tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post1603125724302572055..comments2024-01-26T17:48:29.804+09:00Comments on Dokdo-or-Takeshima?: 1876年 - 「松島の儀」外務省記録局長 渡邊洪基Gerry Bevershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-73498961246557964862007-06-23T21:09:00.000+09:002007-06-23T21:09:00.000+09:00Wow! Thanks, Pacifist. That is a very interesting ...Wow! Thanks, Pacifist. That is a very interesting document, and it shows that the Japanese were very concerned about maintaining good relations with Korea.<BR/><BR/>I will try to edit it tonight, or maybe tomorrow.<BR/><BR/>By the way, I should be finished with all my grading by the middle of next week, so I should have more time available this coming week to work on the blog.<BR/><BR/>Thanks, again.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-53854153043860557062007-06-23T20:09:00.000+09:002007-06-23T20:09:00.000+09:00Gerry,To follow is a rough translation of the docu...Gerry,<BR/>To follow is a rough translation of the document. It included three opinions (甲乙 & 丙; A,B & C), not Tanabe's ipinion.<BR/> After #22, the 23 document included another ipinion (丁 or D). After considering these opinions, they decided to investigate Takeshima and Matsushima with Amagi.<BR/><BR/>- - - - - - - - - - - - - <BR/>第21号<BR/>松島巡視要否ノ議<BR/>公信局長 田邊 太一<BR/>#21<BR/>The Arguments concerning pros and cons of Inspection of Matsushima<BR/>Tanabe Taichi, the chief of the official communication bureau<BR/>Opinion A (甲): We should argue about whether we need the inspection (of Matsushima) or not after we decided the general policy as to whether the island should be opened or not. As I’ve heard that Matsushima is the name we Japanese named but it was actually Usan which is an island belonging to Ulleungdo (蔚陵島). As to the belonging of Ulleungdo (蔚陵島), there was a dispute in the era of the former government (= the shogunate) and they communicated each other for a long time and in the end the shogunate promised that they won’t own it. It was written in the history of the both of the countries. To dispatch someone to inspect it without any reasons is like to count some other one’s treasures. And it is like to cross the border. Although we, Japan and Korea, have just begun to communicate each other, there are still some doubts in them. To open the gap between us, doing this (inspection), is hated by the sociable persons. If we hired English or Russian ships and dispatched them, they would hate it more. Even if the island we are talking about would not in the Korean territory, when we opened the uninhibited islands in the south and made them Ryukyu county, some knowledgeable people argued that it was not right. We should make the prospect of our country calm. To stimulate Chosun and to make them worry is not advantageous. We can’t open Matshushima, and we should not open it. To inspect it after knowing that is useless, isn’t it? And it may bring harmful effects later.<BR/>Opinion B (乙): To open it or not can’t be decided until we inspected it. Theory on maps must be accomplished when you actually saw it. You can not say that it’s right to believe a theory only on the paper. And the island is located in the sea near our shore. It is the important route when our people go on voyage to Korean mainland or to Russian locals. So it is our negligence to pass it over without investigating the details of its geographical features. Therefore, we should inspect not only the island (Matsushima) but also Takeshima (Ulleungdo), and we should know every present detail of them. Inspection is needed. However, it is needless to say that it is stupid to hire English or Russian ships and only anchor there for one day or half a day and make one or two officials land it and make them inspect it. It is not urgent, so if there would be a time for the Navy to be free, after quelling the Seinan war (the local war inside Japan), we would dispatch Naval officers who are experts of survey and drafting and government officials who are experts of products and let them inspect the island. After making reports and maps, then we would recognize for the first time whether Matsushima is a part of Ulleungdo (蔚陵島), whether it is Usan, or whether it is an ownerless island. Then we could think about the profit when we cultivate it in the future.<BR/>Therefore, it is not impossible to decide whether we should open or not, before we inspect it. We can not help inspecting Matsushima definitely. However, the argument by Wakisaka doesn’t dare to make it right (to inspect it) but it would be regrettable in the future.