciation of Liancourt Rocks), Ryanko island, or Yanko island. It was Ryanko island that Nakai Yosaburo made a petition to the Meiji government.

    So Japanese had names for Liancourt Rocks for 300 years (Matsushima, Ryankorudo-iwa or Ryanko island or Yanko island) and finally in 1905 it was named as "Takeshima" because the name of Takeshima which was the name for Ulleungdo originaly was disappeared with the phantom island of Argonaut.

    On the other hand, there was no name for Korea for Liancourt Rocks. Usando was not Liancourt Rocks, Sambongdo was not Liancourt Rocks ans Seokdo was not Liancourt Rocks.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous17/7/08 09:21

    If you finally find the historical truth, You'll be ashamed of yourself for Japanese falsehoods.

    Do you know comfort women?
    Japan also deny this truth.

    ReplyDelete
  5. nekochan,

    It seems that you are mixed up.

    So, are you sayig that the Korean government claim that "Usando" is the present-day Dokdo is not true?

    __________________________________

    that's why the map of Joseon draw 'usando' at north-west.
    because that's where usando REALLY locates. north-west of dok-do(takesima).so, the island located east of usando-which you guess it as ullengdo-, is actually looks like, dok-do(or takeshima).

    ReplyDelete
  6. anonymous,

    Don't start the other issue like "Comfort Women" here.

    Regarding the Liancourt Rocks, when its truth will come out in Korea, you will be ashamed of yourself in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  7. kanaegaese,

    Thank you for showing the map owned by the Tottori Prefectural Museum.

    Koreans should think by themselves of why Korea does NOT have even a single detailded map like this for the "Dokdo" that they claim it's theirs.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous17/7/08 13:09

    Japanese Government deny their shamed hitory and cheat the truth of history.

    How can we believe the map from japan? It's just faked map.

    ReplyDelete
  9. anonymous,

    So, don't believe the Japanese map.

    Can you provide an old detailed Korean map of Dokdo like this?

    And, if you can't, think of why you can't.

    __________________________________

    How can we believe the map from japan? It's just faked map.

    ReplyDelete
  10. dokdo-takeshima.com17/7/08 13:37

    This map shows that the Japanese who voyaged to Matsushima simply went there to trespass on Korea's Ulleungdo Island.


    At least a year earlier the Japanese had concluded both of these islands did not belong to Japan


    Please read here

    DokdoNotPartOfJapan

    ReplyDelete
  11. dokdo-takeshima.com17/7/08 13:39

    This map shows that the Japanese who voyaged to Matsushima simply went there to trespass on Korea's Ulleungdo Island.


    At least a year earlier the Japanese had concluded both of these islands did not belong to Japan


    Please read here

    DokdoNotPartOfJapan

    ReplyDelete
  12. dogdo,

    We already talked about it.

    Whatever Japan "ceded" along with Ulleungdo, if Korea was unaware of its whereabouts, the fact that Japan ceded it does not make it a Korean territory.

    __________________________________

    At least a year earlier the Japanese had concluded both of these islands did not belong to Japan

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous17/7/08 14:28

    Japanese do not admit their shamed past. It'll mess up their future too.

    ReplyDelete
  14. the name 'usando' came from the name 'usanguk' (i told you that before). 'guk国' means 'country'. there was a country that ruled does islands, until 512. (if you are so curious about this, read 'samguksak(g)i')
    so, that's why korean are saying 'usanguk includes dok-do'. silla invade 'usanguk' and united that island into their territory. why? 'sailors from usanguk' were pirate to silla locals, so they asked their king to 'clear up' those pirates.

    it's 216km from ullengdo to ancient silla's shore. if locals from usanguk could sail 216km, it's obvious to think that they could sail 87km. (ullengdo~dokdo) so since the record are showing 'usanguk' as a country, professors and historian are giving those as 'evidence' of dok-do. they 'never' say usando=dokdo, (i don't know were you got those words.) what they trying to say, is, 'usanguk actually included dokdo in their territory.' and that is what their saying.

    and, yeah, maybe Joseon didn't made proper name of dok-do long time a go. as your perspective.
    but what are you going to explain, about 東南諸島開拓使兼管捕鯨事? the Joseon's official 'employee' to gives rule to 'usando and island around them'(their working area actually included dokdo).
    Kim-Ok-Geun was latest 東南諸島開拓使兼管捕鯨事, and he got that job at 1883. if you want to know about that, read 'Joseon WangJo silloc'; 'public' record of Joseon. (and if you want to give an objection about this, than you gonna have to bring all historian in the 'world'. since it's the most trustful record of Joseon in academic world.)
    and every official map you just showed me as comment were made after 1883. that doesn't help anything. since Joseon have evidence already. (and Korea also has official map made after 1950.)

