竹島問題の歴史

15.7.08

日本語インデックス(Index of Posts on Dokdo-or-Takeshima?)

日本語インデックス(Index in Japanese)

Q & A (よくある質問)......韓国側の地図/文献......日本側の地図/文献
..
西洋の地図/文献........用語集..... リンク集......N新聞記事等

Occidentalismでの投稿記事インデックス  竹島問題の歴史


日本語の投稿記事(年代順)(Articles in Japanese)

1618年 - 幕府の「渡航許可書」

1656年 - 柳馨遠 『輿地志』 (「東国興地志」巻之七 江原道 蔚珍)

1693-1703年 - 朴世堂『西渓雑録』(張漢相「蔚陵島事蹟」)

1693-1703年 朴世堂『西渓雑録』と申光璞『蔚陵島事蹟』

1696年 - 幕府の「渡航禁制令」

1711年 - 朴昌錫「鬱陵島圖形」

1711年 - 鬱稜島に派遣された検察官朴昌錫の残した碑文

1736 ~ 1767年 - 「輿地圖」 - 鬱陵于山両島

1737~1776年 - 廣輿圖 - 江原道と鬱陵島

1700年中期 - 「八道輿地圖」 - 鬱陵島

1793年 - 韓国の記録「日省録」に記された"松島"

1800年代以前(推定) - 東京山川 八道地圖

1807年5月12日 - 李泰根が鬱陵島を検察する

1836年 - 会津屋八右衛門による竹嶋一件と「竹嶋渡海一件記 全」 (竹島事件 会津屋八右衛門)

1840~1860年頃 - 隠岐国松島 (文鳳堂a.k.a 山城屋忠兵衛「文鳳堂雑纂」)

1853-1922年 - 肝付兼行 (Kimotsuki Kaneyuki)

1861年 - 金正浩「大東輿地圖」

1864年 - 日本の地図に現れる竹島と松島は瓜ふたつ

1876年 - 島根県の報告「渡海禁制のいきさつ」

1876年 - 島根県の報告「(竹島の)由来の概略」

1877年 - "松島"に関する様々な意見:「松島巡視要否ノ議」 外務省公信局長 田邊太一

1878年 - 「松島の儀」外務省記録局長 渡邊洪基

1882年 - 4月7日 高宗が于山島は鬱陵島の隣接島であると述べたこと

1894年 - 海軍省水路部「朝鮮水路誌」(明治二十七年)

1899年9月23日 - 皇城新聞記事「鬱陵島 事況」

1899 - 9月 27日 - 古川鈊三郎「軍艦摩耶 報告書」

1899 - 10月 3日 - 高雄謙三「鬱陵島出張復命書」

1899 - 10月10日 - 摩耶艦長海軍中佐松本有信「軍艦摩耶 報告書」

1901年 - 大韓帝国地理書「大韓地誌」玄采著附属江原道地図

1902年 - 外務省通商局編纂「通商彙纂」

1902年4月 - 大韓帝国内部 『鬱島郡節目』

1903年 - 韓海通漁指針

1904年 - リャンコ島領土編入並二貸下願 (中井養三郎)

1904年2月20日 - 「満韓新図」

1904年9月25日 - 韓国名"独島"が竹島/Liancourt Rocksを示すのに使われた始めての記録

1905年1月28日 - 閣議決定資料

1905年 - 軍艦橋立の竹島調査

1905年 - 外務省通商局編纂「通商彙纂」 第50号

1905 - 5月 29 , 30日 & 6月5日- 官報号外「日本海海戦戦報」

1906年 - 02月 26日 ~ 4月17日 - 「內部來去案 第一冊」 大韓帝国、統監府に抗議し日本人による韓国の領土収奪を阻止する

1907年 - (明治四十年)「朝鮮水路誌」

1946(昭和21)年2月 - 外務省外交文書「旧日本外地情況雑件  2.行政の分離に関する司令部側との会談 」

1948 - Jan. - 宋錫夏"OOLNUNGDO, HISTORIC ISLAND OF KOREA"(古色蒼然な 歴史的遺跡 鬱陵島を捜して)

1948 - 12月12日 - 申奭鎬「独島所属について」『史海』創刊第一号

1950年代の竹島をめぐる論争における日韓それぞれの主張

1950年 - オーストラリア政府の質問に対する米国の回答

1953 - 昭和28年の竹島に関する国会審議

1954年 - ヴァン・フリート使節団報告書

1960 - 申奭鎬「獨島の来歴」(雑誌『思想界』), Part 1

1960 - 申奭鎬「獨島の来歴」(雑誌『思想界』), Part 2

1966 - 2月 - 兪鎮午「韓日会談が開かれるまで」(上)『思想界』1966年2月号

1974年 - 5月22日~24日 - 東亜日報「秘話 第一共和国 276-278 : 第十一話 李承晩と日本 4-6」

竹島問題の歴史

鬱陵島検察使のこの地図は、子山嶋をあらわしているか?

安龍福の言う倭の松島=子山島(于山島)はやはり竹嶼だった

イガ島、まの島、マノ島に共通するものは?

18世紀の隠岐ノ松島 「竹島図説」

明治期の欝陵島~竹島/独島関連の日本製地図

1894-1948 朝鮮領土の境界

Web竹島問題研究所の記事を翻訳する許可を得ました

竹島の歴史入門(日本語版)・History of Dokdo for beginners (Korean version)

中央日報「独島を守ろう」と作った教科書に誤り15カ所

「竹島問題に関する国際法論文選」出版プロジェクト2009

Q & As (English ; 英語)

Q1: Has Dokdo been a part of Korea since the sixth century?

Q 2: What is Ulleungdo's largest neighboring island?

Q 3: Why did old Korean maps show Ulleungdo as two islands?

Q 4: Did King Sejong's geography text mention Dokdo?

Q 5: Did Korea's 1530 "Sinjeung Dongguk Yeoji Seungram" mention Dokdo?

Recommended Articles (English)

1412 - Koreans on Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Jukdo

1454 - Another Picture of “Dokdo” from Ulleungdo? 1454年 世宗実録「地理志」

Where have all the Usandos gone?

Korean Scholar Says "Usando" Was Ulleungdo's "Jukdo"

Ulleungdo's Neighboring Island of Jukdo (죽도 - 竹島)

KBS Documentary on "Jukdo," the Real Usando

What do イガ島, まの島 and マノ島, have in common?

1470 - "Sambongdo(三峯島)" was just an another name of Ulleundo, not Takeshima/Dokdo

1656 - "Yojiji (輿地志)" by Ryu Hyung-won (柳馨遠) didn't say "Usan is so-called Japanese Matsushima."

Mid 17th century - Illustrative Map of Matsushima (松嶋絵図) by Murakawa Clan

1667 - Onshu Shicho Goki (隠州視聴合記)

1694 - Jang Han-sang (張漢相) Finds Sambongdo (三峯島)

1696 - Ahn's so-called Matsushima/Usando was Jukdo, afterall. (元禄九丙子年朝鮮舟着岸一巻之覚書 肅宗実録 30卷, 22年 戊寅)

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)"

1711 - Bak Chang-seok's (朴昌錫) Map of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島圖形)

1794 - June 3 - "正祖実録 正祖18年6月3日条" Gajido(可支島) was described as a place on or near Ulleungdo, not Takeshima/Dokdo.

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 8 : "An Yong-bok, Usando, & Matsushima (Songdo)" 肅宗実録(1696), 鬱陵島圖形(1711), 鬱陵島事蹟(1694), 海東地圖(1750s), 輿地圖(1736-67), 朝鮮地圖(1750-1768), 地乘(1776-1800), 東國文獻備考(1770), 日省録(1793), 萬機要覽(1808), 靑邱圖(1835), 朝鮮国交際始末内探書(1869), 高宗実録(1882), 鬱陵島外圖(1882), 大韓全図(1899), 皇城新聞(1899), 大韓勅令勅令第41号(1900)

1807 May 12 - Lee Tae-gun (李泰根) Inspects Ulleungdo (日省録 : 北有于山島周回爲二三里許南至都庄仇味)

1835 - "Map of Asia and Small Orient(亜細亜小東洋圖)" shows Takeshima/Dokdo as Japanese territory (長久保赤水 唐土歴代州郡沿革地図 亜細亜小東洋圖)

1882 April 7 - King Kojong says Usando Neighboring Island of Ulleungdo (高宗 19卷, 19年 4月 7日 壬戌)

1900 - Imperial Edict Makes Ulleungdo a County of Gangwon Province (大韓勅令第41号)

1906 - Feb 20 & April 17 - "Official Documents of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Vol.1" - Korean government protested about land transaction in 竹邊浦
Korean Imperial government officially acquiesced the Japan's sovereignty over Takeshima/Dokdo
by not expressing protest against Japan.

Investigation of Japanese maps during Meiji period before the incorporation of Liancourt rocks

Korean Eastern limits described in various books world wide exclude Takeshima/Dokdo from Korean Territory

The Territorial Recognitions which Western Maps of Japan Show for Takeshima/Liancour Rocks between 1880-1905 : Ver.1

1951 - August - Rusk's Letter - #12 ( As regards the island of Dokdo, otherwise known as Takeshima or Liancourt Rocks, this normally uninhabited 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. )

1953 - Jul 22 - US Doc. Reconfirms Dean Rusk Letter (Memorandum by Mr. Robert A. Fearey of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs)

1954 - Report of Van Fleet mission to the Far East


英語での本ブログ投稿記事(年代順)(Blog Articles in Historical Date Order)

1412 - Koreans on Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Jukdo" (世宗實錄 卷 "牛山茂陵兩島"

1436 Jun 19 - Gangwondo Governor Asks to Populate "Muleungdo's Usan" (世宗實錄 卷 七十三, 世宗 十八年 閏六月 甲申條 "武陵島牛山"

1457 - Apr 16 - "The two islands of Usando and Muleungdo are suitable for settlements."

1470 - "Sambongdo(三峯島)" was just an another name of Ulleundo, not Takeshima/Dokdo

1530 - "Paldo Chongdo" (八道總圖) - "Map of the Eight Provinces"

1530 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - (1) 「八道総図」 in 『新増東国輿地勝覧』

1600's? - The Map of Joseon(朝鮮国図)

17th C. Korean Map - "Paldo Jeondo" (八道全図)  (”自此以東方日本”

1600s - Map of Silla, Goguryo, & Baekje Regions (支那朝鮮古地圖 - 지나조선고지도)

1600s - "Map of the Original Regions of Silla, Goguryeo, & Baeje" (新羅高勾麗百濟肇造區域之圖) from "Dongyeo Bigo" (東輿備攷) Maps

Three Kingdoms Map from 1600's

1618 - Permission Given to the Oya and Murakawa Families (幕府 鳥取藩主 村川家 大屋家 竹島(欝陵島)渡航許可書)

Mid 17th century - Illustrative Map of Matsushima (松嶋絵図) by Murakawa Clan

1656 - "Yojiji (輿地志)" by Ryu Hyung-won (柳馨遠) didn't say "Usan is so-called Japanese Matsushima."

Mid 1600s-1682 - "Gi-eon(記 言)" by Kim Si-seop(金時習) : "From Weolsong he viewed Ulleung/Usan." (越松望鬱陵于山)

Later 1700s - "Aguk Chongdo" (我國摠圖)

1662 - "Cheokjuji (陟州誌)" by Heo Mok (許穆 - 허목) - Ulleungdo (鬱陵島) : 或云于山鬱陵一島方百里在海中蔚珎之東

1667 - Onshu Shicho Goki (隠州視聴合記)

1667 - "Onshu Shicho Goki(隠州視聴合記)" - The different translations

1692-1693 - The 1692 and 1693 incidents: Ahn Yong-bok's(安龍福) first visit to Japan

1693-1696 - The Takeshima incident(竹島一件): the 1st dispute between Japan and Korea

1694 - Jang Han-sang (張漢相) Finds Sambongdo (三峯島)

1694 - "Ulleungdo Sajeok" (蔚陵島事蹟) - A 1694 Ulleungdo Inspection Report

1696 - Ahn Yong-bok's(安龍福) second visit to Japan: Part I (竹島一件)

1696 - Ahn Yong-bok's (安龍福) second visit to Japan: Part II (竹島一件)

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)"

1696 - Ordinance Prohibiting Voyages to Takeshima (幕府 渡航禁制令)

1696 - Ahn's so-called Matsushima/Usando was Jukdo, afterall.

1699? - Today's Kwannundo(観音島) and Small Udo(小于島) in 「欝陵島図形」 by Choson Official Inspector, the Identical Figures.

1700s? - Korean Atlas "Yojido" (朝鮮摠図)

1711 - Bak Chang-seok's (朴昌錫) Map of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島圖形)

1711 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - (2)「欝陵島図形」

1711 - Ulleungdo Inspector Bak Chang-seok's (朴昌錫) 1711 Inscription

1714 - July 22 - "Visible to the east of Ulleung is an island that is on the border of Japan." (補闕正吳)

1724 - Oki's Matsushima in the 18th century (竹島図説 "隠岐の松島")

1736 ~ 1767 - Yeojido (輿地圖) - Ulleung/Usan (鬱陵于山兩島)

1737 ~ 1776 - "Gwang Yeodo" (廣輿圖) - Gangwondo & Ulleungdo

Mid 1700s - "Paldo Yeojido" (八道輿地圖) - Ulleungdo Map (鬱陵島圖)

1742 - 朝鮮八道総図(萩藩当職山内広通と浜崎代官清水親全の命により描いた彩色図)  - (「蔚珍之内風日清明即峯頭樹木及山根沙渚歴々可見風便二日可渡海有林落基址七即今空虚」)

1744 - Chungwanji (春官志) - "Ulleungdo is called Sambongdo (三峰島)" (李孟休 春官志 鬱陵島 爭界)

Early 1750s - "Haedong Jido" (海東地圖) - Ulleungdo

1750~1768 - Joseon Jido (朝鮮地圖) - Ulleungdo

1752 - Fang-ling-tau means Ulleungdo

1754 - "The Field Chart of Japan, The Atlas of Japan (日本輿地図 日本分野図)" by Mori Kohan( 森幸安) described Takeshima(Ulleungdo) as Japan's territory

1760s - Korean Atlas "Seonyeokdo" (鮮域圖)

1770 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - (3) 「欝陵島図 in'『朝鮮地図』

1777-1787 - Haedong Yeojido (海東輿地圖) - Ulleungdo

1786 - June 4 - Kim Chang-yun (金昌胤) Inspects Ulleungdo (日省録)

1790 - "A Map of China and Surroundings(華夷一覧図) "by Kimura Kenkado(木村蒹葭堂)

1793 - Korean Record: "Songdo another name for Ulleungdo" (日省録)

1794 - June 3 - Han Chang-guk (韓昌國) Inspects Ulleungdo (日省録)

1794 - June 3 - "正祖実録 正祖18年6月3日条" Gajido(可支島) was described as a place on or near Ulleungdo, not Takeshima/Dokdo.

1795-1800 - Dong Yeodo (東輿圖) - Ulleungdo (鬱陵島)

1796 - "日本並北方図" - 本多利明 - 幕命

1798 - The old chart of Dagelet

Before 1800s? - Donggyeong San Cheon (東京山川) - Paldo Jido (八道地圖)

Late Lee Dynasty - Ulleungdo and Usan were visible from Korean peninsula (江原道古地図(Kanwondo old map))

Late 18th c., "Joseon Paldo Jido," Ulleungdo & Usando (朝鮮八道地圖)

18th/19th? Century Map of Ulleungdo & Usando (朝鮮八道圖)

19th c. Map of Ulleungdo: "Ulleungdo Dohyeong" (鬱陵島圖形), property of Samcheok Museum

1800 - 1822 - Joseon-do - Ulleungdo (朝鮮圖 - 鬱陵島)

1807 - May 12 - Lee Tae-gun (李泰根) Inspects Ulleungdo (日省録)

1807 - San-in Chuo Shimpo: "Usando (于山島) = Jukdo (竹嶼), Documented for the First Time"

1816 - 大日本接壌三国之全図 - 大阪 其由堂・旭栄堂合梓

1817 - Aaron Arrowsmith's map of Japan and Von Siebold

1822 - Jido - Gwandongdo (地圖 - 關東圖)

1823 - "Haedong Yeoksa sok" (海東繹史續) - "萬歷二十五年倭分屯松島蔚山釜山鎭書 謹案文獻備考于山島卽倭所謂松島也 輿地勝覽 于山鬱陵本一島..."