<BR/><BR/>Opinion C (丙): There was a theory in an English newspaper that (UK) needs a Naval base in the north part of Pacific Ocean in order to prevent from Russia’s eastward expansion. They may pay attention to the island like Matsushima. And I’ve heard that the official English ship made a voyage from Nagasaki to Korea. We don’t know what route they went, as there was no Japanese interpreter-official on the ship. We can’t say that there is no possibility for them to inspect the island. When a UK minister or somebody else talked about the corresponding island, it is shameful to say that we don’t know. It is troublesome. Therefore, we should think that it is our most urgent task to know the status quo of the corresponding island, apart from the arguments to open or not open like opinions by A and B. So I hope anybody available should inspect the place, if there is somebody who goes near the island and would like to anchor there, we would permit him to do so and it is possible to hire him. But it doesn’t always seem to be a good idea because even if he could succeed, he must stay at the place we mentioned, it would be expensive. After considering it is worth getting done the task soon, it would be good to give some money to Mr. Sewaki and order him to do the task using the pre-paid money without exceeding it. Although we can’t deny a possibility that Korean government may increase their doubt if Japanese reached on a foreign ship, Korean people on the island can’t differentiate Japanese and other foreigners, so I believe that there won’t be an obstruction on the friendship of neighbors.pacifisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14100903035796287895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-11485333152153071662007-06-23T13:50:00.000+09:002007-06-23T13:50:00.000+09:00Pacifist,The book I have said that Tanabe Taichi b...Pacifist,<BR/><BR/>The book I have said that Tanabe Taichi believed that the Matsushima mentioned in Mutoh Heigaku's petition was Ulleungdo, which was Korean territory, and, therefore, the Japanese government had no authority to grant Mutoh permission to develop the island. I think the document also mentioned that some in the ministry thought that the Matsushima in the petition was Usando. <BR/><BR/>I thought that it might be nice to have a translation of that document since we can attach "Japanese" maps that show that Usando was a neighboring island of Ullengdo, not Liancourt Rocks. <BR/><BR/>Also, Toadface and others post short quotes from that document to try to manipulate and twist the facts. See Toadface's post <A HREF="http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-usando.html" REL="nofollow">HERE</A>. I thought that if we had a translation of the full document, we could show people how people like Toadface twist and distort the facts of that document.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I have not read the document, so I do not know if it is worth translating or not. Also, I cannot translate it, so it is your decision to do it or not, especially since it is a fairly long document. Also, Mr. Watanabe's document seems to have covered that area fairly well, so maybe we do not need a translation of Tanabe Taichi's document.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-81508708850423172902007-06-23T13:07:00.000+09:002007-06-23T13:07:00.000+09:00Gerry,The document in which you are interested was...Gerry,<BR/><BR/>The document in which you are interested was written by Tanabe Taichi, the chief of 公信局 which was a department concerning foreign documents and communications. <BR/><BR/>It only mentions that there are various opinions such as "Matsushima is Usan" etc, so he thought that they need to investigate Matsushima.pacifisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14100903035796287895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-58069234565803876562007-06-23T08:05:00.000+09:002007-06-23T08:05:00.000+09:00Gerry,Yes, I have read it. I have a copy of the bo...Gerry,<BR/><BR/>Yes, I have read it. <BR/><BR/>I have a copy of the book printed because I want to translate and post some of the articles if there are interesting. It seems there are plenty of interesting articles in the official documents.pacifisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14100903035796287895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-64822069135203024452007-06-23T00:26:00.000+09:002007-06-23T00:26:00.000+09:00Pacifist,I like "Concerning Matsushima" and have a...Pacifist,<BR/><BR/>I like "Concerning Matsushima" and have added it the post.