    “The point is, effective control, which Korean lacks, totally.”
    I have to say, Japan lacks as well. if you go down to 'official map' or records, to 19th century and blow that, you will find out how lack it is.
    and most of the maps(including non-official map) made from Oki island, or from Simane. not from kyoto. but Joseon, made those maps at Han yang. (today's Seoul)

    and these words really upsets me.
    "At least, it is really good to read Korean speak logically. I was almost forced to believe Korean are crazy"
    "And stop using "victim card" here. It sounds you have something to hide, which is truth."

    I guess you have a lot of 'personal' feeling about Korean. (sorry to hear that.)
    but, well, that looks as personal attack to me. and since Korean culture is, 'if someone gives you personal attack, just ignore them. "logical" doesn't work on them.' I guess all the Korean who comes to this blog seems to bring those words as action. and that is your fault. you started it. by ignoring 'Trauma' of Korean. and plus, to Chinese as well.

    say that to victims.
    say that when you know the real 'fact' of 2nd world war at asia.
    It sounds Japanese government have something to hide, which is truth.
    and seems you don't know the real 'point' of dok-do issue. (which Korean and Chinese already know)

    You know why Japanese doesn't welcomed in East asia? do you know why old ones saying bad words to Japanese traveler?
    Japan never apologied 'not even once' to those victims. only to Korea? nope, to chinese victims either. i met a chinese girl, which their grandmother was murdered by japanese soldier. and they haven't got any apology from Japan. and still feel bad about Japanese government. and my grandfather himself, still have gunshot at his right arm. which came from Japanese soldier.

    every thing around china-korea-japan related with '2nd world war'. EVERY THING. and that include dok-do problem as well.
    maybe it's hard for you to understand. but that's what happened at Korean and China during 20th century. even business, arts....everything.

    i'm not trying to say "dok-do is Korean territory. because Japan did bad things to us!" but 'what Japan did' is the key to solve this problem. the 'trauma' of past is the key. and even if, you, and Japanese politician 'finally' bring dok-do to Japan, and re-name it to 'takesima', it might lead asia to 3rd world war. it's not just history man. it's politic. not only Korea, but China as well is looking at this. whether Japan doesn't do something stupid enough to bring their people mad. Dok-do is a bomb. (and since China-Japan has their problem to with island as well.)

    so, what you are doing is, like talking about Neo-Nazi front of Jewish. that's one of the reasons why your assertion in this blog, doesn't make any powers to academic world. i'm sorry but that's true. (but it will work very good on politic. in bad way.)

    ReplyDelete
  15. nekochan,

    Don't bring in something irrelevant to the Liancourt Rocks problem.

    History is history and territory is territory.

    Now, answer my question.

    Are you saying that "Usando" is not Dokdo unlike your government's official claim that "Usando" is
    Dokdo?

    ___________________________________

    that's why the map of Joseon draw 'usando' at north-west. because that's where usando REALLY locates. north-west of dok-do(takesima).so, the island located east of usando-which you guess it as ullengdo-, is actually looks like, dok-do(or takeshima).

    ReplyDelete
  16. nekochan,

    At least, you came up with a new thing "東南諸島開拓使兼管捕鯨事".

    Now, how can you prove that "東南諸島" included the Liancourt Rocks?

    We can suppose that it must have included Ulleungdo and Jejudo which had been known to Korea.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous17/7/08 16:31

    Proud history is history, and shamed history is also history.

    Japanese shamed history make a lie.
    So, Japanese should be sorry for their lies.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I have realized that, in the Korean claims, there are only wishful thinking that "we must have known Dokdo because it can be seen from Ulleungdo".

    Of course, having seen it is not good enough for a territorial claim.