1827 - May 19 - Ha Si-myeong (河始明) Inspects Ulleungdo (日省録)

1831 - May 14 - Lee Gyeong-jeong (李慶鼎) Inspects Ulleungdo (日省録)

1834 - Korean Map: "Cheonggudo" (靑邱圖) 金正浩

1834 - Cheonggudo (靑邱圖) 1834 Map by Kim Jong-ho 金正浩

1835 - "Map of Asia and Small Orient(亜細亜小東洋圖)" shows Takeshima/Dokdo as Japanese territory (長久保赤水 唐土歴代州郡沿革地図 亜細亜小東洋圖)

1835 - Late 18th & 19th Century Japanese Maps Showed Ulleungdo & Liancourt Rocks as Japanese ( 長久保赤水 唐土歴代州郡沿革地図 亜細亜小東洋圖)

1836 - Japanese Man Executed for Sailing to Ulleungdo (会(今)津屋八右衛門 竹島事件)

1837 - Japanese sign to be auctioned off (八右衛門 竹島事件 高札)

1840-1860 c. Matsushima of Oki County (文鳳堂a.k.a 山城屋忠兵衛「文鳳堂雑纂」)

1840 - Aaron Arrowsmith's map of Japan and Von Siebold ("Atlas von Land- und Seekarten vom Japanischen Reiche Dai-Nippon" in 1851.)

1842 - Okajima Masayoshi Wrote of Ahn Yong-bok's Flag and Claims (岡島正義 因府歴年大雑集)

1846 - French map of Korea (Coree)

1849 - 2007 - "Takeshima in Japanese map (1)" by Funasugi Rikinobu 1(「嘉永新増 大日本国郡輿地全図」)

Latter 1800s: "Dae Dongyeo Jido" (大東輿地圖)(東輿) - Ulleungdo (鬱陵島) ( with "Usando" (于山島) 

1853-1922 - Kimotsuki Kaneyuki (肝付兼行)

1853 - 萬国地球全図、大日本輿地図略 東都 鈴亭谷義蔵版 - 嘉永6年

1855 - Mid-19th c. Map of Samcheok District & Ulleungdo (地圖 江原道 咸鏡道)

1855 - French map of Korea (Coree)

1855 - Colton's "Japan"

1855 - What does this 1855 Jpn map of Oki say? (第四十八 隠岐島)

1855 - Imperial Gazetteer Volume One, UK

1855 - Pronouncing Gazetteer, USA

1858 - British Publication "China Pilot," 2nd Edition (1858)

1860 - 1870? - Japanese map of Korea (朝鮮國全図) (瀬脇壽人)

1861 - Daedong Yeojido (大東輿地圖) - Ulleungdo Map

1861 - "Dae Dongyeo Jido" (大東輿地圖) with Unique "Index Map"

1861 - "Daedong Yeojido (大東輿地圖)" at Univ. of Wisconsin - Milwaukee

1861 - British Publication "China Pilot," 3rd Edition (1861)

1861 - Late 18th & 19th Century Japanese Maps Showed Ulleungdo & Liancourt Rocks as Japanese (新刊輿地全図)

1863 - Description of Ulleungdo from Kim Jeong-ho's "Daedongjiji" (金正浩 大東地志 )

1863 Korean Map from Japanese Woodblock Encyclopedia (江戸大節用海内蔵)

1864 - Japanese Map shows 2 similar islands (増訂大日本輿地全図)

1864 - British Publication "China Pilot," 4th Edition, 1864

1865 c - French map of Korea ( Corée)

1870 - "How Takeshima & Matsushima Became Part of Joseon" (朝鮮国交際始末内探書「竹島松島朝鮮附属ニ相成候始末」 )

1873 - British Publication "China Sea Directory," 1st Edition, Vol. 4 (1873)

1873 - Japanese Map Shows Takeshima & Matsushima as Japanese (Carte de l'empire du Japon publiee par la Commision Imperiale Exposition Universelle de VIENNE 1873 by Japanese Meiji Government)*

1874 - "Histoire de L'Eglise de Corée" by Claude Charles Dallet

1875 - "Chosen Yochi Zenzu" by Sekiguchi Bisyo (關口備正) (朝鮮輿地全図)

1876 - General Gazetteer, UK

1876 - "Keirinjiryaku(鶏林事略)" by Sewaki Hisato (瀬脇寿人)excludes Takeshima/Dokdo from Choson

1876 - "Argument for the Development of Matsushima" (武藤平学 松島開拓之議)

1876 - Shimane prefecture explains the history of Takeshima in 1876 (Part 1/2) (島根県 渡航禁止のいきさつ)

1876 - Shimane prefecture explains the history of Takeshima in 1876 (Part 2/2) (島根県 (竹島の)由来の概略)

1877 - Argument about "another island": details of the compiled official documents (公文禄) of the Ministry of the Interior (太政官指令)

1877 - Jpn Map of Ulleungdo (磯竹島略図)

1877 - Jpn Map Shows "Matsushima" (松島) as Japanese (文部省出版 宮本三平「日本全図」)*

1877/78 - Watanabe Says Liancourt Rocks are Japanese (竹島考証 : 渡辺洪基 「松島之儀一」)

1877/78 - Different Japanese Views on Matsushima (竹島考証 : 田辺太一 「松島巡視要否ノ議」(意見 : 甲乙丙))

1877/8 - Unfinished Translation of an 1878? Document (竹島考証 : 渡辺洪基 「中間意見」)

1880s - 1890s - Gwandong Pangyeo - Ulleungdo (關東方輿 -鬱陵島)

1880 - R. Hausermann's Map of Korea ( Corée)

1880 - German Map of Japan from Adolf Stieler's Hand Atlas 7th Edition (National Border between Ulleungdo and Choson)*

1880 - Japanese Warship "Amagi" (軍艦天城) Surveys Ulleungdo and finds "Takeshima" is Jukdo.

1881 - Kitazawa Masanari(北澤正誠), a official of MOFA concluded that "Takeshima" is Jukdo in "A Study of Takeshima (Takeshima Kosho 竹島考証) "

1881 - Oki & Matsushima Same Color on 1881 Japanese Map ( Geographic Bureau of the Ministry of Interior (内務省地理局) 大日本府県分轄図 大日本全国略図)*

1882 April 7 - King Kojong says Usando Neighboring Island of Ulleungdo (高宗実録 19卷, 19年 4月 7日 壬戌)

1882 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - (4) 『鬱陵島外図』

1882 - "The Joseon Situation" (朝鮮事情), by Enomoto Takeaki(榎本武揚) excludes Takeshima/Dokdo from Joseon territory

1882 - Shinsen Chosen Yochi Zenzu (新撰朝鮮輿地全圖) by Wakabayashi Tokusaburo (若林篤三郞)

1882 Aug 5 - Japanese newspaper 自由新聞

1883 - Japanese "Seaways Magazine" (日本水路誌)

1883 - Mar. 1 - The island that Japan calls Matushima or Takeshima and Korea calls Ulleungdo (The Draft of Official Notice : 内達案)

1883 - Japanese Map of Ulleungdo (朝鮮国蔚陵島出張桧垣内務省書記官復命ノ件)

1884 - British Publication "China Sea Directory," 2nd Edition, Vol. 4 (1884)

1893 - Lanier "L'Asie" excluded Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) from Korean territory

1884 - Appleton Map of Japan and Korea, USA

1884~1894 - Map of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島) & Usando (于山島) (it shows an island off the east shore of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島) labeled as "Udo" (于島))

1886 - Dec. - 寰瀛水路誌 第二巻第二版 韓露沿岸 (Japanese Seaway Directory, Choson and Russia )*

1888 - British map of Japan and Corea (no Liancourt Rocks, but the borderline indicated that Dagelet island was Japan's territory)*

1891 - German Map "Ost-China, Korea und Japan"  ( Stieler, Adolf; Gotha; Justus Perthes)*

1891 - American map of Japan (People’s Publishing Co. in Chicago)  

1891 - American map of Japan (International Cyclopaedia)Taka, Matsu and Liancourt Rocks

1892 - A description of Ulleungdo (”鄭處士述懷歌”)

1892 -  Podzhio "Overview Korea" - Russian Diplomat dropped Takeshima/Dokdo from Gangwon-do.

1892 - German Map of ”China und Japan ("Meyers Kleiner Handatlas," Leipzig)*

1893 - Andree's Allgemeiner Handatlas
It shows Ulleungdo = Korean , Liancourt Rocks = Japanese

1893 - "The Sea Chart of Hokkaido and Northeastern Islands(北洲及北東諸島)" plots Waywoda Rock far outside of Korean territory

1893 - "Yeoljae Chwalyo" (輿載撮要 - 여재촬요) - Map of Samcheok (三陟) and Ulleungdo (鬱陵島) 

1893 - German Map ”Ubersichtskarte von China und Japan”

1894 - French map of Korea and Japan (Is. Liancourt ou Hornet (Jap))

1894 - Carte De La Coree from "Le Petit Journal"

1894 - British map of Japan (Edward Stanford, Charing Cross, London) * Three islands

1894 - American map of Japan (Cram Universal)

1894 - "Jissoku Chosen Zenzu" (實側朝鮮全圖) by So Mokan (宗孟寬)

1894 - Japanese map of Korea, "Chosen Yochizu" (朝鮮輿地図)

1894 - Japanese map "日清韓三国地図"

1894 - British Publication "China Sea Directory," 3rd Edition, Vol 4 (1894)

1894 - British map of Japan and Korea (Popular Atlas of The World)* Three islands, with National border between Argonaut & Dagelet

1894 (1897) German map of Japan and Korea ("JAPAN UND KOREA", Leipzig, Germany)*

1894 Jan 14 - New Japanese Boat Visits Ulleungdo (山陰新報 "漁船改良丸の好果")

1894 - February 18 - Article on an Ulleungdo Inspection (山陰新報 "朝鮮竹島探檢 (松江佐_狂水生投)")

1894 - Jpn Gazetteer: Usando "in the vicinity of Ulleungdo" (于山島:蔚陵島ノ近傍) (三橋僊史著『朝鮮地名案内』)

1894-1897 - From "Korea and Her Neighbors" by Isabella Lucy Bird.

1894-1895 - British Map of Corea and Map of Islands of Japan (W. & A. K. Johnston, Edinburgh & London)

1895 - 紇法『士民必知』 (Knowledge Necessary for All) excluded Takeshima from the Country of Korea.

1895 - Map of Japan: The TIMES Atlas) * three islands

1896 - "Japan and Korea" by J.G. Bartholomew (UK)* no colour but national border between Choson and Matsushima(Dagelet)

1896 - "Central Japan" by J.G. Bartholomew (UK)* Includes Liancourt Rocks

1897 - German map of ”Japan Und Korea”) (Leipzig, Germany)

1897 - German map "CHINA, KOREA UND JAPAN"* no colour but national border between Choson and Matsushima(Dagelet)

1897 - American map of Japan and Korea (The Century Atlas)*Three islands

1897 - Bacon's Popular Atlas of the World: Map of Japan and Korea

1898 - Korean Map of Gangwondo & Ulleungdo (地圖 江原道 咸鏡道)

1898 - British Map "Japan Islands" (London, James Imray and Son )

1899 - Korean Map: "Daehanjeondo" (大韓全圖) (玄采 大韓地誌)

1899 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - (5) 『大韓全図』(1899) , 『大韓輿地図』(1900 c.a.)

1899 - Did the 1899 "Joseon Seaways Directory" Mention "Dokdo"? (朝鮮水路誌)

1898 - American Map "Empires of China, Japan and Korea" (Chicago: J. Martin Miller)

1899 - American map of Japan and 1894 Japanese map of Korea (Map of Japan : George F. Cram of Chicago)

1899 - American Map of Japan (George F. Cram of Chicago) *Three islands

1899 - Sep 23 - "Hwangseong Sinmun" (皇城新聞) 1899 Sep 23: Ulleungdo Situation

1899 - Sep 27 - Report of Ulleungdo by Japanese warship Maya

1900 - The Times Map (China and Japan, Printing House, London)It shows Ulleungdo = Korean , Liancourt Rocks = Japanese

1900 - The Times Map : map of China (East) and Korea

1900 - Russian Ministry of Finance  "Overview of Korea" - Korean easternmost is Ulleungdo(130°54′ E.) , not Liancourt Rocks

1900 - Japanese map of Ulleungdo (赤塚正助 鬱陵島山林概況)

1900 - "Uldo-gi" (鬱島記), by U Yong-jeong (禹用鼎)

1900 - Oct. 22 - A petition by 李乾夏 "鬱陵島를鬱島로改稱하고島監을郡守로改正에關한請議書", which excluded Dokdo from Uldo County.

1900 - Imperial Edict Makes Ulleungdo a County of Gangwon Province (大韓勅令第41号)

1901 - "Daehanjiji" (大韓地誌) Map of Korea's Gangwon Province (玄采)

1901 - No Korean Fishermen on Ulleungdo in 1901 (Kim Ho-dong (김호동) The History of Dokdo & Ulleungdo (독도, 울릉도의 역사) )

1902 - Japanese Document Describing Ulleungdo (外務省通商局編纂 通商彙纂)

1902 - German map of "Japan und Korea"

1903 - The Fishery Guide of Sea around Korea (黒龍会 韓海通漁指針)

1903 - Mar 30 - "Hwangseong Sinmun": "于山島에 二百二十名" (皇城新聞)

1903 - German Map of Japan which was owned by German Embassy

1903 - Encyclopaedia Britannica Map

1904 - German map of Japan

1904 - February 20th Japanese map of Korea and Manchuria (満韓新図 日露戦争実記)*

1904 - Canadian Business Map of Japan ( Rand McNally Business Atlas)*

1904 - American Map "The Seat of the Japan-Russian War" (Geo.F.Cram, Chicago) *

1904 - British Map of "Eastern China, Japan and Korea" (Edward Stanford, London) Three islands

1904 - British Publication "Sailing Directions" (1904)

1904 - American Map of Japan, Korea & Manchuria (C.S. Hammond & Co., New York) Three islands

1904 - "Hammond map of Japan, Korea and Manchuria"Hammond's Atlas of the World (C.S. Hammond & Co., New York) * Three islands

1904 - September 29 - Petition to Incorporate Ryanko-to (Liancourt Rocks) (中井養三郎 リャンコ島領土編入並二貸下願 )

1904 - Sep 25 - First Record of "Dokdo" for Liancourt Rocks (軍艦新高行動日誌)

1904 - History of Joseon Civilization (恒屋盛服 朝鮮開化史 - 조선개화사)

1904-1905 - Ulleungdo drawn by Japanese fleet #19

1904-1905 - Watchtowers during the Russo-Japanese War

1905 - "Trade Documents" by MOFA (外務省通商局編纂 通商彙纂)

1905 - January 5th - The Report about Laincourt Rocks by the captain of the naval ship Tsushima, Commander Sendo Takeo對馬艦長海軍中佐仙頭武央"竹島報告")

1905 - January 28th: the decision to incorporate Takeshima in to Shimane by a Cabinet meeting公文類集第29編 竹島編入閣議決定)

1905 - Feb 24 - Takeshima Incorporated into Shimane Prefecture (山陰新報 "隠岐の新島")

1905 - Mar. 15 - (隱岐新報): Japan "officially" incorporates "Takashima"

1905 - May 29 , 30 & June 5- An Extra of Official Gazette "The War Report of The Japan Naval Battle"(官報号外)

1905 - June 2 - 皇城新聞 : Korean called "Liancourt Rocks(リアンコルド岩)" as "Angohu島", not "Dokdo", Seokdo nor Usando.

