tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post5324718319047544197..comments2024-01-26T17:48:29.804+09:00Comments on Dokdo-or-Takeshima?: 1876 July - "Argument for the Development of Matsushima"Gerry Bevershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-45488540409960165592007-06-21T22:21:00.000+09:002007-06-21T22:21:00.000+09:00Pacifist,Do you a link to the original Watanabe Ku...Pacifist,<BR/><BR/>Do you a link to the original Watanabe Kuoki document (記錄局長渡辺洪基立案)? I thought we could post it since we already have a translation.<BR/><BR/>昔者竹島ノ記事略説多クシテ松島ノ事説論スル者ナシ 而テ今者人松嶋ニ喋々ス 然り而テ此二嶋或ハ一島両名或ハ二嶋也ト諸説紛々朝野其是非ヲ決スル者ヲ聞カス 彼竹島ナル者ハ朝鮮ノ蔚陵島トシ幕府倫安ノ議遂ニ彼ニ委ス 故ニ此所謂松嶋ナル者竹嶋ナレハ彼ニ属シ若竹島以外ニ在ル松島ナレハ 我ニ属セサルヲ得サルモ之ヲ決論スル者無シ然ルニ松嶋ナル者我国ト朝鮮トノ間ニ位シ長崎ヨリ浦潮港ニ至リ馬関其他石州因州伯州壱岐ヨリ彼要地タル 「ラサレフ」港ヘノ道ニ当タルヲ以テ頗ル要地ト為シ連綿此近傍ニ英魯其船艦ヲ出没ス若シ夫我国ノ部分ナランニハ之ニ多少ノ注意無ル可ラス 彼国ナラン歟又保護ヲ加ヘサル可ラス 況ンヤ他国我ニ糺ス 之ニ答フルニ決辞ナキヲ如何セン 然ラハ則無主ノ一島ノミ諸書ニ就テ案スルニ竹嶋洋名アルゴナウト嶋ナル者ハ 全ク烏有ノ者ニシテ其松島デラセ嶋ナル者ハ本来ノ竹嶋即チ?陵島ニシテ我松嶋ナル者ハ洋名ホルネットロックスナルカ如シ 然ルヲ洋客竹嶋ヲ認テ松嶋ト為シ更ニ竹嶋ナル者ヲ想起セシ者ノ如シ而テ此ホルネットロックスノ 我国ニ属スルハ各国ノ地図皆然リ他ノ二嶋ニ至リテハ各国其認ムル所ヲ同フセス 我国論又確拠無シ 是実ニ其地ノ形勢ヲ察シ其所属ノ地ヲ定メ而テ其責ニ任スル所ヲ両国間ニ定メサル可ラサル者タリ因テ先ツ嶋根県ニ照会シ其従来ノ習例ヲ糺シ併セテ船艦ヲ派シテ其地勢ヲ見若シ彼既ニ著手セハ 其宰政ノ模様ヲ実査シ然ル後ニ其方略ヲ定メント要ス 請フ速ニ採リテ議スル者アラン事ヲ伏望ス<BR/><BR/>記錄局長渡辺洪基立案<BR/><BR/>There are several brief descriptions of Takeshima (Ulleungdo) in past records, but there are no discussions of Matsushima. However, these days people are talking a great deal about Matsushima. There are various views. Some say that it is two islands, and some say that it is one island with two names, but I have not heard that it has been decided either way.<BR/><BR/>The (mentioned) “Takeshima” is considered to be Chosun’s Ulleungdo, which the Shogunate ended up entrusting to them (Koreans) as a convenient quick fix, without considering future implications. Therefore, if the “Matsushima” being talked about here is Takeshima (Ulleungdo), then it belongs to them. If the Matsushima is not Takeshima, then it must belong to Japan. It is still inconclusive.<BR/><BR/>The location of Matsushima (Songdo) is considered important because it is situated between Chosun and Japan. It is on sea routes between Nagasaki and Vladisvostok and between Shimonseiki and Wonsan, so this is a critical location, where English and Russion warships are frequently seen. So we should be very careful. Even if it is part of Chosun, we still have to protect it. As things stand now, we have no answers to give if other countries ask us about the island. This means the island is ownerless.<BR/><BR/>Many records say that “Argonaut,” which is the Western name for Takeshima (Ulleungdo), does not exist, and that “Dagelet,” which refers to Matsushima, is actually Takeshima (Ulleungdo). So what we call “Matsushima” (Liancourt Rocks) is called “Hornet Rocks” by Westerners. Foreign maps show Hornet Rocks as Japanese territory, but there is still no agreement among countries concerning the other two islands.<BR/><BR/>We do not have the answers either, so the area should be surveyed to determine under whose jurisdiction it belongs. Therefore, we should first contact Shimane Prefecture and investigate their relationship up to now. At the same time, we need to dispatch a ship to do a survey of the area. If Chosun has already started, we need to determine their progress and consider our options. I respectfully urge that this matter be dealt with as soon as possible.<BR/><BR/>Watanabe Kuoki, Director of the Bureau of DocumentsGerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-1664495046869783152007-06-21T13:56:00.000+09:002007-06-21T13:56:00.000+09:00Gerry,It looks perfect, except only a minor mistak...Gerry,<BR/><BR/>It looks perfect, except only a minor mistake that the map is on the right although the text says it is left.<BR/><BR/>I thought at first to post the two texts together but I thought it would be too long and gave up to do so. But you could treat them right. Thanks a lot Gerry.pacifisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14100903035796287895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-69089663916705597702007-06-21T13:27:00.000+09:002007-06-21T13:27:00.000+09:00Pacifist,Please check my corrections to make sure ...Pacifist,<BR/><BR/>Please check my corrections to make sure that I edited it correctly.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-22897517118089367112007-06-21T13:23:00.000+09:002007-06-21T13:23:00.000+09:00Pacifist,I hope you do not mind, but I combined th...Pacifist,<BR/><BR/>I hope you do not mind, but I combined the two 1876 documents since they were obviously related to each other. In fact, it looks that the second statement by Mutoh came at the end of his proposal to the Meiji government.<BR/><BR/>I hope I did not make a mistake by deleting the other post.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-86516464066642662322007-06-20T14:59:00.000+09:002007-06-20T14:59:00.000+09:00Gerry,Another interesting documents edited ib 1877...Gerry,<BR/><BR/>Another interesting documents edited ib 1877:<BR/>公文録 内務省之部 一 明治十年三月 <BR/>The Official documents: the Ministry of the Inners (March 1877)<BR/><BR/>http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/takeshima/2a10kou2032-1877/index1.html<BR/><BR/>It included copies of documents in the Genroku era and the conclusive text that "Takeshima and another island" are not related to our country. It is interesting that all the texts were saying Takeshima, not mentioning Matsushima. <BR/><BR/>(It has been said that the Ministry of the Inners used the name of Takeshima to indicate Ulleungdo, while the MOFA used the word Matsushima to indicate Ulleungdo.)<BR/><BR/>It attached the map of Isotakeshima, which we've seen before. It depicted Isotakeshima (Ulleungdo) and a small islet (Jukdo) and Matsushima and a part of Oki. All the text didn't say Matsushima but the map says Matsushima.<BR/><BR/>So naturally, the "another island" doesn't seem to be Matsushima, which was Liancourt rocks in the map.pacifisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14100903035796287895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-47896117903860736102007-06-20T12:49:00.000+09:002007-06-20T12:49:00.000+09:00Gerry,Could you please correct my bad English Than...Gerry,<BR/><BR/>Could you please correct my bad English Thank you.pacifisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14100903035796287895noreply@blogger.com