    ReplyDelete
  19. anonoymous,

    Here is a Korean history lesson for you:

    http://100.naver.com/100.nhn?docid=189881

    Hogong is said to be of a Japanese origin, and there is even a theory in Korea that he was actually the first king of Silla.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous17/7/08 17:05

    and there is even a theory in Korea that he was actually the first king of Silla.

    <- Please, find it for me

    Korea also has a theory, japan is established by Gaya, it's ancient dynasty of korea.

    ReplyDelete
  21. nekochan

    everybody know that 金玉均 used to be "東南諸島開拓使兼管捕鯨事". It's not a news. And everybody know he had never been to Takeshima/Dokdo at the same time. "東南諸島"didn't include Takeshima/Dokdo.

    I said you are logical and I meant it as a compliment. It's really unfortunate for you to take it as an insult.

    "the 'trauma' of past is the key"

    I don't think so. The fact is a key. History study should be free from emotion. Or it will destroy your country.

    Anyway, when it comes to Takeshima/Dokdo issue, the real victim is Japanese civilians who were killed by Korean authority. If you want to talk about so-called Japanese "bad things", do it anywhere else.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous17/7/08 17:12

    I am sick of japanese lies.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous17/7/08 17:18

    Why had japan got atomic bombs?

    Two atomic bomb was not enough?

    Japanes lies...

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous17/7/08 17:34

    Kaneganese,
    You need to study history or get your head screwed on correctly. You said "The fact is a key. History study should be free from emotion. Or it will destroy your country.

    Anyway, when it comes to Takeshima/Dokdo issue, the real victim is Japanese civilians who were killed by Korean authority. If you want to talk about so-called Japanese "bad things", do it anywhere else"... You need act on what you say and take a hike. How many people from Japan were injured? Do you know how many Chinese, Philipinos, and Korean were murdered by Japs? So, Who are the real vitims?

    Oh raquel,
    Here's are what you country men have indicated the lands belong to Janpan in mid to late 1800s. Stop making false statements about who owns Dokdo. Since Japanese are such supreme creatures, they couldn't make mistakes to below maps, could they????

    Links from other blog:
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-japan-national.html
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-japan-national-3.html
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-kinseki.html
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-1895-japanese-limit.html

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous,

    This is a place for Takeshima/Dokdo issue. It has nothing to do with Japanese war history. If Korean bring up this everytime Dokdo comes up, everyone in the world sees you are not telling truth and have something hide in your pokets. In the arena of international law, it has nothing to do with territorial issue. Grow up from your "pitiful me" sentiment and see the fact that Korean had no single evidence that had effective control over Takeshima/Dokdo at all.

    And I don't think raquel is Japanese.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anonymous17/7/08 17:53

    Korean government do not translate the evidance of the dokdo into english. So, there are rare english data about dokdo. I think it's stupid thing like japanese.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anonymous17/7/08 17:57

    Most of japanese data are fake.
    It's not real like japanese history. They shoud be shamed for their history.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Korean michingae-deul,

    Use "Name" instead of "Anonymous"
    when you post your posting.

    Otherwise, there is no way of knowing which michingae is which.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anonymous17/7/08 18:26

    狂った犬, Watch you mouth.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I have a suggestion to the Koreans here:

    Use "usando", "jasando", "sambongdo" and "kajido", etc for your Names, okay michingae-deul? :-)

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anonymous17/7/08 18:31

    Two atomic bombs were insufficient.
    Jap'll need more hentais.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous17/7/08 18:44

    Please stop barkking, jjokbbari!

    ReplyDelete
  33. Everybody,

    Please stop using dirty words.  We should pay respect to each other. Please argue about the Takeshima/Dokdo issue.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Anonymous17/7/08 19:04

    Agreed!

    ReplyDelete
  35. Anonymous17/7/08 19:17

    Kaneganese,
    Regarding your post at 5;46pm. First of all, I was responding to your post about Japanese is the Victim, NOT!!!

    Second,
    You should visit http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/ and stop saying it's lies or not true. It has more documents indicating the Dokdo belongs to Korea.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Anonymous17/7/08 19:24

    raquel (6:20PM posting),
    Because you write in BROKEN KOREAN, you can write foul language? Answer you your question, because f******* A****** like you, I do not have desire to take my time to sign up. So enjoy trying to guess who is who. Now, with that said, shove corncob in your a** and rotate. Enjoy!