1905 - June 3 - Japanese Magazine "The Chronicle of Japan-Russo War (日露戦争実記)"

1905 - June 5 - Tokyo Asahi Shimbun Corrected "Liancourt Rocks" as "Takeshima"

1905 - June 12 - A Report of Liancourt Rocks by a naval engineer Kiguchi Kichigoro (戦艦橋立海軍技手木口吉五郎"竹島視察報告")

1905 - June 14 - A Report of "Takeshima" (Liancourt Rocks) by Rear Admiral Taketomi Kunikane (第三艦隊司令官海軍少将武富邦鼎"竹島視察報告")

1905 - June 15 - Japanese Cruiser Hashidate Surveys Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks) (橋立戦時日誌)

1905 - June 15 - A Report of TakeshimaWarship Hashidate Captain Fukui Masayoshi (printed version) (戦艦橋立艦長海軍大佐福井正義"竹島視察報告")

1905 - Jul 3 - "Postcards to Commemorate Naval Battle" (山陰新報 " 海戦記念絵葉書")

1905 - Aug 6 - Japanese Officials to Visit Takeshima (山陰新報 "竹島渡航")

1905 - Aug 11 - "日本民族の新發展 滿韓露領地誌"

1905 - Aug 22 - "Governor Matsunaga Inspects Takeshima" (山陰新報 "松永知事の竹島視察")

1905 - Aug 22 - "Sea Pigs" Near Takeshima (山陰新報 "県庁内に海豚放養")

1906 - Feb 20 & April 17 - "Official Documents of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Vol.1" - Korean government protested about land transaction in 竹邊浦

1906 - Mar 11 - "Voyage to Takeshima Decided" (山陰新報 "竹島行決定")

1906 - July - the Korean Self-Strengthening Society (大韓自强會) blotted out Takeshima/Dokdo from its monthly magazine in 1906.

1906 - Jul 13 - Korea Omits Dokdo from Uldo County (皇城新聞 「鬱島郡의 配置顛末)

1906 - Jul 13 - Daehan Maeil Shinbo "Ikeda's Official Letter(池田公文書簡
)" - Japanese Resident-General made inquiry about Uldo County, not Ulleung Island.

1906 - Apr 1 - Japanese Tell Koreans of Takeshima Incorporation (山陰新報 "竹島土産")

1906 - Apr 8 - "Diary of My Trip to Takeshima" # 3 (山陰新報 "竹嶋渡海日記")

1906 - Sep 26 - Boundary Survey of Uldo County Conducted (皇城新聞 "鬱島戸口")

1906 - "Daehan Jiji" (大韓地誌) by Hyeon Chae (玄采)

1907 - "Chodeung Daehan Jiji" (初等大韓地誌)

1907 June - "Sinpyeon Daehan Jiri" (新編 大韓地理)

1907 - Daehan Shinjiji Attached Maps (大韓新地志附地圖)

1907 - Japan's "Joseon Seaways Directory" (朝鮮水路誌)

1909 - Japan's "Korean Fisheries Guide" ( 韓国水産誌 鬱陵島全図 )

1913 - Jun 22- Location of Usando Unknown in Early 1900s (毎日申報 "無人島探検中止")

1917 - Map of Korea (朝鮮地図 朝鮮総督府)

1917 & 1918 - Maps of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島図 朝鮮総督府)

1918 - Japanese Map of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島図 朝鮮総督府)

1918 - "Latest Joseon Geography" (藤戸計太 最新朝鮮地理 - 최신 조선지리)

1919 - National Geographic Map of Korea

1922 - "Map of Daehanminguk" (대한민국 디도) (大韓民国図)

1923 - Shimane Prefecture Journal (島根県誌)

1928 - The name of Kwannondo(観音島) came from the "Stone Buddhas (石仏)" on the island. (東亜日報)

1934 Jan 30 - "Maeil Sinbo" - Article on Ulleungdo "鬱陵島란 엇더한 곳인가"

1939 - Jpn textbook shows Liancourt Rocks as Korean? (尋常小学国史絵図)

1941 - ”Geography Text of Kangwon Province (江原道誌)” reconfirms it is Ulleungdo which can be seen and it is from Ulgin

1944 - 1984 - National Geographic Maps

after 1945 - "Geography for Middle School(中等地理)" by the Association of Gyeongbuk Geographers(慶北地理學會) admits Dokdo is outside of the territory of Korea

1945-1953 - Map of Korea (USA) (Geographia map Co., INC in New York) excludes Liancourt Rocks from Korea

1945-1953 - Map of Japan (USA) (Geographia map Co., INC in New York) includes Liancourt Rocks in Japan

1946 - Jan. 29 - SCAPIN 677

1946 - Feb. 13 - "Conference with GHQ/SCAP concerning separation of the administration"

1946 - Jun. 22 - SCAPIN 1033

1947 - Sep. 16 -SCAPIN 1778

1947 - Roh Do-yang "National Geographic Student Atlas for Middle School” excluded Takeshima/Dokdo from Korea

1947 - Sep. 2 - Sok Ju-myong(石宙明)'s "History of Ulleungdo " says that Jukdo has been the eastern edge point of Joseon.

1949 - Nov. 14 - Willam J. Sebald's telegram

1949 - Nov. 19 - A letter from W. Walton Butterworth

1949 - Dec. 29 - U.S. Draft made on December 29, 1949

1950 - July - Commentary on Draft Treaty by the Department of State

1950's - Korean Video: "Dokdo & the Peace Line"

1950's - Japan & Korea Argue Their Claims in 1950s Letters

1949 - U.S. Maps DOES NOT Confirm Korean Sovereignty Over Dokdo

1950 -中央人民政府人民革命軍事委員会作戦部測絵局 『朝鲜地图』 - People's Republic of China excluded Takeshima/Dokdo from " Map of Korea"

1950 - Oct 26 - USA answers to Australian government (Memorandum by Mr. Robert A. Fearey of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs)

1950 - The Daily Telegraph Map of Korea

1940s-1950s - Geographia Map Company's Large Scale Map of Korea (USA)

1950's - Rand McNally Official War Map of Korea

1951 - Apr. - May: Joint UK and USA Draft - extra(1)

1951 - Jun. 1 - New Zealand's view - extra(2)

1951 - Jul. 6 - SCAPIN 2160 (cache)

1951 - Jul 9 - Coversation of Yu Chan Yang with John F. Dulles

1951 - Jul 19 - The 2nd Conversation between Yu Chan Yang and John F. Dulles

1951 - Aug 2 - Another letter from You Chan Yang

1951 - Aug 3 - Bogg’s Memorandum

1951 - August 9 -Dean Rusk Letter (A letter by US Secretary of State Dean Rusk to the Korean Ambassador )

1951 - Sep 9 - San Francisco Peace Treaty

1951 - Sep 21 - Korean Government comprehended Takeshima/Dokdo was affirmed as a Japanese Territory in Peace Treaty

1952- Jan 18 - Syngman Rhee Line

1952 - Nov. 5 - Confidential Security Information of USA

1952 - Dec. 4 - Confidential Security Information of USA

1952 - Dec 4 - “American Embassy’s Note Verbale No.187” - U.S. iterates Rusk Note to ROK.

1953 Jul 22 - Confidential Security Information of USA “Possible Methods of Resolving Liancourt Rocks Dispute between Japan and ROK”( The United States Government's understanding of the territorial status of this island was stated in assistant Secretary dated August 10,1951.")

1953 - Jul 22 - US Doc. Reconfirms Dean Rusk Letter (Letter from Office of Northeast Asian Affairs To E. Allan Lightner American Embassy, Pusan Korea by L. Burmaster Office of U.S. Northeast Asian Affair )

1953 - Oct 13 - Daiichi-Daihou Maru Incident - the dispute over the Rhee Syngman Line

1953 - Nov 30 - Secret Security Information of USA

1953 - Dec. 9 - SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION by Dulles

1953 - American map made by the National Geographic Society (China Coast and Korea)

1954 - Report of Van Fleet mission to the Far East

1954 - Korean map didn't include Liancourt Rocks ( "Korea: Her History and Culture" Office of Public Information, Republic of Korea.)

1965 - June 22 - Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea

1966 Japanese map from Junior High School Textbook (新詳高等地図 最新版)

1967 - American map showed "Takeshima" as Japanese (a Map of Japan and Korea, Hammond)*

1996 - CIA Map of Japan (Administrative Map of Japan )*

2007 - "The analysis of the western maps" by Funasugi Rikinobu

2008 - New Article on Gerry from San-in Chuo Shinopo(山陰中央新報)

2008 - "10 Issues of Takeshima" by MOFA

2008 - June 25 - Article on the Syngman Rhee Line: Lies, lies, lies "60 Years of the Republic: The Syngman Rhee Line")

2008 - Korean Teacher Union Calls on Japan to Apologize for Dokdo

2008 - June - Japanese News Update

2008 - July 14 - The New Guidelines for Teacher's Handbook

2008 - Aug - New Dokdo Propaganda Video

2008 - Oct. 3 - Japanese Government officially made Cabinet Decision "It is apparent that Takeshima is an inherent part of the territory of Japan."

2008 - Dec. 10 - South Korea' Expansionism/Territorial Ambition never dies.

2008 - Dec. 28 - S. Korea protests Japan's territorial claim to Dokdo

2009 - Feb. 22 - Happy Takeshima Day!

2009 - June. 13 - Former Shimane Gov. Sumita Nobuyoshi (澄田 信義) passed away.

2009 - Nakai Yozaburo Exhibition Mentioned in San-in Chuo Shinopo

2009 - Exhibition on Nakai Yozaburo in Oki from 6/13 - 6/28

2009 - 17 July - Japanese Defense White Paper claimed Takeshima is an inherent part of Japan.

2009 - Oct. 25 - 日韓の和解と友好を考えるマラソントーク (Marathon talk "For Reconciliation and Friendship of Japan-South Korea - )

2010 - Feb. 22 - Happy Takeshima Day !!

2010 - Apr 10 - Japanese Ministry of Education approved all textbooks which mentioned Takeshima as its sovereign territory.

2010 - April 30 - Japanese government approved all textbooks that marked Takeshima as Japanese territory

2010 - May 16 - Foreign Minister of Japan instituted Takeshima Issue to the Foreign Minister of South Korea.

2010 - July 7th - South Korean terrorist attacked Japanese Envoy

2010 - Dokdo Institute of Yeungnam University admits Usando in Choson's official map of Ulleungdo(鬱陵島圖形) in 1711 is Jukdo, not Dokdo/Takeshima.

2011 - Feb 22 - Takeshima Day -- February 22

2011 - Feb 22 - DPJ Lawmakers Attend 'Takeshima Day' Ceremonies

2011 - Feb 22 - S. Koreans Attend Takeshima Day Ceremonies

2011 - Apr 14 - A Looter in the Sea of Japan (Korea plans ocean science research station on Takeshima/Dokdo)

2011 - Jul. 27 - Korean President Bars Japanese Lawmakers from Korea

2011 - Aug.1 - Japanese Politicians Stopped from Leaving Korean Airport

2011 - Aug.3 - Yonhap --"Dokdo ferry operator imposes ban on Japanese passengers"


Series Colum : "Seeking Truth Based Solely on Facts(実事求是)” by Prof. Shimojo Masao(下條正男)

The 26th column “Seeking Truth Based Solely on Facts(実事求是)”

The 25th column “Seeking Truth Based Solely on Facts(実事求是)”

The 24th column “South Korean Government dug their own grave by publishing the English version of "The Dokdo/Takeshima Controversy" by Prof. Emeritus Naito Seichu and Mr. Park Byeong-seop.”


The 23rd column " Refutation against the report of South Korean Yonhap News Agency which misread the Mori Kohan(森幸安)'s "The Map of Tsushima(對馬輿地図)"


The 22th column “ Refutation against "The Meiji Government's recognition of Takeshima=Dokdo" by Mr. Park Byeong-seop(朴炳渉)””, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4

The 21st column " Refutation against "Analysis of Shimojo Masao's Editorials" by Mr. Park Byeong-seop(朴炳渉)”

The 20th column “Act of Folly by "Northeast Asian History Foundation"”

The 19th column “"Korea Maritime Institute(KMI : 韓国海洋水産開発院), who lacks ability to read their own historical documents, criticized on Shimane Prefecture. "”

The 18th columnAbsurd and Peculiar Theory of Prof. Hosaka, plus the "Children and textbook nationwide net 21" and others' Getting "Out of Control.”

The 17th column “The Ordinance of Prime Minister and Cabinet Office, No.24 and the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance, No.4 in 1951(昭和26年).

The 16th column ""Dokdo Month" without any historical grounds."

The 15th column " South Korea's Groundless Claim of "Inherent Part of (Korean) Territory"

The 14th column “A reckless Courage of the Professor Kimishima Kazuhiko(君島和彦) of Tokyo Gakugei University(東京学芸大学).

The 13th column “Sins of Asahi Shimbun and Mr. Wakamiya Yoshibumi(若宮啓文).

The 12th column “Northeast Asian History Foundation and Dokdo Research Center's Misunderstanding”

The 11th column “South Korea's Misunderstanding of 'A Map of Three Adjoining Countries (Sangoku Setsujozu 三国接壌図)' by Hayashi Shihei(林子平)”

The 10th column " A Blunder of Sokdo(石島) = Dokto(独島) Theory

The 9th column "Criticism on Dokdo Research Center”

The 8th column “The Historical Facts" The 6th column “Onshu-shicho-goki (隠州視聴合記)" and the "Nihon Yochi Totei Zenzu (日本輿地路程全図)" by Nagakubo Sekisui(長久保赤水)"

The 5th column “South Korea’s erroneous interpretation of the document 'Takeshima and Another Island are Unrelated to Japan"

The 4th column “Errors in Educational Video Produced by the Northeast Asian History Foundation (東北アジア歴史財団)."