<BR/><BR/>By the way, have you read Item No. 21 in the 竹島考證 下 ? Here are links to the pages:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.tanaka-kunitaka.net/takeshima/2a343tan1649-1881/45.jpg" REL="nofollow">Page 1</A><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.tanaka-kunitaka.net/takeshima/2a343tan1649-1881/46.jpg" REL="nofollow">Page 2</A><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.tanaka-kunitaka.net/takeshima/2a343tan1649-1881/47.jpg" REL="nofollow">Page 3</A>Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-42531346779754219872007-06-23T00:13:00.000+09:002007-06-23T00:13:00.000+09:00Gerry and Kaneganese,The word 儀 means, as Kanegane...Gerry and Kaneganese,<BR/><BR/>The word 儀 means, as Kaneganese already answered, "concerning" or "matter". <BR/><BR/>So the direct translation should be "Concerning Matsushima" or "The matter of Matsushima". In my opinion, the former looks smart. How do you think, Gerry?pacifisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14100903035796287895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-80032903338160701762007-06-22T23:59:00.000+09:002007-06-22T23:59:00.000+09:00Thank you, Gerry"儀" means "as for" or "concerning"...Thank you, Gerry<BR/><BR/>"儀" means "as for" or "concerning" in Japanese. I don't think of best translation. Pacifist? Any idea?<BR/><BR/>And thank you for reminding me for creating timeline. I totally fogot it.<BR/><BR/>Pacifist, thank you.<BR/><BR/>I will add "ダジュレー" and 元山, too.Kaneganesehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15533339719864245857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-77308233910968099822007-06-22T23:46:00.000+09:002007-06-22T23:46:00.000+09:00Kaneganese,I just checked again and the color I us...Kaneganese,<BR/><BR/>I just checked again and the color I use for my quotes are four rows down and the second column from the right.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-89482646747131671352007-06-22T23:41:00.000+09:002007-06-22T23:41:00.000+09:00Sorry, Kaneganese. I regularly misspell words. :)B...Sorry, Kaneganese. I regularly misspell words. :)<BR/><BR/>By the way, I just noticed that I left out the title for Mr. Watanabe's letter. How would you translate 松島の儀?<BR/><BR/>Also, if you want to make a Japanese language version "Timeline," similar to my English version <A HREF="http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2007/05/japanese-history-timeline-english.html" REL="nofollow">HERE</A>, you should start a new post and use the Japanese word for "History Timeline" as the title.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-24187257226483227902007-06-22T23:38:00.000+09:002007-06-22T23:38:00.000+09:00Kaneganese,I've read somewhere that ラサレフ was 元山 (W...Kaneganese,<BR/><BR/>I've read somewhere that ラサレフ was 元山 (Wonsan) in Korea. Maybe ラサレフ was a Russian name of it.<BR/><BR/>BTW, I thought that Dagelet is ダジュレー in French accent.pacifisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14100903035796287895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-7221410429143791692007-06-22T23:33:00.000+09:002007-06-22T23:33:00.000+09:00Gerry,I don't want to be bitchy, but it was you wh...Gerry,<BR/>I don't want to be bitchy, but it was you who wrote "firth row". I thought you said "first row", not "fifth row". (^-^) <BR/>I'm surprised, too.Kaneganesehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15533339719864245857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-48888718709575415762007-06-22T23:22:00.000+09:002007-06-22T23:22:00.000+09:00Kaneganese,I added the picture of Mr. Watanabe to ...Kaneganese,<BR/><BR/>I added the picture of Mr. Watanabe to my post, too. Does it look all right, or does it look too crowded now?<BR/><BR/>By the way, the quoted text in your post is pink on my computer. Are you trying to show your femininity? :)Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-79898832082115041532007-06-22T23:07:00.000+09:002007-06-22T23:07:00.000+09:00Gerry,I added the colloquial version which I trans...Gerry,<BR/><BR/>I added the colloquial version which I translated before. And few links. The man in the picture is Mr.Watanabe.Kaneganesehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15533339719864245857noreply@blogger.com