    ReplyDelete
  37. anonymous 미친개,

    도끼로 이마까 깐이마또까 밧겟스로, 피받아.

    ReplyDelete
  38. You should really ban anonymous comments on this blog.

    Letting people post without a handle just encourages trolls and allow Steve B. pretend that he isn't trying to spam links to his own rant-filled site about Dokdo-takeshima.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Korean michingae-deul,

    Usando, Sambongdo and Kajido belong to Korea, but not Dokdo.

    Wake up, michingae-deul. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  40. Anonymous17/7/08 20:22

    Anattawa jjobbari dethyo.

    ReplyDelete
  41. anonymous,

    "호공" was a 쪽바리.

    So, the first king of Silla was perhaps a 쪽바리. :-)

    http://100.naver.com/100.nhn?docid=189881

    ReplyDelete
  42. Anonymous17/7/08 20:57

    He's not the first king.
    쪽바리야! 한글 똑바로 읽어라.

    ReplyDelete
  43. 미친개,

    There is a theory in Korea that "호공" was actually the first king of Silla. So, the king was a 쪽바리.
    Possible. We can't deny it.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Anonymous17/7/08 21:13

    "호공" was a 쪽바리.

    You're also jjokbbari.

    네가 인정하니 다행이다. 그래 너두 쪽바리니 좋냐? 쪽바리 미친개야 그만 짖어라!

    ReplyDelete
  45. anonymous 미친개야,

    Are you happy that "호공" was a 쪽바리? :-)

    ReplyDelete
  46. Anonymous17/7/08 22:42

    raquel watch your dirty mouth~!
    just because you are not educated it doesnt mean that you need to advertise to others about it !

    ReplyDelete
  47. Anonymous17/7/08 23:07

    Dokdo is a beautiful islands that lie in East Sea,
    It belongs to Korea since shila dynasty and shila king wasnt Japanese never have..
    In fact i have heard that Japan and Shila was very friendly allies
    In addition Japan has learnt various astonishing art from Shila and also Shila has learnt many fabulous things from Japan ^^

    and i want to say that dokdo is korea's precious islands ^^;

    ReplyDelete
  48. anonymous,

    If you insist that Tokdo is yours, you should learn at least how to write it correctly.

    It's "Tokdo", baboya. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  49. Anonymous17/7/08 23:18

    IT's Dokdo! and it is pronounced as Dokdo -0-

    Raquel don't pretend to be smart..
    everyone knows that you are ignorant

    ReplyDelete
  50. anonymous 11:13 PM,

    It's "Tokdo", baboya.

    You must learn the correct Korean language. Watch this and learn:

    http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=N1mDz4yv5ro

    ReplyDelete
  51. baboya,

    Did you understand that it's Tokdo?

    Good night, michingae-ya. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  52. Anonymous17/7/08 23:31

    IT IS DOKDO -0- or are you deaf?
    have you ever heard people talking?

    it's is pronounced as DOKDO and please don't try to look smart because everytime you try you look more ignorant

    ReplyDelete
  53. Yes, of course I've heard people Dalking, baboya. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  54. Anonymous17/7/08 23:40

    what's the point talking to immature person who don't even understand a thing..-0-

    have fun raquel and lets see what happens tomorrow

    o by the way there is something call cyber police

    thanks for the comment ^^!

    ReplyDelete
  55. Anonymous18/7/08 00:20

    残念ながら「狂犬」とか「馬鹿犬」やらスティーブさんを罵ったのはRaquelさんからでしたが御本人の身の錆は考えず他人を罵るとは正に「火病る韓国人」と全く変わらない物ですね。

    逆切れに走る貴方ももう一歩で、嫌で堪らない「火病る韓国人」と同列に立っているって事はご存知なのかしら。

    それに「도끼로 이마까 깐이마또까 밧겟스로, 피받아」は死語だから駄洒落でも使わないで欲しいです。

    それに文法に合わせて書いて下さい。目障りな韓国語は使わないでね。見ている俺が恥ずかしい程ですから。

    又、斧を振り回し過ぎると手が滑ってご本人の顎を砕くかも知りませんのでご注意を。

    じゃ、頑張ってね。

    貴方は「火病る日本人」のトップじゃ。(プス)