History of San Francisco Peace Treaty

1946 - Jan. 29 - SCAPIN 677
1946 - Feb. 13 - "Conference with GHQ/SCAP concerning separation of the administration"
1946 - Jun. 22 - SCAPIN 1033
1947 - Sep. 16 -SCAPIN 1778
1949 - Nov. 14 - Willam J. Sebald's telegram
1949 - U.S. Maps DOES NOT Confirm Korean Sovereignty Over Dokdo
1949 - Nov. 14 - A letter from W. Walton Butterworth
1949 - Dec. 29 - U.S. Draft made on December 29, 1949
1950 - July - Commentary on Draft Treaty by the Department of State
1950 - Aug. 7 - U.S. Draft made on August 7, 1950
1950 - Oct. 26 - USA Answers to Questions Submitted by the Australian Government
1951 - Apr. - May: Joint UK and USA Draft - extra(1)
1951 - Jun. 1 - New Zealand's view - extra(2)
1951 - Jul. 6 - SCAPIN 2160 (cache)
1951 - Jul. 9 - Coversation of Yu Chan Yang with John F. Dulles
1951 - Jul. 19 - The 2nd Conversation between Yu Chan Yang and John F. Dulles
1951 - Jul. 26 - the Japan-U.S. Joint Committee designated Takeshima as a bombing range for the U.S. Forces stationed in Japan. (official gazette of Japan)
1951 - Aug. 2 - Another letter from You Chan Yang
1951 - Aug.3 - Bogg’s Memorandum (On re-ceiving Boggs's memo. I asked the Korean desk to find out whether anyone in the Korean Embassy officer had told him they believed Dokdo was near Ullengdo, or Takeshima Rock, and suspected that Parangdo was too.)
1951 - Aug. 9 - Rusk's Letter  ( As regards the island of Dokdo, otherwise known as Takeshima or Liancourt Rocks, this normally uninhabited 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. )
1951 - Sep. 9 - San Francisco Peace Treaty
1951 - Sep. 21 - Korean Government comprehended Takeshima/Dokdo was affirmed as a Japanese Territory in Peace Treaty
1952- Jan. 18 - Syngman Rhee Line
1950's - Japan & Korea Argue Their Claims in 1950s Letters
1952 - Nov. 5 - Confidential Security Information of USA ("It appears that the Department has taken the position that these rocks belong to Japan and has so informed the Korean Ambassador in Washington." )
1952 - Dec. 4 - Confidential Security Information of USA ( "I much appreciate your letter of November 14 in regard to the status of the Dokdo Island (Liancourt Rocks). The information you gave us had never been previously available to the Embassy. We had never heard of Deen Rusk’s letter to the Korean Ambassador in which the Department took a definite stand on this question.")
1953 Jul. 22 - Confidential Security Information of USA “Possible Methods of Resolving Liancourt Rocks Dispute between Japan and ROK”( The United States Government's understanding of the territorial status of this island was stated in assistant Secretary dated August 10,1951.")
1953 - Jul 22 - US Doc. Reconfirms Dean Rusk Letter (Letter from Office of Northeast Asian Affairs To E. Allan Lightner American Embassy, Pusan Korea by L. Burmaster Office of U.S. Northeast Asian Affair )
1953 - Nov. 30 - Secret Security Information of USA ("The Liancourt Rocks case appears to have aspects in common with that of Shikotan Island" "Remind the ROK of our previous statement of view (the Rusk letter)")
1953 - Dec. 9 - SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION by Dulles
1953 - Oct 13 - Daiichi-Daihou Maru Incident - the dispute over the Rhee Syngman Line
1954 - Aug. - Report of Van Fleet mission to the Far East, 26 April - 7 August , 1954
2008 - Jul. 30 - Press Briefing by Senior Director for Asian Affairs at the National Security Council, Dennis Wilder, on President's Trip to Asia (cache)


Others

Should Japanese Boycott Ulleungdo?

"Korea bans entry of Japanese reps on Ulleung foray"

Should Japanese Lawmakers Be Barred from Visiting Dokdo Museum?

Why are Koreans afraid of Japanese lawmakers visiting Ulleungdo?

"Seoul in Quanary Over Japanese Lawmakers" Planned Visit to Dokdo Museum

Which country will China try to occupy first, Taiwan or North Korea?

The Reason Japan Cannot Give Up Takeshima (Dokdo)

Why Did Koreans Fail to Mention Imperial Edict #41 to the US in 1951?

Arirang: "Korean Lawmakers Hold Seminar of Dokdo"

Ulleung County Symbol Recognizes 'Three Peaks' of Ulleungdo

Video Comparing Korean Map Drawings of "Usando" (于山島), by Yabutarou

Dong-a Reports Discovery of a "Dae Dongyeojido" Map Showing "Dokdo"

Steve Barber is back in the Korean news.

Heartbreaking Earthquake & Tsunami in Japan

"'Flash Patriotism'--Dokdo Bonds Gone After 5 Years"

Problem with Blogger's SPAM Filtering

Daum Map's "Jukdo" (죽도 - 竹島)

Some New Gadgets Added to the Blog

Page Views for This Blog for Feb. 3 - Feb. 9


Exhibition of "Dokdo" Maps & Docs in Busan

Samcheok Museum Map dated 1884 - 1888?

Joseon Paldo Jido (朝鮮八道地圖) - Ulleungdo (鬱陵島)

Are Koreans still interested in "Dokdo"?

Korean Finally "Discovers" 1905 Japanese Newspaper Article

I do not support Korea's "East Sea" movement.

"Rie Akiba angers Korean netizens with Dokdo"

"Rename Dokdo 'Syngman Rhee Islets'"

Famous Movie Quotes about Dokdo

"Hokkaido Teachers Support Korea Over Dokdo"

"Japan Takes Softer Stance Over Dokdo"?

How should 三數十里 (삼수십리) be translated?

How should 大東輿地圖 be translated in English?

Nat'l Library of Korea "Map Materials Room" Opens

Columbia Univ. Professor: "Kim Jeong-ho had absolutely no concept of Dokdo"

Old Maps at the National Library of Korea

U. of Wisconsin Library Removes "Dok Do" from Map Description

Univ. of Wisconsin at Milwaukee Duped by "Dokdo" Advocates

Important Mistranslation of 1694 Ulleungdo Inspection Report

Congnamul's Satellite Photo of Ulleungdo

Man Arrested for Planning to Torch Japanese Embassy

What happened to our "hit counter"?

Is the Dokdo-Takeshima debate still alive in Japan?

Yuji Hosaka: "Born to Defend Korea's Dokdo Claim"

"Lesson Learned From Dokdo," by Tong Kim

Mark Selden seems ignorant of Dokdo/Takeshima history

"Dokdo Humor," by Gerry Bevers

Dokdo Museum Exhibition Focuses on Modern History

"Seoul Podcast" Discusses Dokdo

Another EPIK-sponsored Dokdo Brainwashing

Jukdo (竹島) Missing from Daum's Satellite Photo of Ulleungdo

Ulleungdo's Neighboring Island of Jukdo (죽도 - 竹島)

Foreign English Teachers Used for Dokdo Propaganda

New Survey: Is the Korean government telling its people the truth about Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo)?

Survey: Int'l Court Should Settle Dokdo-Takeshima Dispute

A Sea Lion Cave

Steve Barber & his "Academic" Site in Korean News

Some good photos of Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima 竹島 / Dokdo 獨島)

KBS NEWS: "Dokdo Protector 'An Yong-bok Foundation' Sets Sail"

English Web Sites Supporting Japan's View on Liancourt Rocks?

[Viewpoint] "Spreading the word about Dokdo"

Ulleungdo Inspectors' "Wind-waiting House" (待風軒) Over 158 Years Old

"Difficult to confirm" if Korea Burned Ulleungdo Inspection Documents

The Korean "wild cat" (삵, 살쾡이, 野猫)

Korean Documentary on "Dokdo"

Japan makes a protest stealthily

Great Pictures of Liancourt Rocks on "The Boston Globe" Site

US Think Tank Warns Seoul about Noisy Dokdo Protests

An Yong-bok's "Usando" (于山島) probably "Ika-shima" (いか嶋)

Another Ridiculous Claim from Hosaka Yuji

Korean Translation of Jang Han-sang's 1694 Inspection Record

RAS Will Sponsor a Lecture on Dokdo on Feb. 24

"Old Japanese Document Shows Dokdo Is Korean Territory"

Korean Dokdo Documentary Flopping at Theaters

A Korean Song: "Do you know Dokdo Island?"

Review of Korean Documentary, "Sorry, Dokdo"

"New high school draft curriculum avoids islets row"

Integrity finally wins one

Has Toron Talker changed sites?

Dong-A Ilbo Archive Database

The Takeshima Secret Pact

"S. Korean Lawmakers to Visit Washington Over Dokdo Issue"

"독도" by Gerry Bevers

Essay Contest on Dokdo

Kim Jang-Hoon bought maps

North Korean Stamp of Dokdo

Has the Dokdo Guardian stopped guarding Dokdo?

"Addressing Japan's Dokdo Disease," by Kang Chun-suk"

Korea Protests the Mention of "Dokdo" in Japan's Defense "White Paper"

New Poll: How should the dispute over Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo/Takeshima) be settled?

"Google Earth": Great Satellite Photo of Jukdo

"Korea Times" Distorting Facts

Reuters: "S. Korea steps up defense of disputed islets"

KT: "Japan Renews Claim to Dokdo in Defense White Paper"

NYT: "Desolate Dots in the Sea Stir Deep Emotions as South Korea Resists a Japanese Claim"

IHT: "A fierce Korean pride in a lonely group of islets"

AP: "SKorean emotions run high over island dispute"

Steve Barber in Korean News

How about a trade?

"Projects Unveiled to Reinforce Sovereignty Over Dokdo"

Professor Claims Korea's National Institute of Korean History Mistranslated 1714 Passage

Interview with Mark Lovmo about his Dokdo Site

Same photo, different effects?

"Dokdo is Korean Territory"?

CIA - The World Factbook

Korean Times: "Dokdo Research Institute Opens"

Wow! Even More Ridiculous Claims.

More Ridiculous Dokdo Claims from a Shameless Lee Sang-tae

A New Version of the Dokdo Song?

Does Japan also have a Takeshima song?

Another Picture of the Map Mural at the "Blue House"

Full Text of Bush-Lee Joint Press Conference

"70% of Japanese Think Dokdo is Theirs: Poll"

President Bush: "I know Dokdo Island."

"US Reinstates S. Korean Sovereignty Over Dokdo"

Today, visits to this blog passed 1 million.

"Lee, Bush to Discuss Dokdo"

"US Office No Longer Regards Dokdo as Korean Territory"

Ulleungdo from Possibly Samcheok (三陟) or Donghae City (東海)

Ampontan Compares Kor & Jpn Editorials on the Current Dispute

Ampontan on Korea's Reaction to the Current Takeshima Controversy

In the Process of Changing the Blog Menu

Links to Some Great Copies of Ulleungdo Maps

They insist that Tsushima was Korean territory

Comments will now be moderated.

New, old map of Ulleungdo?

Japanese Video Disputing Korean Claim Usando Was "Dokdo"

"Anonymous" comments are no longer allowed.

News Flash - PM Fukuda notified President Lee of describing Takeshima

Japanese News Update : July 11, 2008

Korean Eastern limits described in various books world wide exclude Takeshima/Dokdo from Korean Territory

Article on the Syngman Rhee Line: Lies, lies, lies.

Japanese News Update : June 26, 2008

San-in Chuo Shimpo: "Usando (于山島) = Jukdo (竹嶼), Documented for the First Time" (日省錄)

Japanese Ministry of Education : "Takeshima Japanese soil, Teachers handbook to say isles claimed by Tokyo, Seoul belong to Japan" (Yomiuri Shimbun : 読売新聞)

Japanese Documentary on Dokdo-Takeshima Dispute ( TSK Super News Special : TSKスーパーニューススペシャル「鬱陵島で見た!~竹島・溝は埋まったか~」)

Korean Fishing Boat Seized by Japanese Patrol Boat (May 18 report on Korea's MBC News)

Korea Times: "Teacher's Guidebook Alleges Japan to Claim Dokdo"

A Russian businessman published a book for appealing restoration of four islands of Kuril to Japan.

Are Google & Korea conspiring to hide "Jukdo" (竹島)?

Korean news site displays childish nationalism.

Korean Teacher Union Calls on Japan to Apologize for Dokdo

Did Koreans elect another lamebrain president?

Japan's Immature Relations with China & S. Korea

Link to Pictures & Info on Ulleungdo & "Dokdo"

Good Satellite Image of Ulleungdo

Great Copy of Bak Seok-chang's 1711 Map of Ulleungdo

Teaching English with Dokdo Propaganda

Japanese Government Bows to Korea on Takeshima

Strangely, votes are being subtracted from our survey.

Roh Moo-hyun's Angry Dokdo Speech

President Lee's policy on Korean-Japanese history is the right policy.

"Japan Claims Dokdo in Foreign Ministry Document"

Korean Eastern limits described in various books exclude Takeshima/Dokdo from Korean Territory

Korea to Use "National Geographic" to Publicize Dokdo Sovereignty

Takeshima Not Mentioned in Japanese Educational Guidelines

Any Info on this Japanese Map (實測朝鮮全圖, 1894, 宗孟寬)?

Some Interesting Photos of Ulleungdo

Samcheok Museum's "Ulleungdo Dohyeong"

Samcheok Museum's "Ulleungdo Dohyeong" (鬱陵島圖形)

Is Mark Lovemo's "Dokdo" Web site history?

Over 40 Old Korean Maps on Display in Suwon

Happy Takeshima Day !

Surely you are joking, Prof. Hosaka ! (ご冗談でしょう、保坂先生!)

Wikipedia Drops "History" Section from Liancourt Rocks Description

Dong-A Ilbo: "Japanese Netizens Actively Promote 'Takeshima'"

Yomiuri Shimbun: "Detailed map of Takeshima completed"

2007 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - Supplement

Korea to add "Dokdo" to image of old map.

Korean Nationalism and so-called "Dokdo"

Geographical Survey Institute of Japan(国土地理院) first displays Takeshima's details in the topographical map.

Korea's NE Asian History Foundation Advertisement

Some "Netizens" Upset New Banknote Has No Dokdo

1894-1948 Korean territory (Revised version)

Good Video of Ulleungdo's Northern Shore

Went to Samcheok Museum today, and....

Can you see "Dokdo" (獨島) from Ulleungdo?

Korean Scholar Says "Usando" Was Ulleungdo's "Jukdo"

Article on "Dokdo Islands" in "Vladivostok News"

"Onshu Shicho Goki" - The different translations

Oh, no, Dokdo. Here we go, again.

KBS Documentary on "Jukdo," the Real Usando

Daum Urges Koreans to Come Here and Vote "Dokdo"

Inspector's Map of Ulleungdo Shows Jasando (子山嶋)?

Some help with this map, please?

Why did Western Maps Show Ulleungdo as Japanese?

Symposium on "The Life of Dokdo Guardian An Yong-bok"

Where have all the Usandos gone?

Nice picture of Ulleungdo's Jukdo (Usando)

Today's Update September 02, 2007

What do イガ島, まの島 and マノ島, have in common?

Most Popular Article on Sanin-chou Shimpo site?

"Dokdo Must Have Trees to be Internationally Legal Island"

Yonhap News says Dokdo was annexed in 1910

ALERT: Dokdo Under Attack!

Investigation of Japanese maps during Meiji period before the incorporation of Liancourt rocks

General Comments for Suggestions for June 2007

Japanese Articles on Dokdo/Takeshima

Japanese Name Glossary

Japanese Document and Map Links

English/Western Document and Map Links

Korean Document and Map Links

Wikipedia Switches from "Dokdo" to "Liancourt Rocks"

Dokdo Residents Talk about the Islets

"Shimane Prefecture Research Committee Report 'Takeshima is Japanese Land'"

Searching for Solutions or Cheerleaders?


韓国語での投稿記事(年代順)(Blog Articles in Korean)

竹島の歴史入門(日本語版)・Historyof Dokdo for beginners (Korean version)

한국의 친구서,부디 검토해 주십시오


Index of Related Articles on Occidentalism (オクシデンタリズムでの投稿)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video Series (With Japanese Translations) :

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 1 : Propaganda video, 朝鮮王朝実録, 八道総図 (1530)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 2 : 世祖実録 (1457年4月16日 世祖三年丁丑四月)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 3 : 1786 Ulleungdo Inspection : 日省録(1786), 海東地圖(1750 c.a.), 鬱陵島外圖(1882)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 4 : 1794 Ulleungdo Inspection "Gajido (가지도) and more dead sea lions"

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 4 Supplement : "Sea Lions & More Proof Usando was not “Dokdo”" 1786&1794 Inspection, 皇城新聞(1899)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 5 : "The King, Lee Gyu-won & Many Names for a Neighboring Island" 高宗19年(1882), 靑邱圖(1834), 英海軍地図(1863), 大日本国沿海略図(1867), 「松島開拓之議」(1877/8), 軍艦「天城」作成地図(1880)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 6 : 海東地圖(1750's), 靑邱圖(1834), 韓国古地図(1800's), 鬱陵島外圖(1882), 日本古地図(1886), 鬱陵島見取図(1905), 韓国水産誌「鬱陵島全図」(1909)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 : Google Earth, 韓国古地図集, 大韓全図(1899), Histoire de l’Eglise de Coree(1874)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 8 : "An Yong-bok, Usando, & Matsushima (Songdo)" 肅宗実録(1696), 鬱陵島圖形(1711), 鬱陵島事蹟(1694), 海東地圖(1750s), 輿地圖(1736-67), 朝鮮地圖(1750-1768), 地乘(1776-1800), 東國文獻備考(1770), 日省録(1793), 萬機要覽(1808), 靑邱圖(1835), 朝鮮国交際始末内探書(1869), 高宗実録(1882), 鬱陵島外圖(1882), 大韓全図(1899), 皇城新聞(1899), 大韓勅令勅令第41号(1900)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 9 : "Location of Usando Unknown in 1903 and 1913" 毎日新報(1913)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 10 : “Usando and Ulleungdo Are 350 ri to the East” 增補 文獻備考(1908), 大韓勅令第四一號(1900), 皇城新聞(1899)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 11 : 大韓全図(1899), 大韓新地誌(1907), 崔南善「朝鮮常識問答」(1946) 「朝鮮常識」(1948)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 1 : 靑邱圖(1834), Google Earth, 鬱陵島地図

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 2 : "1882 Ulleungdo, an outside view & Seal Cave" 鬱陵島外圖(1882)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 2 Supplement : "可支島, 石間朱穴" 鬱陵島外圖(1882), 日省録(1786), 文獻備考

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 3 : "Haedongjido (海東地圖): Ulleungdo, Usando, and Sea Lions" 海東地圖(1750 c.a.)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 4 : "Maps Showing Ulleungdo/Usando 2 Days from Uljin" 輿地圖 (1730ca. ), 海東地圖(1750 c.a.), 左海地図(Jwahaejido)江原道図(1710年)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 5 : "Muleungdo (Ullengdo) “also called ‘Usan’” 東輿備攷(1682ca.)輿地圖 (ca. 1730), 地海東地圖(Early 1750s), 朝鮮地圖(1750 - 1768), 地乘(After 1776), 廣輿圖(early 19th century), 靑邱圖(1834)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 6 : "1894 Japanese Map of Korea (Ulleungdo & Usando) " 朝鮮全図(1894)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 7 : 鬱陵島圖形(ca. 1711)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 8 : 備邊司 方眼地圖(ca. 1750)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 9 : "1877 Japanese Map Showing “Usando” (于山島)" 原版朝鮮全図之写(1877)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 10 : 朝鮮國細見全図(1874)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 11 : 大朝鮮國全圖(1890s)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 12 : 日本帝国海軍作成 朝鮮全図(1873)


Other Related Posts : Occidentalism

Wikipedia Switches from “Dokdo” to “Liancourt Rocks” : Tuesday, May 29th, 2007

Chosun Ilbo: “Danger of Dokdo Disappearing from Wikipedia” : Thursday, May 24th, 2007

Historical Distortion or Ignorance? : Friday, April 27th, 2007

Has anyone been to this museum? : Thursday, April 26th, 2007

Shimane Prefecture’s New English Pamphlet on Takeshima : Wednesday, April 25th, 2007

Japan’s MOFA Updates Takeshima Web Pages : Monday, April 23rd, 2007

Interview with Sankei Shimbun Reporter on Dokdo/Takeshima : Sunday, April 22nd, 2007

An Yong-bok: “We arrived at Oki’s Matsushima….”? : Sunday, March 25th, 2007

Dokdo Museum Head Admits Maps Show “Jukdo, not Dokdo” : Tuesday, March 20th, 2007

New Article on Usando & “Haejang” Bamboo : Tuesday, March 13th, 2007

Cutouts from an 1896 Japanese Map : Saturday, March 10th, 2007

Artistic License in Regard to “Dokdo”? : Friday, March 9th, 2007

The other article about Gerry in the San-In Chuo Shinpou : Tuesday, February 27th, 2007

Korean History Group Responds to Japanese Article on Usando : Saturday, February 24th, 2007

Happy Takeshima Day! : Wednesday, February 21st, 2007

New Takeshima (Dokdo) Article in Japanese Newspaper : Wednesday, February 21st, 2007

Gojong & Sunjong Added to Choson Annals : Thursday, January 25th, 2007

Another Picture of “Dokdo” from Ulleungdo? : Thursday, January 18th, 2007 (1454年 世宗実録「地理志」

Developing a Dokdo/Takeshima database : Wednesday, January 10th, 2007

The Korea Times runs Gerry’s story : Sunday, January 7th, 2007

Shimane Prefecture Takeshima Research Group Crushes Korea’s Dokdo claims : Monday, December 4th, 2006

Another problematic article in the Korean media : Thursday, November 30th, 2006

Asked Not to Write About Dokdo on the Net : Wednesday, November 15th, 2006

The lies of the Dokdo Museum : Wednesday, July 26th, 2006

Gerry Bevers writes about Dokdo/Takeshima : Wednesday, May 10th, 2006

Other Related Posts : Enjoy Korea/Japan on Naver

International Law
国際法で有効な韓国の竹島実行支配の証拠を教えてください

国際法に基づく韓国の竹島の実効支配の証拠は見つかりましたか?

判例で読み解く竹島の領有権

日本の1905年の竹島編入は、秘密裏に軍事的に実施したから違法ニダ。

竹島は無主地でなかったので、日本の1905年の先占は無効である。

当時国際法は領土編入の前提に (1) 茂朱誌と (2)茂朱誌の場合にもその周辺関連国への問い合わせと国際的考試を条件にし

拝啓 韓国明知大学教授(国際法) 金明基 殿

国際法の学者は、先占の通知義務を認めている。1905年の竹島編入は無効nida。

竹島の先占には、通知が必要とか、官報公告が必要とか、嘘をつくなよ。

1905年の竹島編入は軍事目的のため無効?

1905年の竹島編入は無効?国際法を捏造する学者 明知大学教授 金明基 その2

1905年の竹島編入は無効?国際法を捏造する学者 明知大学教授 金明基


竹島は、紛争地ではない!!!

国際司法裁判所で対馬の領有権を争おう!!!


安龍福は、嘘吐きなので処罰した。


SCAPIN677で竹島が韓国領になった?詐欺国家の嘘を暴く

日本はSCAPIN第677号を無視している!!!

アメリカも韓国のSCAPIN解釈を拒否

ラスク書簡の法的効力。竹島は日本領でした

ラスク書簡を否定する文書の解読

ラスク書簡を否定する文書が見つかったんだって?


太政官文書の国際法上の効力を考える。

いつ日本が竹島の権原(title)を放棄しましたか?

サンフランシスコ条約で、日本は竹島のtitleを放棄した?


韓国が、竹島の国際司法裁判所への付託を拒否する理由

国際法の権威Crawford教授が、「日韓併合条約は合法」と結論



Maps/Documents

韓国が隠している竹島の歴史 半万年

1905年以前に竹島が韓国領だった証拠はどこ?

韓国人は、これが竹島に見えるの?

于山島は、鬱稜島の西にある島です!!(ちなみに、竹島は鬱稜島の東南)

成宗実録の三峯島の解釈(韓国国史編纂委員会の歪曲)

太政官文書の「里」は4kmではなく、海里(1.85km)ニダ。

これが、大韓帝国が竹島を実効支配した証拠nida。 (独島で取ったあしか日本輸出)

太政官文書の「外一島」は、竹島なのか?

SF条約に馬羅島は書いてないが韓国領だ。よって、竹島も韓国領だ。

保坂が公開した独島地図

竹島の存在を知らなかったのに、大韓帝国は実効支配してたのですか?

韓国の竹島には、翼がついていたのですか?

鬱陵島から竹島が見えると、「東国輿地勝覧」にも書いてある。

1877年に日本と関係なしとした「竹島外一島」とは、鬱陵島と竹嶼(CHUKDO)のことでした。

于山島は竹島ではなく、架空の島でした。

サンフランシスコ条約1949年12月の米国草案で竹島を日本領と規定。

アメリカが「竹島は日本領」と、韓国大使に最終回答 (1951年7月19日  韓国大使(ヤン)から国務長官への書簡/1951年8月10日 国務次官補(ラスク)から韓国大使への回答)

1899年の大韓全図で、竹島を韓国領とはっきり明記

EEZの竹島起点は韓国に不利?

竹島の領有権について日韓の主張を比較検証

【海洋調査】国内法では拿捕可能、国際法では不可

半島の史書で検証する竹島。

2. 外国の地図だけで決めるなら、鬱陵島も日本の領土

3. 林子平圖のTakeshimaは竹島/独島ではない

1903年日本で発刊された世界地理教科書に

于山島は竹嶼Jukdoか独島か?

8. 19世紀末大韓帝国政府, 独島・鬱陵島を韓国領土で正確に表示 という韓国の主張は歪曲

19世紀末も、鬱陵島の最も顕著な付属島はJUKDOで、次に顕著な島は観音島

金正浩 1834.靑邱圖(写本)中の于山島

于山島が竹島/独島でない10の理由

Naver Mapで見比べる 大于島と小于島、JUKDOと観音島

鬱陵島の北東部に有るJukdo竹嶼の地図と、 郡県図に記入された于山島の地図を比べてみる

18.19C前後の鬱陵島及びLiancourt Rock付近の漁業

1899年の大韓全図の鬱陵島の描写の疑問

58 comments:

  1. Great! Muchas gracias!
    Thanks a lot, Kaneganese!
    I hope all the new comers will be interested in every article.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Are you friggin' kidding me?
    Are you talking about compensation?
    Are you talking about forceful overtaking?
    Trust me, there's a lot more to say about Japan...
    If you're Japanese, study history somewhere else but Japan, cause the fraudulance of Japanese textbooks are widely known...
    And if you ain't, I don't know if the articles you found are true in any manner, but would you say that the US should belong to England cause it was England's like 500 years ago?
    I ain't gonna check up this blog anymore cause it just pisses me off too much...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Tai Kim

    History? Victim card again?

    Look, making Japanese bad doesn't help Korean look better anymore. Actually, it only reveals the fact Korean are avioding from the truth to the world. Grow up and face the music of what you have done. When it comes to Takeshima/Dokdo issue, it is Japanese civilian who are victims. Korean owe astronomical amount of money to them.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ...guess I do check this blog again...
    kaneganese, I'm only using the history/victim card cause obviously, your whole blog is using it.
    When looking solely at the Dokdo/Takeshima issue, Korea MAY owe Japan astronomical money, but since the Korean/Japanese government is paying, which government do you think owes the other more?
    You have managed to accumulate lots of info on your blog, and I applaud that, but I have to say, I can't help but feeling that the blog is biased.
    I bet if there was a Korean blog like this, it would be as biased too.
    All I'm trying to say is that if you're trying to persuade people that Dokdo/Takeshima is Japan's, then you shouldn't use the history/victim card, cause man, you know that Japan owes much more to Korea.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Tai Kim

    "...guess I do check this blog again..."

    Yes, please. Thanks.

    By the way, I don't think Japanese government is demanding compensation from Korea. I am telling this because I'm so surprised to know that almost none of Korean know the fact many Japanese civilians are killed and injured during their invasion on the island. Korean should now the fact that they are not always the victim in the history. When it comes to Takeshima/Dokdo issue, they were aggressor, and by the international law, it is illegal.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Kaneganese
    One of your ground rule states "unrelated issues will be unwelcome and may be deleted"... Your remark to tai kim about potential injuries to Japanese fishermen compare to what Japanese has done to Koreans over years (1905 to 1945) is not comparable… including assignation of Korean Queen in 1895 by Japanese. I would appreciate if you stop making comments like “Japanese are victims” (enough said on that but I did want to set history correctly)
    You've referenced many western maps; in my opinion, until end of Japanese colonialism in Korea, western part of world did not have much contact with Korea. Korea was known as "hermit kingdom" in the West due to closed door trade policy. In fact, William Griffins’' author of 1882 book Corea:The Hermit Nation, who never visited Korea and had no first hand experience with the county supported Japanese invasion and occupation of Korea by Japanese. Wouldn't that explain misinterpretation (bias) of geography by western map? Most of western world favored Japan over Korea due to trade. In fact, prior to mid to late 20th century, Korea did not welcome westerners.
    It appears you have done lots research and you’re intelligent person, but I only see issue in very biased Japanese perspective and left out relevant maps published by Japanese that shows Dokdo indeed belong to Korea as late as 1877, prior to Sino-Japanese war.

    Pictures say thousand words...
    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
  7. ys1965,

    Don't believe Steve Barber's site, which is full of lies.

    We showed various western maps from the 1890's here to show you the circumstance around the islands in the Sea of Japan.

    In those days, western ocean navigation ships were superior to Japan's or Korea's ships and they knew well about navigation and geography. It is important to know how they thought about the ownership of these islands as a third party.

    The important thing is that these western maps didn't show that Liancourt Rocks to be Korean territory and various geographical books (including Korean books) indicated that Korean eastern limit was Ulleungdo - Liancourt Rocks were no included in Korea.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous17/7/08 16:53

    pacifist,
    What claims do you have to say Steve Barber's site is lies? Just because Steve is telling the truth that you don't want to face, he's liar??? COME ON... Be real!!! His site actually has supporting documents(Great Job Steve!!!). This is just another example of when the true this presented, Japanese just doesn't want to face the facts. I find this blog site too dominated with stubborn people who do not want to face the true. I'm out of here!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Who's the force overtaker??
    I can't even beleive that people who only read the Japanese side of the story but never even learnt North-East Asian history can say things that they don't konw about.
    I'm not Korean and i voted for Korea.

    Why?

    Japan took over Korea by force and Killed, sloughtered, raped and also biological testing on Korean people for over 30 years killing over tens, maybe 100s of thousands torchered and sloughtered and you call them the force over taker??

    Who's the victom?
    you think Hittler was the victom in Euroup but think japanese are?
    because that's what Japanese did.
    the did the same thing what Hittler did to Jewish people.

    i think you should under stand that before the militarial ocupation, Dok-do was Korean terretory and also Japanese took over by force.

    The Japanese fishermen were on the other side of their national boarders and were chased out.
    what Koreans did was clearly getting their own land back form Japan who torchered them.

    I think you guys all should read the both sides. not whats popular(Japan).

    then "WHY" is Japan sugesting it's their terretory?

    well, because they bombed Pearl harbor, they couldn't recive long distance missles from America and Dok-do is a very tactical place to bome the main land of Korea.
    It may not be true, but there is also a theory that there is natural resource in the near by sea.

    and maybe it is their honor or something, but it is sure it is a very good place for bombing and miltary base.

    but, the Korea were on American side in the Korean war, so they have long-distance missle from America.

    so if dok-do is lost, there might be some very interesting sene in the East. ^^

    I hope you know what's ture or at least read the both side of the story, not just Japan.

    oh, and did I mention I'm not Korean?

    ReplyDelete
  10. and Japan's history book is a
    litte(very) differn't from Korean history book. (I read both)

    Japanese one says that they 'rescued Korea from the Russians'

    and korean ones says 'we tried to get help from Russia to escape from Japan'

    and 'Why' would anyone say that their rescuer is the bad one?

    because it's not.

    and the occupation was Illeagal.
    By threat and force.

    I think you people know a lot about Jewish holocoast than the military occupation in Korea that the Japanese did.

    I recomend you read or hear about it. YOu will find many common things between them.

    ReplyDelete
  11. anonymous (at 4:53PM),

    You should compare Steve's site with our site reading each of the corresponding topics.
    Please read all of the following and think yourself, which is telling the truth.

    (1)About 公文録 (Kobunroku)

    Steve's site:
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-1877-doc.html

    Our site:
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2007/06/argument-about-another-island-details.html
    - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Steve only showed the first document and jumped to the conclusion. We read all of the documents and considered what the "another island" means.