    ReplyDelete
  56. 괴발개발18/7/08 05:20

    한국어도 읽을 능력이 되는 분들이 댓글을 쓰시는 듯해서 한 마디 남깁니다. 나름 대단한 설전이기는 한데, 이 블로그의 취지와는 어울리지 않는 내용으로 한창 도배되어 있어서 눈이 좀 아프군요. 아직 이 블로그의 성격을 확실히 파악하지 못한 탓에 논평은 하지 않고 가겠습니다. 개인적으로 이 블로그의 주인에 대해 알고 싶은데 어디로 가야 하나요? 컴맹이라서 잘 모르고 헤매고 있습니다. ^^*

    ReplyDelete
  57. Anonymous18/7/08 06:17

    獨島는 韓國嶺土임을 입증한 여러가지 자료

    한국의 독도 영유권 인정한 日태정관 문서




    ▷ 1877년 한국의 독도 영유권을 인정한 일본 태정관 문서. 당시 일본의 최고 국가기관이었던 '태정관(太政官)'은 이 문서에서 '울릉도와 독도는 일본과 관계없는 것을 마음에 익혀라'며 일본 내무성에 훈령했다.
    일본국립공문서관에 소장된 이 문서는 독도연구보전협회와 독도학회가 사본을 입수해 최근 발간한 소책자 '우리 땅 독도이야기'에 공개했다

    ■▶ [자료출처 : www.hankyung.com]


    독도를 조선 영토로 기록한 일본 고지도




    ▷ 근대 일본의 실학자 '하야시 시헤이(林子平)'가 1785년에 그린『삼국접양지도(三國接壤地圖)』. 이 지도는 울릉도와 독도를 한반도와 같은 황색으로 칠했을 뿐 아니라 그 옆에 '조선의 것(朝鮮ノ持ニ)'이라고 글자를 써넣어 독도와 울릉도가 조선 영토임을 더욱 명료하게 표시하고 있다. 이 지도는 독도연구보전협회와 독도학회가 공동으로 펴낸 소책자 '우리 땅 독도 이야기'에 소개돼 있다

    ■▶ [자료출처 : http://eyenews.hankooki.com]



    “독도는 조선땅” 표기 프랑스 지도




    ▷ 프랑스 지리학자 당빌(J.B.B D'Anville)이 1737년 그린 '조선왕국전도(Royaume de Core´e)'. 이 지도에는 우산도(독도)와 울릉도를 한국 동해안에 더 가깝게 그려 독도가 한국 영토임을 명료하게 표시하고 있다. 이 지도는 독도연구보전협회와 독도학회가 공동으로 펴낸 소책자 '우리 땅 독도 이야기'에 소개돼 있다

    ■▶ [자료출처 : http://www.kmib.co.kr]






    독도 경계 명확히한 삼국접양지도








    ★...일본의 저명한 지리학자 하야시 시헤이(林子平.1738~1793)가 1785년 조선과 일본, 중국 동북지방 등을 그린 `삼국접양지도(三國接壤地圖)'에 독도가 조선 땅이라는 사실이 명확히 표기되어 있다. 대구시립중앙도서관은 삼국접양지도를 리플릿으로 제작, 시민들에게 역사 바로알리기를 위한 자료로 활용키로 했다

    ■▶ [자료출처 : http://eyenews.hankooki.com]






















































    출처:이 자료는 독도연구보존협회 '신용하' 회장님께서

    그 동안 모아오신 역사자료입니다.

    ReplyDelete
  58. nekochan,

    Are you saying that "Usando" is not Dokdo unlike your government's official claim that "Usando" is
    Dokdo?

    ___________________________________

    that's why the map of Joseon draw 'usando' at north-west. because that's where usando REALLY locates. north-west of dok-do(takesima).so, the island located east of usando-which you guess it as ullengdo-, is actually looks like, dok-do(or takeshima).

    ReplyDelete
  59. nekochan,

    What you wrote below is historically CORRECT, but it is NOT in accordance with the the Korean claim that "Usando" is Dokdo.


    _________________________________

    'usando(jasando)' is known as 'ullengdo'. EVERY Korean knows that. since that is what written in historical records(samguksagi, joseon wangjo-silloc), and even shown in myth and song.

    ReplyDelete
  60. anonymous 12:20 AM,

    Write in English please if you wish to say something to me.

    Arigatogojaimasu. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  61. Anonymous18/7/08 17:27

    raquel,
    You said, "호공" was a 쪽바리" - Silla King was Japanese, Are you kidding???? You've cited http://100.naver.com/100.nhn?docid=189881 link. Obvious you cannot read or understand Korean, yet you’ve cited source totally contradicts your statement. As you stated, Ho Kong was Japanese, but gave up Japanese nationality to help Hyeojeose Park, founding monarch of Silla Dynasty. Ho Kong was never the first King of Silla Dynasty; however, Ho Kong was high official in Silla Dynasty. King Hyeojeose Park rewarded Ho Kong for good contributions he’ve made to Silla Dynasty.

    See below for history of first Silla King, Hyeojeose Park. If you disagree, post a link or provide source; otherwise, DO NOT FRABRICATE HISTORY!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyeokgeose_of_Silla
    http://www.answers.com/topic/silla-1?nr=1&lsc=true

    ReplyDelete
  62. anonymous 5:27 PM,

    Thank you for your reply.

    I only said that "there is even a theory in Korea that 호공 was actually the first king of Silla".

    It is only a theory. Okay?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Anonymous18/7/08 18:13

    raquel,
    Do you know what theory means? To help you below is definition from AskOxford.com
    theory
    • noun (pl. theories) 1 a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained. 2 an idea accounting for or justifying something. 3 a set of principles on which an activity is based.

    The link you provided did not have any basis that Ho Kong was the founding Silla king.

    I've noticed you cited the link and stated that Ho Kong was founding Silla King from Japan in multiple blogs. Totally incorrect statement and I hope you stop sending false "theory".

    ReplyDelete
  64. By the way, I'm seeing in "호공" a great hope that can bridge and bring Japan and Korea together to better understandings and friendships. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  65. anonymous 6:13 PM,

    I only used the word "theory" as mentioned in Wiki.

    Take it easy, baboya. :-)

    ___________________________________

    In common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, a speculation, or a hypothesis. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Anonymous18/7/08 18:34

    Yes, I do also hope that will happen one day. However, unless Japan leave Korea alone. Japan will only bring bad memories of brutal atrocities caused to korean people during 1910 to 1945. Dokdo is part of Korea, and Koreans are not will to loose Dokdo

    ReplyDelete
  67. Anonymous18/7/08 18:40

    raquel

    Again, can you use more creditable resource, take a look the the quality scale.

    Bungsin!

    ReplyDelete
  68. Anonymous18/7/08 18:55

    The korean source you provide has no mention of Ho Kong (Japanese) was founding Silla King. So how can you say Korean source theorize Ho Kong was the first Silla King? Perhaps it's you theory, if so it stinks!!!

    ReplyDelete
  69. anonymous 6:40 PM,

    Speaking of the Japanese Imperialism in the Korean peninsula, the Japanese occupation authority forbade this Korean tradition "病身舞" to be performed for a humanitarian reason:

    http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=i86fiRjvafk

    Having seen you using the word "病身", I think you people perhaps lack something as humane human beings.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Anonymous18/7/08 19:53

    Your point? As you pretend to be intelligent creature (or Japanese puppet), do you see the heading... It's in Japanese, MORNON! Find something useful to discuss.

    ReplyDelete
  71. anonymous 7:53 PM,

    Here it is in Korea as you requested:

    http://cafe.naver.com/sillarian/42

    My point is that you should not see history in black and white.

    I think that it was a good thing to do for the Japanese authority to forbid such a Korean tradition.

    Is it brutal to forbid such a tradition? I think definitely no.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Anonymous18/7/08 20:20

    At first, you did not intend it.
    You are still sseu re gi and michingae.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Anonymous18/7/08 20:20

    raquel,

    At first, you did not intend it.
    You are still sseu re gi and michingae.

    ReplyDelete
  74. anonymous 8:20 PM,

    I have another Korean history question for you.