    (2)About "Onshu Shicho Gouki"
    Steve's site:
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-saitohosen.html

    Our site:
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2007/10/onshu-shicho-goki-different.html

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    We once taught Steve his gramatical error in this article and he once said that he would correct it but...

    (3) About "How Takeshima and Matsushima became part of Joseon":

    Steve's site:
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo1870doc.html

    Our site:
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2007/06/1870-report-how-tamkshima-matsushima.html
    - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Again he only showed the first part of the documents without considering what the document meant.

    (4) About Prof. Hosaka's map:
    Steve's site:
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-professor-hosaka.html

    Our site:
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/06/1899-american-map-of-japan-and-1894.html

    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/02/surely-you-are-joking-prof-hosaka.html
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Persons who know how to read longitudes can understand how Steve is misleading the readers...

    Dear intelligent Korean people, please compare the sites without prejudices. Then you will find the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  12. lessonone,

    This is not a site to talk about history but you have a wrong view of the history, so I will tell you this. Even if you insist you are not Korean, it's a Korean historic view. (If you are not a Korean, you must be a foreigner who was taught in Korean school.)

    "Japan took over Korea by force and Killed, sloughtered, raped and also biological testing on Korean people for over 30 years killing over tens, maybe 100s of thousands torchered and sloughtered and you call them the force over taker??"

    Didn't you know that Chosun under the Yi Dynasty was on the verge of collapse before Japan made her a protectorate? Japan paid lots of money from Japanese citizens' tax to save Korea.
    And annexation was not always forced, there were Japanese statesmen who were against the annexation including Itoh Hirobumi (who was assassinated by a Korean before the annexation) and there were lots of Korean people who wanted annexation. The most progressive political party, 一進会, pleaded to both of Korean and Japanese emperors to annex two countries.

    Please take a look at this photo:

    http://nandakorea.sakura.ne.jp/img/nihonjidai.jpg

    It is the celebration after the annexation in Korea before the gate that was built by Korean party 一進会.

    As to the annexation, ther was no killing, no rapes, .... if you believe those kind of lies, you must have learnt in Korean school because only Korea is educating such a groundless thing.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hey.
    PLZ, find the island in the ancient Japanese maps..

    Any ancient Japanese maps don`t have the island, but almost korean maps have it.

    a doubt of Kim jung ho`s map??

    Why do you look at only a picture of the map??

    he made two type maps.
    the one is a picture. the other is a writing.

    The writing absolutly has a dok-do comment that is ours.

    What are you doing??

    ReplyDelete
  14. and why do you hide some truth?

    why do you avoid the report of Hungtaek Sim in 1906?

    ReplyDelete
  15. LevisKIM,

    Hungtaek Sim simply misunderstood about Dokdo. He didn't know where it was and believed the island he called "Dokdo" is a inhabitable island in 1906. I think he probable misconstrued Japanese Takeshima with Korean "竹島", Jukdo, which is 2.2km east from Ulleungdo and inhabitable island. In fact, Korean Imperial didn't make any official report after they had received the report from commander of 春川. It is highly likely they realised it is not their Usando, but the remote island which they didn't know, but happened to share same name "竹島".

    If Shim really meant "Dokdo" in his letter as today's Takeshima/Dokdo, he should have written it as 石島, which is supposed to be their island by the Imperial Edict no.41 in 1900.

    However, he has written it in Chinese 独島, not 石島.

    On top of that, 皇城Shimbun in July 1906 shows us that Imperial Ministry of Internal Affair of Korea officially answered to Japanese Resident-General that Takeshima/Dokdo was outside of Uleudo County.

    in other word, Korean government officially declared it is not their territory.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "Hey.
    PLZ, find the island in the ancient Japanese maps.."

    There is no real "ancient" maps which show Takeshima/Dokdo in both countries. However, Japanese documents clearly record that Murakawa and Ohya clan of Yonago, Tottori started to use the island economically around 1850s. This is the first and oldest map ever which depict actual Matsushima(today's Takeshima/Dokdo) precisely, found in the world so far.

    Mid 17th century - Illustrative Map of Matsushima (松嶋絵図) by Murakawa Clan

    And this is not the only one which depicted Matsushima. There are plenty.

    On the other hand, there is absolutely no Korean maps which has today's Takeshima/Dokdo accurately described before 1960s. All the Korean ancient maps which Korean claim as proof simply show that Korean back then had no practical knowledge of the island in the Sea of Japan, and confused about the numbers and even the location of Ulleungdo.

    ReplyDelete
  17. leviskim,

    There are many maps in Japan that depicted Liancourt Rocks as Matsushima in the Edo period. (In those days Ulleungdo was depicted as Takeshima and Laincourt Rcoks as Matsushima.)

    However, there is NO Korean map that depicted Liancourt Rocks actually. I think the island in Korean maps you believe to be Liancourt Rocks are not Liancourt Rocks but Usando. But Usando has been proved not to be Liancourt Rocks. (Please read the articls in this blog for details.)

    As to Sim Heuntaek, he reported about the Japanese envoy to the local government and the local government sent the same report, almost the carbon copy of Sim's report, to the central government.
    The central government ordered to investigate what the Japanese envoy did and the details about the island, but after that no orders reported, no claims were made to Japan.

    Here is a Korean newspaper to show that they didn't think Liancourt Rocks to be their territory in 1906:
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/02/july-1906-korea-omits-dokdo-from-uldo.html

    It may mean that they recognised the island was out of Korean territory because Korean Empire knew their territory's eastern limit was Ulleungdo. (Please see the details:
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/04/korean-eastern-limits-described-in.html

    ReplyDelete
  18. Oops, Kaneganese already answered the same thing. Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thanks your comments.
    but I think that you have a only Japanese friendly or anti Korean opinion.

    Why am I saying like this?
    Bcz you only like and read only until a doubt..

    look at this maps.
    http://cafe.naver.com/enjoyjapanhistory.cafe?iframe_url=/ArticleRead.nhn%3Farticleid=73

    almost maps was made by Japanese.
    They show that the past Japanese opinion of Dok-do.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Hungtaek Shim`s report story.

    1906.03.28
    [출처] [제 86 문] Japaese 隱岐島司 (UN-GI-DO officer) of shi-ma-ne visited Ulrung govenment office.

    and he said that Dok-do is Japanese territory.

    SO~
    Mr Shim reported it to Chun-chon mayor.

    Misunderstanding??
    Japanese office informed and he reported.

    he absolutely wrote our territory Dok-do.

    Why couldn`t Korean goverment say anything to world in 1906?

    The Korean goverment had been deprived of the right of diplomacy and military since 1905 bcz of the second treaty between Korea and Japan.

    ReplyDelete
  21. 皇城(Hwang-sung)news story.

    Japanese say that..

    sixty ri from east to west and forty ri from north to south for a total of 200 ri

    this was the Ulrung`s reign area.

    Think about it.
    60X40 = 200. right??
    2400 is correct.
    This is not an Area comment.

    and [ri] is not for Area.
    [ri] is for RANGE.

    look at this comment.[total 200ri]
    200ri = 80km.
    Ulrung-do <-> Dok-do = 92km.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Murakawa and Ohya clan story.

    Murakawa and Ohya clan of Houki..
    Houki didn`t exist then.

    it is a Japanese scholar`s saying.
    Naito Seichu.

    and he said and the other Japanese scholar said...

    拜領[Baeryong] means [receive] in ENG.
    but it has political meaning.
    [Baeryong] was impossible in that age.

    Japanese rule and Korean rule of meidival age was different with Western meidival history.

    All territory is for KING.
    [Baeryong] was impossible.

    Do you understand?

    ReplyDelete
  23. and last..

    Japanese Emperor..
    It is a very funny translatioin.

    From the ancient until Chosun(Korea)-Japan war in 1592, Japanese king`s standard name was [No-Gook-WANG]
    it means a slave country king.

    who agree his title?

    Japanese King called Emperor to Korean Kings and Chinese Kings
    and they paid a tribut to Korea and China.

    Even though Japan is a very rich country now, and Korea has been destroied since Chong(china)- Chosun(Korea) War,
    at that time, Japanese RANK was so lower than korean one.

    RANK was a very funny story to westerner.I know.
    but it was a rule of EAST ASIA.
    How much do you know and understand Asian History?

    We are recovering our position and history fact from our history mistakes and Japanese lying.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Levis KIM,

    "almost maps was made by Japanese.
    They show that the past Japanese opinion of Dok-do."

    What you need to do right now is to look for Korean concrete evidence to show their effective control over the island, not Japanese maps, or you will not prove yourself correct forever.

    "1906.03.28
    [출처] [제 86 문] Japaese 隱岐島司 (UN-GI-DO officer) of shi-ma-ne visited Ulrung govenment office.
    and he said that Dok-do is Japanese territory."

    No. He said "Our Takeshima(竹島) is now Japanese territory."

    Shim apparently mistook it as Korean Jukdo(竹島), which locates 2.2km east from Ulleungdo. Dokdo was a Korean name for Takeshima, but he didn't really know where it was and the geography. He thought "Dokdo/Takeshima" was inhabitable island, which is not true.

    "皇城(Hwang-sung)news story."

    As for the news paper article, please read the following post.

    Korean officially admitted Dokdo is outside of their territory to Japanese Resident-General : 1906 - July - Korea Omits Dokdo from Uldo County (皇城新聞 「鬱島郡의 配置顛末」)

    "Murakawa and Ohya clan of Houki.. Houki didn`t exist then.
    it is a Japanese scholar`s saying. Naito Seichu."

    Houki (伯耆) did exist. It is one of the old country(伯耆国) of Japan. Naito only pointed out MOFA's tiny mistake because there were no Han(藩), or clan as Houki Han(伯耆藩) back then, that's all.

    You need to read carefully Professor Emeritus Naito's opinion. He used to be one of the lety activist of Shimane University and supposed to be a 金日成's sympathizer. He basically says there are no concrete evidence Korea had any proof of effective control over the island before Japan. He is only doing this since he dreams of overthrowing Japanes government and build a socialistic country like North Korea.

    Ohya and Murakawa did claimed that they received(拝領) the islands from Shogunate. It was recorded in Japanese documents. I don't think it is a concrete proof that civilian owned the land but Japanese then did considered both islands within Japanese territory. In fact, other documents and maps clearly support this fact.

    See below.

    Japanese considered both Ulleungdo and Takeshima/Dokdo within her territory. : 1667 Onshu Shicho Goki (隠州視聴合記)

    Japanese considered both Ulleungdo and Takeshima/Dokdo within her territory. : 1835 - "Map of Asia and Small Orient(亜細亜小東洋圖)" shows Takeshima/Dokdo as Japanese territory

    "Japanese Emperor..
    It is a very funny translatioin.

    From the ancient until Chosun(Korea)-Japan war in 1592, Japanese king`s standard name was [No-Gook-WANG]
    it means a slave country king."

    I don't understand what you are talking about. I think you need brain surgery.

    I don't understand why Gerry allowed this comment neither.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Levis Kim,

    I have mentioned Sim Heung-taek before in posts, and I thought I had written about him before, but it may have been on another blog. Anyway, I want to do a more detailed post of him and his encounter with the Japanese officials.

    Anyway, the main problem with Sim Heung-taek's claim is that he did not know where "Dokdo" was. He said it was 100 ri (40 km) from Ulleungdo, when, in fact, it is about ninety-two kilometers from Ulleungdo.

    Also, Sim Heung-taek did not protest when the Japanese told him they had incorporated Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo/Takeshima). In fact, he even accepted and thanked the Japanese officials for the gift of a sea lion that was caught at "Dokdo."

    Why did Sim Heung-taek claim Dokdo was part of his county?

    I think it was because Japanese fishermen had been fishing Dokdo from Ulleungdo for a few years, and, therefore, he probably assumed it was part of Ulleungdo based on that fact.

    Why did Sim Heung-taek say Dokdo was only 100 ri (40 km) from Ulleungdo?

    I think it was because the Japanese had told him that it was 100 ri from Ulleungdo, and Sim Heung-taek mistakenly assumed they were using the Korean measure of "ri," instead of the Japanese measure, which was "1 ri = 1 km" by that time.

    After Sim reported the incident to his superiors, he was asked to investigate the claim further. In the meantime, Korean newspapwers reported the incident, which was probably the reason Japan's Residents-General in Korea asked Korea's Ministry of Interior to clarify what islands were neighboring islands of Ulleungdo. However, in her reply, Korea's Interior Ministry did not mention "Dokdo," which suggests that the investigation had revealed that "Dokdo" was much farther from Ulleungdo than Sim Heung-taek had realized and that it was not Korean terrority, but just a couple of barren rocks.

    The Korean Interior Ministry's response was reported in the Hwangseong Shinmun (皇城新聞) in a July 13, 1906 article, which was a few months after Sim had reported to his superiors about "Dokdo." You can read the article HERE.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Kaneganese,

    I did not know what Levis Kim was talking about, either, which was why I allowed his comment. I thought you guys might know.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Kaneganese//

    I think that you put a veto on all Korean information.

    most of Korean map have the island that was called U-SAN-DO(ancient Dok-do name)

    Why don`t you talk about Jungho Kim`s writing style map??

    The document Number is 292,1038 ki 229 d. and It is kept in Japanese Congress library.

    and why can`t you believe other countries information, including Japanese one?

    Do you want to see European map?
    =================================
    http://cafe310.daum.net/_c21_/bbs_search_read?grpid=J58&mgrpid=&fldid=N4T&contentval=000gLzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz&datanum=2625&fenc=sVTnNM1pBaAk-J15_BC6KA00&nenc=.B-bJ.ZkVLLFqzmeciYmSA00&srchid=IIMIXMmK00

    ReplyDelete
  28. Levis Kim,

    If you are talking about Kim Jong-ho's 1863 Daedongjiji (大東地志), I have translated the geography part for Ulleungdo HERE.

    Islands

    Ulleungdo is in the sea due east of this “hyeon” (縣) and is the old Usan 우산 (于山). Other names are Muleung (武陵 - 무릉), Uleung (羽陵 - 우릉), and Uleung (芋陵 - 우릉). It has a circumference of about 200 ri, and the distance from east to west is about seventy ri, while the distance from north to south is about fifty ri. Three dangerously high peaks tower above the island and are pure rock. If you climb up to a high place on a clear day and look into the distance, it [Ulleungdo] looks like a shimmering cloud. With a fair wind, it can be reached in two days. The Japanese call it Takeshima (竹島 - 죽도) and it is close to Japan’s Oki district. Japanese boats occassionally come to fish (倭舡漁探者時到).

    From the central peak, it is about thirty ri to the shore due east, forty ri due west, twenty ri due south, and twenty ri due north. The are six to seven streams, five to six bamboo forests, and dozens of [old] dwelling sites (居址). There is Jeojeon-dong (楮田洞), Gong-am (孔巖 – "Hole Rock"), Jutogul (朱土窟 – "Red Earth Cave"), “seokjang” (石葬 – stone-piled graves), old boat houses (古址船泊處), and “places to wait for fair wind” (待風所). On the south side of the island are four or five small islands. The center of the island is all deep valleys with streams and rock cliffs. There are many cats and rats that are so big they are unrecognizable. [狙 means “monkey,” but it was probably supposed to be 猫 (cat).] There are also runaways (避人). There are peaches, plums, mulberry, edible herbs, rare trees, and many strange, unknown plants.

    ----------------------

    島嶼

    鬱陵島在本縣正東海中右于山一云武陵一云羽陵一云艼陵周二百餘里東西七十餘里南北五十餘里三峯岌嶪聳空純是石山自本縣天晴而登高望見則如雲氣便風二日可到倭人謂之竹島與日本隱岐州相近(倭舡漁探者時到)自中峯至正東海濱三十餘里正西海濱四十餘里正南海濱二十餘里正北海濱二十餘里川溪六七竹田五六居址數十有楮田洞孔巖朱土窟石葬古址船泊處待風所島之南有四五小島島中皆石壁石澗洞壑甚多有狙鼠極大不知避人亦有桃李桑拓菜茹之屬珍木異草不知名者甚多○


    Can you explain exactly what you are talking about?

    Do you think the "Takeshima" reference in the document is a reference to "Dokdo"? If you do, then you are wrong. Takeshima was the name for Ulleungdo in 1863. Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) was never referred to as Takeshima until 1905, which Japan incorporated the islets.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Can you explain Japanese and european maps that is including the imformation of korean terrotiry Dok-do? everything is mistake??

    Hey..
    Japanese evidences are so fewer.

    Their major insistences are that korean was wrong, or korean hadn`t known,

    what do you think that Japanese maps?? They didn`t think Dok-do is not their territory..

    Any Japanese maps and books including schoolbook didn`t have it.

    but Korean recorded it. U-san-do.
    on the Ulrung-do right.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Dae-dong-Ji-Ji and Dae-dong-yo-ji-do writing map are different. he made 3maps, [Chong-gu-do],[Dae-dong-ji-ji],[Dae-dong-yo-ji-do(illustrated map and writing)]

    ReplyDelete
  31. I understand your difficultness to understand my saying. My English is not fluently and I changed little sensitive.

    When korean hear Takeshima, we recognize our bad choice and historical mistake. so we changed sensitive and we lose our control.

    I think that old soldiers who killed poor pheasants are same.
    Anyway It is crazy works. I know.
    most of korean people blame them.

    I think that all country has crazy right wing men.

    Anyway I want you guys to have a balanced view of Dok-do.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Gerry,

    I think he is talking about "Sinocentrism(中華思想 or 華夷思想)". But other than that, I have absolutely no idea except for the slander against Japanese Imperial family.

    Anyway, I don't think it has nothing to do with Takeshima/Dokdo debate. I guess he is only trying to show how Korea was "advenced" and gave cultures to Japan, which is not true and drag us into "(distorted) history lessons".

    ReplyDelete
  33. Levis KIM,

    "Japanese King called Emperor to Korean Kings and Chinese Kings and they paid a tribut to Korea and China."

    As obnoxious as ever.

    Are you talking about 足利義満, the Muromachi Bakuhu Shogunate(室町幕府将軍)? He did temporary tribute trade(朝貢貿易) between China, but it was not tribute with Korea. It has nothing to do with Japanese Imperial family. Unlike Korea, Japan has been free from Sinocentrism when they stopped sending envoy to Tang Dynasty China(遣唐使) in 894. That's why Japan didn't compiled authentic history book(正史) after 901, the year of "日本三代実録" was compiled.

    ”but Korean recorded it. U-san-do. on the Ulrung-do right.”

    Usando is not today's Takeshima/Dokdo, but it was Ulleungdo before 1700s and Jukdo or flying island sometimes after 1700s. But it has never been today's Takeshima/Dokdo. And it was recorded as such in Korean documents.

    1711 - Bak Seok-chang''s (朴錫昌) Map of Ulleungdo

    San-in Chuo Shimpo: "Usando (于山島) = Jukdo (竹嶼), Documented for the First Time"

    Even Korean scholars started to admit it.

    Dokdo Museum Head Admits Maps Show “Jukdo, not Dokdo”

    呉尚学(Cheju University), 李相泰(Seoul University), 柳雨林(Dokdo Research Center)

    They admitted that, not all, but some Usandos in the maps and documents are not today's Takeshima/Dokdo.

    ReplyDelete
  34. leviskim,

    I can't understnad what you wrote;

    "Can you explain Japanese and european maps that is including the imformation of korean terrotiry Dok-do? everything is mistake??"

    There are no "Korean Dokdo" in any Japanese and European maps.

    The western maps from the 1890's to early 1900's had "Matsu Shima" (or "Matsu I.", "Matsu Sima", or "Matsu island", or "Dagelet island") which was Ulleungdo and Liancourt Rocks (or "Hornet Rocks") as Liancourt Rocks, not Dokdo. And they almost all say Liancourt Rocks were not Korean territory. (Many of them say that Liancourt Rocks to be Japanese territory, actually.)

    1891 & 1894 (American map):
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/06/1891-1894-american-maps-of-japan.html

    1891 (American map):
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/07/1891-american-map-of-japan.html

    1891-1899 (German, British and American maps):
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/06/1891-1899-four-maps-from-map-library-of.html

    1892 (German map):
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/06/1892-german-made-map-of-east-asia.html

    1894 (German map):
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/06/1897-german-made-map-of-japan-and-korea.html

    1894 (British map):
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/06/1894-british-map-of-japan-and-korea.html

    1894 (British map):
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/07/1894-british-map-of-japan.html

    1897 (American map):
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/06/1897-american-map-of-japan-and-korea.html

    1897 (German map):
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/06/1897-german-map.html

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    BTW, this is not a blog to talk about emperors and kings, but I would tell you that Japan had sent tributes to China during the Tang Dynasyty and the Sui Dynasty, but after those era, Japan left Sinocentrism and went their own way. So Japan could have their "emperor" not "king". In the Sinocentrism world, "emperor" was only one in China and tributaries could only have their "kings" who served for the Chinese emperor.

    Unfortunately, Korea had been a tributary to China (Ming and Qing) for about 500 years until Japan liberated her in 1894.

    Please read the following article. (parts of Korea and Japan)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinocentrism

    There was a gate called 迎恩門 (영은문), The Yeongeunum (gate of welcoming imperial favors), in Seoul. Where the Joseon King welcomed embassies from the emperor of the Ming Dynasty. It was destroyed a year after the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895.

    Located just outside the West Gate (敦義門) of the walled capital city. On the road to Beijing as an adjacent to the Mohwgwan (慕華館), literally hall of longing for China. It's nearest post station was the Hongjewon (弘濟院).

    Embassies were occasionally sent to Joseon by the emperor of the Ming Dynasty to announce imperial succession, investiture of a crown prince and others. When they reached the Hongjewon, they took off their traveling clothes and changed into formal attire. The next day, they received a reception from the king himself in front of the gate. The rite performed by the king two times in history of Joseon. After Ming China envoys move off to the gate, King Jungjong performed a rite named "wu bai san koutou" (五拜三叩頭) with the crown prince and his followers, in direction of the Ming Dynasty emperor.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeongeunmun_Gate

    After Japan defeated Qing in 1894, Korea was liberated from China and they became to have their own "emperor" - so they could have "Korean Empire" for the first time.

    When they created the empire for the first time, they asked Japan whether they could put "Great" (大)as a prefix to the country name as Japan did (大日本帝国, The Great Empire of Japan), Japan said yes, so the official name of the country became 大韓帝国 (The Great Korean Empire).

    ReplyDelete
  35. pacifist//

    Yes I know.
    He defeated Chinese finally. but we had fought against Chinese Empire for 1500years and we won most of wars.

    What country can live without nature help against 1,000,000 chinese soldier?

    most of countries and races disapeared and absorbed to CHINA.

    and JO-SON DYNASTY has one record that it is called Jo-Sun-Wang-Jo-Sil-ROK.

    the record consist of a lot of books and letters.

    Japanese King`s letter always was written. Jo-Sun Emperor....this is presents.

    so Jo-Sun government thought that because they don`t know the rule, so they called us Emperor.

    Anyway Japan were just an outsider.
    After Western advance to EAST ASIA, Japanese wanted to be Preussen. so they changed their history.

    ReplyDelete
  36. http://blog.naver.com/joyple?Redirect=Log&logNo=11336395

    look at this map.

    this map was made in 1737.

    ====================================

    and your Chinese letter is the Japanese style.

    Japanese Chinese letter is different with original Chinese letter.

    you guys only see the Japanese information??

    ReplyDelete
  37. And Japanese IRONY..

    They prove that they notified that Takeshima is Japan Territory. because of being ownerless in 1905.

    think about it.

    They prove that Takeshima has been their territory from the past.

    however, notified again??
    because of being ownerless??

    isn`t it funny??

    ==================================
    one more thing.

    they gave a licence crossing the sea to Dok-do.

    Hey..
    as following their proof,
    It was their territory. but licence crossing the sea??

    Is it logical?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Levis KIM,

    If you want to convince someone, especially us on this blog, you need to present concrete evidences, or at least show us the original documents you are talking about. And please write in Chinese as well, or I can't understand which documents or which King you are talking about. If you are talkin about 朝鮮王朝実録, almost all the original documents are open to the public on the net. You can easily get access to the site and get the original documents. Show us the link to support youy shabby logic. But remember, we can read 漢文.

    But basically, your arugument seems to have nothing to do with Takeshima/Dokdo issue. It seems just a ranting by whom cannot arugue logically. So stop ranting about your country's delusional history.

    As for the French Map "Rroyaume de Coree(1737)", read the following.

    A French geologist D’Anville’s “Map of Joseon(Royaume de Coree) NEVER records Lianocourt Rocks(Takeshima/Dokdo) as a Korean territory.

    They are not Ulleungdo and Usand, but Thian Chan tao千山島 Fan-Ling tao江陵島(Ulleungdo) from Chinese map. Takeshima/Dokdo was not discovered by westerners until 1849.

    Next time, please bring Korean map for the evidence, otherwise, I consider you admit there is none.

    Japanese was the only one who had been using the island for the economical activity since 1650s. When Meiji Restoration occured, Japanese confused the location of the island from the mismapped Western maps. But in 1905, Meiji government accepted the plea by Nakai Yosaburo who wanted to control the excessive sealion huntings by Japanese fishermen, and incorporated Takeshima into Shimane Prefecture of Japan officially since there were no trace of other countries occupation except Japanese fisheremen's hut for sealion hunting in 1905. They were fighting war against Russia. Japanese needed to officially announce its sovereignty to the world. Japanese have been considered it to be Japanese territory from 1600's, but under the international law, they needed to incorporate officially so that no other country like Russia, British wouldn't claim it.

    Read below.

    Japanese officially incorporated Takeshima. "1905 - January 28th: the dicision by a Cabinet meeting (閣議決定)"

    And this is totally supported by the fact that there Korean, Japanese and Western documents clearly excluded Takeshima/Dokdo from Joseon/Korea's territory.

    Korean Eastern limits described in various books exclude Takeshima/Dokdo from Korean Territory.

    "they gave a licence crossing the sea to Dok-do."

    The Ulleungdo and Takeshima was luclutive so Ohya and Murakawa clans were allowed to dominate the economic activity by the Shogunate. The licence was issued for the dominance. Nothing illogical.

    By the way, do you mind my asking if you are an adult or not? You seem very young to me, but recent incident surprised me that some Korean adult act extremely chldish and incapable of writing logically.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Leviskim,

    I understand you because Korea is still refraining from educating true history of Joseon.

    And I know that history is not a theme of this blog so I will make it end with this posting, but Korean history is related with your understanding of Takeshima/Dokdo issue and you should know about true history of your own country. So please read the following.

    The Yi Dynasty was a tributary to China, Ming and Qing, for 500 years because Yi Dynasty was built with a help of Ming and Joseon was defeated by Qing although they fought agaist Qing at first but lost (Qing made a stone statue to prove that Joseon would obey Qing forever but the fact about this statue is not taught in Korean school) and it was finally liberated by Japan in 1894. The Korean people celebrated the liberation - we have a photo of women marching to celebrate the liberation and as I wrote before, the 迎恩門 was destructed in 1895 after the Shiomonoseki Treaty.

    To follow is from Park Chunghee's book:
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    "I make this analysis for creating new culture and making advance by recalling, regretting and criticizing our history.

    First, our history was the history overwhelmed by the other nations or the history of depending on other nations from beginning to end as I said before.

    (abbreviation)
    .....the age of Joseon Dynasty came. It lasted 500 years.)

    To our regret, we have never turned the tide during long history of the suffering. We have never presented the power of our nation to the outside world.

    And such invasions have been always caused by ourselves, neither by the geopolitical issue of the peninsula, nor by our lack of strength.

    Sometimes we made united efforts to prevent foreign invasions. But we often saw Korean people sold out to the enemy, or sit on the fence on.

    We have considered ourselves as the weak, and considered others as the strong. This is our worship of the powerful, our bad habit, and our evil legacy. We can not develop by ourselves without rejecting and changing these faults.

    Next, I want to talk about our fault of faction.
    It is too childish and too ugly to be found in the other nation.

    In this aspect, our ancestors were active comparatively and had malelike natures till the Middle age. But from the age of Chosen Dynasty, such natures were disappearing gradually.

    (abbreviation)

    I think it is not necessary to explain what became of them for the rest of the day.

    Chosen Dynasty had been unfortunately ruined by spending her days in partisan battles.

    (abbreviation)

    As described above, I can only say it is pitiful to analyze Korean history. In an historical period, we can find a great king or hero such as Sejong or duke of Lee. But when I take a global view of our history, I only despair darkly in open-mouthed surprise.

    If we Koreans really want to gain prosperity, we must reform our history above all.
    We should burn our history which is full of much evil.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    To follow is from Isabella Bird's book - Bird visited Korea in 1894 during and after the Sino-Japanese War. She witnessed the historical moment. ;

    On the 8th of January, 1895, I witnessed a singular ceremony, which may have far-reaching results in Korean history. The Japanese having presented Korea with the gift of Independence, demanded that the King should formally and publicly renounce the suzerainty of China, and having resolved to cleanse the Augean stable of official corruption, they compelled him to inaugurate the task by proceeding in semi-state to the Altar of the Spirits of the Land, and there proclaiming Korean independence, and swearing before the spirits of his ancestors to the proposed reforms. His Majesty, by exaggerating a trivial ailment, had for some time delayed a step which was very repulsive to him, and even the day before the ceremony, a dream in which an Ancestral Spirit had appeared to him adjuring him not to depart from ancestral ways, terrified him from taking the proposed pledge.

    But the spirit of Count Inouye proved more masterful than the Ancestral Spirit, and the oath was taken in circumstances of great solemnity in a dark pine wood, under the shadow of Puk Han, at the most sacred altar in Korea, in presence of the Court and the dignitaries of the kingdom.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Kaneganese//

    Your using Chinese letters are Japanese style.

    Can you read it?

    日本薩摩守〔薩摩州〕總(州)〔守〕藤伊久發還被擄人口。 又中伊集院太守藤原賴久稱臣奉書獻禮物, 歸我傳傳到來人口。

    是月, 日本國左京權大夫多多良義弘遣通竺、永琳兩禪和, 來達禁賊及擄掠人還送事, 仍獻禮物, 兼求《大藏經》。

    是月, 日本關西道九州探題源道鎭, 使人獻禮物, 求《大藏》。

    Do you want to see more?

    The evidence of Japanese tribute to Jo-seon is plenty.
    Among of them, a popular thing is an elephant.

    If you want to know the fact of Dok-do, you have to understand Korea-Japan relationship on history. and 皇國史觀(a historical view of Japanese Imperialism).

    Why did Japan want 皇國史觀??
    Why did Japan make Korea a sacrificial offering for 皇國史觀?

    ==================================
    why??

    most of korean maps have the island. U-SAN-DO.
    I think that you already know it.
    and you don`t believe it..

    So. I showed Japanese maps.
    why don`t you believe Japanese maps??
    Japan is a nation concerned in direct.

    Their maps have a value for evidence. RIGHT?

    and the maps show that Dok-do is korean territory.

    ===================================

    Most of Korean records warned no permit Japanese fishery.

    http://blog.naver.com/cms1530?Redirect=Log&logNo=10015417351

    look at this Japanese a written promise..
    I believe your Chinese letter skill.

    focus on no.15 picture.
    江原道 includes 竹嶋, 松嶋.