    There is a women's university in Seoul called Sookmyung Women's Univeristy.

    Do you know that its founder was a Japanese woman?

    Yes or no?

    ReplyDelete
  75. Anonymous18/7/08 20:45

    Again, you won't stop with stupid "theories" and Japanese propaganda will you? Byung shin chum is NOT about making fun of handicapped people. The dance is to express the viewers that EVEYBODY is socially handicapped hence the name Byung Shin. Before you post anymore links, again and again check your sources. I'm getting tired to educating Japanese puppet. This blog is nothing more than Japanese propagenda!!!! I would like to go to sleep but I feel obligated to educate you and get you out the DARK SIDE

    ReplyDelete
  76. Anonymous18/7/08 20:52

    raquel,

    I'm really getting tired of your BS, in fact you're starting to bug me... You're a bug that won't go away. What is your point about founder of Sookmyung Women's Univeristy? The university was founded during Japanese occupation in Korea. So what? Your such idiot...

    ReplyDelete
  77. Anonymous18/7/08 20:59

    raquel,
    It's getting late, it was fun educating Japanese puppet. I hope you had as much fun as I did. IDIOT!!!

    ReplyDelete
  78. Anonymous18/7/08 21:00

    raquel,

    Oh, one more thing... It's still not too late to get education. "Mind is trouble think to waste"! IDIOT!!!

    ReplyDelete
  79. anonymous,

    I think I was able to prove here that you are the one who must be reeducated.

    For your information, the name of the Japanese founder of the Sookmyung Women's Univeristy in Seoul is Noe Fuchizawa.

    Not surprisingly, the Sookmyung homepage does NOT mention her name
    anywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Anonymous18/7/08 21:10

    raquel,

    This was addressed to you, just in case you couldn't figure that out.

    Again, you won't stop with stupid "theories" and Japanese propaganda will you? Byung shin chum is NOT about making fun of handicapped people. The dance is to express the viewers that EVEYBODY is socially handicapped hence the name Byung Shin. Before you post anymore links, again and again check your sources. I'm getting tired to educating Japanese puppet. This blog is nothing more than Japanese propagenda!!!! I would like to go to sleep but I feel obligated to educate you and get you out the DARK SIDE

    8:45 PM

    ReplyDelete
  81. Anonymous18/7/08 21:18

    raquel,

    Man, are you that stupit? Who cares" You're acting like you graduated from women's university. Bravo, you know the name of founder. Who gives a ****! You must feel really proud, huh... IDIOT!!!

    ReplyDelete
  82. anonymous,

    After you have used the word for swearing, what you said below is not so convincing, isn't it, baboya? :-)

    __________________________________

    Byung shin chum is NOT about making fun of handicapped people. The dance is to express the viewers that EVEYBODY is socially handicapped hence the name Byung Shin.

    ReplyDelete
  83. anonymous,

    Now, you can go to bed dreaming of your new hero "호공", michingae. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  84. Anonymous18/7/08 21:28

    raquel,

    When are you going to face the facts? Convicing you is not important. What is important is others realize you are Japanese puppet and will do any think to distort the truth, history, and Korean culture.

    ReplyDelete
  85. anonymous 9:28 PM,

    You are the one who has to face a fact like the existence of the Japanese founder of the Sookmyung Women's University to begin with.

    Good night, michingae-ya. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  86. Anonymous18/7/08 21:33

    raquel,

    Ho Kong is my hero. Japanese or not, I give respect when they are deserving. Obviously Korean web site you incorrectly stated (thnaks by the way) also gave Ho Kong respect he deserved. IDIOT...

    ReplyDelete
  87. Anonymous18/7/08 21:39

    raquel == idiot, and horosaekki

    ReplyDelete
  88. Anonymous18/7/08 21:56

    get a life raquel
    look at yourself in a mirror
    whatever your commenting you are spitting at your dirty face

    ReplyDelete
  89. Anonymous18/7/08 22:16

    Some person said "the real victim is Japanese civilians " uuh...NO!

    If we go in depth into history and other stuff you wouldnt even want to hear this real fact that JApanese scientist has adimmited.

    during WW2 many Koran and Chinese were taken to Japanese lab and were used as TEST RAT!!