    =================================

    Your objection is not enough to explain the Japanese IRONY.

    The Japanese IRONY is indicated from Japanese and Korea scholars.

    =================================

    and last..
    Yeah My ENG skill is the elementary school level. so sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  41. "
    日本薩摩守〔薩摩州〕總(州)〔守〕藤伊久發還被擄人口。 又中伊集院太守藤原賴久稱臣奉書獻禮物, 歸我傳傳到來人口。

    是月, 日本國左京權大夫多多良義弘遣通竺、永琳兩禪和, 來達禁賊及擄掠人還送事, 仍獻禮物, 兼求《大藏經》。

    是月, 日本關西道九州探題源道鎭, 使人獻禮物, 求《大藏》。"

    All I can read is Japanese feudal lord gave presents for the exchange of 大藏經 when he return Joeson abductees who were taken to Japan. If Korea were supeorior, why those lords are demanding 大藏經 in the first place? How does it make Japanese "king" called Emperor paid tribute to Koean King? You need to learn Chinese grammer so that you will not get tricked Korean so-called historian. And stop ranting about the history which is unrelated to the issue.

    "江原道 includes 竹嶋, 松嶋. "

    This is the transcript of Ahn Yong-bok's inconsistant testimony. Ahn presented 八道総図, which depict Usando as Ulleungdo. Japanese recorded what he said, but apparently, they considered it to be different island from Japanese Matshushima. Matsushima in this Ahn's testimony is not Takeshima/Dokdo. I already debunked Ahn's Matsushima theory. It turned out to be Jukdo.

    Read here.
    1696 - Ahn's so-called Matsushima/Usando was Jukdo, afterall.

    Your English is fine, but your logic is fallen apart. I just don't understand what you are talking about.

    You are only copy and pasting from other site. We've already debunked those claims. It's useless. Can you even argue what we have prestented? Use your own brain and read original documents, not the other's translation.

    And show us Korean map which clearly depict today's Takeshima/Dokdo. Not Japanese map.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Kaneganese//

    Do you want to see more the tribute evidences and the calling Emperor evidences?

    I copied from the original 朝鮮王朝實錄. Does it have a problem?

    You don`t know that most of information of this blog are old for Japanese and Korean.

    Do you know [EnjoyJapan] that is auto-translation website?

    There were so many discussion of Dok-do and History between JPNese and KORean in there. now too.

    ==================================

    http://blog.naver.com/cms1530?Redirect=Log&logNo=10015417351

    you lost one point.

    This written promise was written by Japan.

    As following your assertion that Ahn was misunderstanding, Japanese goverment wrote [江原道 includes 竹嶋, 松嶋] by themself.

    When they were heard Ahn`s claim,
    JPN government recognized 竹嶋.

    They agreed the 竹嶋 abandonment.
    They didn`t write Dok-do. Sok-do and U-SAN-DO.

    They wrote 竹嶋. <- important. RIGHT?

    I think that you can understand this logic. because it is simple.

    ==================================

    I agree that you have an intelligence about ASIA.
    but you were affected from 皇國史觀 so much.

    I understand that most of asian history book in western was based from Japanese-made introduction that was made in the early 1900.

    so I think that your Asis intelligence is based on 皇國史觀.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Leviskim,

    You wrore;
    "Japanese goverment wrote [江原道 includes 竹嶋, 松嶋] by themself".

    But it was not true. It was a local officer who wrote down the memorandum, not Japanese government.

    It was a report based on their questioning the suspect (Ahn Yong-bok). It was just like the police made a report of what the suspect said. Please remember that Ahn Yong-bok was a criminal who smuggle himself into Japan.
    It won't prove anything about the ownership of Liancourt Rocks, it only proves that Ahn Yong-bok believed so.

    ReplyDelete
  44. "Do you want to see more the tribute evidences and the calling Emperor evidences?"

    No. What you have to do is to explain how it has anything to do with Takeshima/Dokdo issue.

    "you were affected from 皇國史觀 so much."

    What are you talking about? You really are delusional. Or is this some kind of relision?

    I truly respect our loyal family as a symbol of Japan as our constitutional law define, and also very grateful that if it weren't for them, Japan couldn't have established such a wonderful mixture of traditional culture and modern technology country. But I don't even hoist the national flag on National Holiday. I don't even really know what 皇国史観 really means. All I say is based on fact, not belief.

    Anyway, stop talking about 皇国史観. It has nothing to do with Takeshima/Dokdo.

    What do you think of my post about Ahn's? How do you argue my point? Did you even read it?

    Gerry, could you please do something about his unrelated comments? His sneakly inserting Takeshima related issue into his comments doesn't mean he can comment anything, don't you think?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Levis KIM

    History lesson for you.

    1. Shogunate already "banned" (note : not abandoned) Ohya and Murakawa clan to go to Ulleungdo(竹島) in Jan. 1696, which is before Ahn's second visit in May 1696. The memorandum was recorded then, so it has nothing to do with Bakufu decision.

    2. Ahn's claim that he met the lord of Tottori, not to mention of Bakufu official is comletely untrue. Naito Seichu claimed its possibility, but recently, Prof, Ikeuchi totally debunked his theory. I'm going to write about his article which matsu kindly gave it to me.

    3. Bakufu didn't even mentioned Matsushima in its order to ban the voyage to Ulleungdo, since Matsushima was not a issue of territorial dispute at all. Joseon dynasty didn't even know about Matsushima. All they knew was Usando, which was another name of Ulleungdo before they dispatch inspector and found Jukdo. Since then, Joseon officials started to record Jukdo as Usando on their maps and documents. Other private map publishers followed.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Kaneganese//

    Hmm...you are a Japanese??
    I feel tired suddlenly.

    I`m sorry but I have a lot of experience to dicuss this problem with Japanese in EnjoyJapan.

    and I know that Japanese have a disposition to catch a speaking tail of the opponent.
    ===================================
    My last reply.

    "Ahn's claim that he met the lord of Tottori, not to mention of Bakufu official is comletely untrue"

    It`s your saying

    Do you know this Japanese book?
    [竹島度海由來記拔書控]

    the book has this comment..

    唐人江府江御引渡 則江戶表御穿鑿 相濟順 御贈歸

    I think that you can translate this easily. What do you think??

    Who was this 唐人???
    Where was 江戶??
    What happen existed in 江戶??

    Is it untrue again??

    ===================================

    Anyway It is a good experience to discuss something on Eng.

    ReplyDelete
  47. ah..Vank is a group of middle and high school students.
    so, Because They can`t explain well in Eng(I am same -.-), Anyway They like action.
    Plz understand them.

    And Korea has a aggressive right wing, and a crazy self-styled scholar.
    but They can`t represent all Korean people.

    I think that It is a generalization error and All country might be similar.

    Good Bye.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Leviskim,

    Don't "catch a speaking tail of the opponent".
    You should read all of the document before you claim.

    The original document is here:

    暫唐人勝房へ御預、其後鳥府表へ唐人被召、船頭黒郎兵衛始、水主召連、勝房後見藤兵衛出府、唐人道中為警固、御組士加納弥右衛門様・尾関忠兵衛様、右御両所御出府、則鳥府表御吟味之上、唐人江府へ御引渡、則江戸表御穿鑿相済、順々御贈帰と成ル。別記有
    之ゆへ、略之。

    http://www2.pref.shimane.lg.jp/soumu/web-takeshima/takeshima04/takeshima04_01/takeshima04c.data/4-4-6-02.pdf

    (Rough translation)
    The Koreans were sent to 勝房, after that they were summoned to Tottori government. 勝房's 後見 Tobei went to the local government with sailors including Kurobei. While Koreans were on the way, they were tightly guarded. Both of 御組士 Mr Kano Yaemon and Ozeki Chubei went to Edo (or the local government) (出府), after the investigation of the Koreans they were put under the shogunate, that means the inquiry to Edo was completed (相済), then they became to send back. As details were written on another document, the rest is abbreviated.

    The two Korean including Ahn Yong-bok were not sent to Edo, but by the order of the Edo, they were sent back.

    Please read the following for details of their stay in Japan:

    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2007/08/1692-and-1693-incidents-ahn-yong-boks.html
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Ahn Yong-bok and another Korean were detained at Oya Kyuemon’s house, while the local government heard about the Koreans from the chief retainer Arao Syuri and ask the Shogunate the instructions.

    On the 26th May, an express-messenger came from Edo, who brought an order to transport the Koreans under guard to Nagasaki.

    They left Yonago on 29th May and arrived at Chofu (鳥府) on 1st June. They set off on 7th June, with the guards Yamada Hyoemon and Hirai Jin-emon and arrived at Nagasaki on 30th June. The Koreans were handed over to the magistrate’s office of Nagasaki. Then, they were delivered to the messenger from Tsushima, Ichinomiya Kansukezaemon. On 14th August. They arrived at Tsushima on 3rd September.

    The lord of Tsushima, So, went to Busan with the envoy including the messenger Tada Yozaemon. In Busan, they handed over the two Koreans to the Chosun government and gave notice to inhibit Korean fishermen from invading Takeshima (Ulleungdo).
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    ReplyDelete
  49. minor correction of the rough translation:

    The Koreans were left with 勝房 for a while, after that they were summoned to Tottori government. 勝房's 後見 Tobei went to the local government with sailors including Kurobei. While Koreans were on the way, they were tightly guarded. Both of 御組士 Mr Kano Yaemon and Ozeki Chubei went to Edo (or the local government) (出府), after the investigation of the Koreans they were put under the shogunate, that means the inquiry to Edo was completed (相済), then they became to being sent back. As details were written on another document, the rest is abbreviated.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Sorry, minor correction of the rough translation again:

    The Koreans were left with 勝房 for a while, after that they were summoned to Tottori government. 勝房's tutelage Tobei went to the local government with sailors including Kurobei. While Koreans were on the way, they were tightly guarded. Both of 御組士 Mr Kano Yaemon and Mr. Ozeki Chubei went to Edo (or the local government) (出府), after the investigation of the Koreans they were put under the control of shogunate, that means the inquiry to Edo was completed (相済), then they became to be sent back. As details were written on another document, the rest is abbreviated.

    ReplyDelete
  51. pacifist

    Thank you for the translation.

    By the way, I think this document is a record of his second trip in 1696 to Japan when he smuglled into himself.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Kaneganese,

    I just wanted to say that your index of articles has been very helpful for me. I had not been using it until just recently.

    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Gerry,

    Thank you, for your compliment.
    It's been very useful for me either since I don't have to dig our archives deeply anymore when I make posts and comments. And I'm very glad I could share it with you and pacifist.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Levis KIM

    I think Enjoy Korea is the best place for you, not here. Mainly because you can use Korean over there and there are lots of Korean like yourself who selectively pick up some parts from the original documents to suit your story, which I don't like.

    The link to pacifist's that are related to the second visit of Ahn is here.

    1696 - Ahn Yong-bok's(安龍福) second visit to Japan: Part I

    1696 - Ahn Yong-bok's (安龍福) second visit to Japan: Part II


    The documents doesn't say Ahn went to Edo. Actually, they didn't. It only means the matter of this incident was passed to Shogunate and it depends on Shogunate decision now.

    In fact, Shogunate ordered Tottori han not to take him seriously and Ahn and others didn't even allowed to enter Tottori town(城内) after all. (This is proved by recent article by Ikeuchi Satoshi. I'll write about this in the furure.) But they were held outside the castle town and later directly banished away from Karonada, Tottori. This time, Tottori Han didn't take Ahn seriously and didn't even send them to Tsushima. And as you know, the lord of Tottori who Ahn claimed to have met were absent in Edo.

    Now, please answer to my question. This is the third time I ask you.

    What do you think of my post about Ahn's? How do you argue my point? Did you even read it?

    1696 - Ahn's so-called Matsushima/Usando was Jukdo, afterall.

    We've already answered your question, so I believe it is your turn to answer my question.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Kaneganese,

    Thanks for the correction.
    That's true, it was written after the 1696 incident but the whole translation is the same as I translated. Ahn was not sent to Edo.

    Leviskim, please read the following;
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2007/09/1696-ahn-yong-boks-second-visit-to_19.html

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    However, the feudal lord (of Tsushima) So worried about their negligence – they had not informed to Chosun yet the shogunate’s decision to ban to visit Takeshima. If Chosun would misunderstand that the shogunate agreed to Ahn Yong-bok’s request and banned to visit Takeshima, it would not only be a future trouble but also a big trouble to Tsushima because they would be excluded from the negotiations between Chosun and the shogunate. So, So Yoshizane (宗義真) dispatched a messenger Kashima Gonpachi to Edo, who explained the situation of Tsushima to Okubo Kaganokami and Abe Bungonokami of the shogunate. After the conference in the shogunate, they abandoned their plan to send the Koreans to Nagasaki to investigate and decided to send them back soon.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    ReplyDelete
  56. Ah~ I`m back,
    Actually I want to quit this discussion, because I know , the discussion never end.

    =================================
    pacifist//

    I have one question. Japanese use Chinese letter now.
    but, Why cant`t Japanese translate a Chinese sentence well?

    唐人 means [Both of 御組士 Mr Kano Yaemon and Mr. Ozeki Chube]???

    Hey, Don`t you know 唐人? this letter 唐??

    唐人 means Chinese people.
    唐 - It means Dang nation.

    But old Japanese called Korean people 唐人..
    so this 唐人 means foreigner.

    [Both of 御組士 Mr Kano Yaemon and Mr. Ozeki Chube] were foreigner at that time?

    ==================================

    And you translated 唐人 to two korean in the head of translated article.

    Why did you translate 唐人 to [Both of 御組士 Mr Kano Yaemon and Mr. Ozeki Chube] in thie sentence??

    唐人江府江御引渡 則江戶表御穿鑿 相濟順 御贈歸

    唐人 : the Chinese people.
    江府 : Edo - shogunate (江戸-幕府)
    江御 : Edo - order.
    引渡 : delivery.

    則 : immediately.
    江戶 : Edo.
    表御 : make clear that it is an order.
    穿鑿 : inquiry

    相 : mutual.
    濟 : cooperation
    順 : kind or honest.

    御 : order.
    贈 : give a present
    歸 : return.

    Right?

    竹島度海由來記拔書控
    and this book is recorded two korean including Ahn.
    唐人 is a foreigner by definition.
    not, [Both of 御組士 Mr Kano Yaemon and Mr. Ozeki Chube]

    ===================================

    ReplyDelete
  57. Leviskim,

    You still don't understand the text written in Chinese (and Japanese) letter.

    I didn't write 唐人 were Mr Kano Yaemon and Mr. Ozeki Chubei, 唐人 (original meaning was Chinese but it also meant foreigners) means two Koreans here.

    唐人江府へ御引渡
    The two Koreans were put under control of the shogunate (Edo).


    則江戸表御穿鑿相済、
    That means (則), inquiry (穿鑿) to the shogunate (江戸表) was already done(相済).


    順々御贈帰と成ル
    By and by (順々) it became (と成ル) to send them back (御贈帰).

    Leviskim, there are Japanese records of how the two Koreans were treated in Japan, and it is clear that they were not sent to Edo, they were sent back soon, as you could read in the site I showed you. (Didn't you read it?)

    ReplyDelete
  58. Levis Kim,

    Didn't I aske you to read my post first? This it the fourth time. Does this mean you agree with me? OK, thanks.

    Are there any Korean scholar who claim that the sentence "唐人江府へ御引渡" means Ahn were sent to Edo town like you say? I don't think so. Actually, I've never heard of it. If there are, pelase let me know the idiot's name.

    "江府" in this sentece means the jurisdiction of Edo Bakuhu, not Edo town.

    Seriously, this is totally a waste of time to talk with you. I can see you don't have any Japanese knowledge but accuse us we don't know Chinese sentence? This is not Chinese, it's written in Japanese.

    ReplyDelete