    Using human as if they were animal was seriously not an act of human right!!

    and i remember one of the most monstrous Japanese scientists saying " it was most efficient way of experimenting a new chemical to use as weapons of war"
    This chemical they mentioned was horrible !

    They inserted this in to poor innocent prisoners *mostly Korean or Chinese WHEN THEY WERE ALIVE

    AND YOU KNOW WHAT THEY DID???
    THEY TIED THAT PERSON AND DISECTED THEM ALIVE!!!!!

    and oh god they took a photo proudly?!?!

    i was seriously out of word
    in such inhuman action
    they grinned like devil that was overwhelmed by their sin!

    Furthermore!!!
    after the atomic bomb was dropped many people were sick after the trauma and you know what?!

    Japanese did not intend to heal any Koreans~~!!!!
    and still that victem lives in Japan helplessly ~!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  90. Anonymous18/7/08 22:23

    And all i want to say is after all this pain you guys have given us..

    There are still way more horrofic thing you Japanese have done that i dont even want to mention!

    please don't make any more absurb action that in return will be hatred

    Sorry for this trouble, i was suddenly angered by some insane comments mostly made by raquel~

    Lastly Dokdo belongs to Korea,
    It is a peaceful island please don't disturb them

    ReplyDelete
  91. Matshushima(Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo) were considered within Japanese territory, not Choson(Korea), thus the licence to trade with those islands issued to the civilian merchant clans of Oyas and Murakawas in Yonago.


    -->
    If Takeshima(Ulleugdo) and Matshushima(Dokdo) were Japanese territory, why was the licence to trade with those islands issued to Japanese civilian merchants? Was it general practice in Japan at that time? If so, can you present any evidence to prove this?

    If Takeshima(Ulleugdo) and Matshushima(Dokdo) were Japanese territory, why did Saitoh Hosen write the northwest boundary of Japan was Oki Island?


    If Takeshima(Ulleugdo) and Matshushima(Dokdo) were Japanese territory, why did Tottori Province(幡) say Ulleungdo and Dokdo don't belong to any province of Japan in 1695?


    If Takeshima(Ulleugdo) and Matshushima(Dokdo) were Japanese territory, why did the Shogunate ban the Oyas and Murakawas to go to Ulleungdo and Dokdo in 1696?


    If Takeshima(Ulleugdo) and Matshushima(Dokdo) were Japanese territory, why did old Japanese maps exclude Ulleungdo and Dokdo as Japanese territory?

    ReplyDelete
  92. YOU LYING JAPANESE.
    You realize you got caught with your own lies.

    Takeshima = Ulleungdo??
    Matsushima = DOKDO??

    Ulleungdo was NEVER Japanese territory.

    So the Japanese were lying back then also to their citizens. amazing. Instead of saying Korea said to keep off they tell them only privaleged clans. nice.

    ReplyDelete
  93. It's a shameless lie to say Kotani Ihei's "Illustrative Map of Takeshima is the evidence Japanese had already established the effective control over the island and considered Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo to be within her territory.


    As Kaneganese said, this map can be historical record telling Japanese recognized both Matsushima and Takeshima geographically and they were engaged in economical activity on both islands, but it has nothing to do with the evidence of Japanese effective control over Dokdo.


    "Illustrative Map of Takeshima" is known to be submitted to Edo Bakufu between the end of 1695 and Jan.1969. What happened in Japan during this time? After the Takeshima Incident, Edo Bakufu inquired Tottori Han of the ownership of Takeshima and Matsushima and Tottori Han answered " Takeshima(Ulleongdo) did not belong to Inaba or Hoki Province......Matsushima(Dokdo) doesn't belong to any province." Right after the response of Tottori Han, Edo Bakufu issued Ordinance prohibiting Japanese to go to Ulleongdo and Dokdo. It's likely this map was used as an reference for the geographical information of Takeshima and Matsushima Edo Bakufu was questioning about. If this map was considered as evidence Japan was effectively controlling Takeshima and Matsushima, why did Edo Bakufu prohibited Japanese to go to Ulleongdo and its attached island Dokdo?


    This map is the clear evidence Tottori Han and Edo Bakufu didn't consider Dokdo as Japanese land no matter how well the Japanese knew about Dokdo and no matter what they did in Dokdo..

    ReplyDelete