tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post8415344766684871143..comments2024-01-26T17:48:29.804+09:00Comments on Dokdo-or-Takeshima?: San-in Chuo Shimpo: "Usando (于山島) = Jukdo (竹嶼), Documented for the First Time"Gerry Bevershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comBlogger38125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-46693195207825694492008-02-08T17:24:00.000+09:002008-02-08T17:24:00.000+09:00Gerry, you are arguing with yourself.The point I'm...Gerry, you are arguing with yourself.<BR/><BR/>The point I'm making is this document shows Ulleungdo was not the boundary of Uldo county but rather it extended further outward. This is the same as Shim Heung Taek asserted in 1906.<BR/><BR/>200 ri is double the circumference of Ulleungdo and if the West coast of the island were said to be one limit, the east boundary would extend far beyond Ulleungdo.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-57304065041728207742008-02-07T03:00:00.000+09:002008-02-07T03:00:00.000+09:00Thank you, Kaneganese. I have posted my translatio...Thank you, Kaneganese. I have posted my translation of the article. Let me know if anyone finds any mistakes.<BR/><BR/>Happy new year.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-18488183170595987642008-02-06T20:17:00.000+09:002008-02-06T20:17:00.000+09:00Gerry, There was a new information. Mr. Sugino dec...Gerry, <BR/><BR/>There was a new information. Mr. Sugino deciphered most of them with a help of "chaamiey" who is a frequent commentator of Yahoo! BBS. (Though he admit he assumed some of them.)<BR/><BR/>"鬱島郡の配置顛末<BR/><BR/> 統監府から内部に公照された江原道三陟郡管下に所在する鬱陵島の所属島嶼と郡廳設始月を示明せよとの故に答酬され、光武二年五月二十日に鬱陵島統監として設證され、光武四年十月二十五日に政府会議を経由して郡守を配置したが、郡廳は台霞洞に置き、該郡所管島はチュク島と石島で、東西が六十里で南北が四十里なので、合せて二百余里だという。" (New translation by Mr. Sugino)<BR/><BR/>"鬱島郡の配置顛末<BR/> 「統監府から大韓帝国内部(内務部)に対して公式照会のあった江原道三陟郡管下に所在する鬱陵島の所属島嶼と郡庁設置月を明示せよとの件で、大韓帝国政府から回答が出され、それによると、経緯は、光武二年五月二十日に鬱陵島統監として設置され、光武四年十月二十五日に政府会議を経て郡守を配置した。郡庁は台霞洞に置き、郡の所管島はチュク島と石島で、東西が六十里で南北が四十里なので、合せて二百余里だという。" (translation to modern Japanese by chaamiey)<BR/><BR/>This is my new translation.<BR/><BR/>"The whole story of how Uldo County was settled.<BR/> 統監府 made an official inquiry to the Ministry of Internal Affair of Korean Empire government (内部) to clarify the adjacent islands to Ulleundo, which is under the jurisdiction of 江原道三陟郡, and the date of the opening of county agency. They answered that it was set as a Ulleundo administrator(鬱陵島統監) on the 20th of May, 1898(光武二年) and county head(郡守) was dispatched via the government conference on 25th May, 1900(光武四年). And they also answered that county agency(郡廳) was setlled in 台霞洞, and the islands under the jurisdiction of county in concern(該郡所管島) are 竹島 and 石島, thus it is 60 ris from east to west, 40 ris from south to north, thus about 200 ris altogether. "Kaneganesehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15533339719864245857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-43881647156287478992008-02-06T17:43:00.000+09:002008-02-06T17:43:00.000+09:00Correction: Circumference is "juwui" (周圍).Correction: Circumference is "juwui" (周圍).Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-47702795027210329842008-02-06T17:33:00.000+09:002008-02-06T17:33:00.000+09:00Steve, you are confused. "Sabang" (四方) referred to...Steve, you are confused. <BR/><BR/>"Sabang" (四方) referred to the area of the island, and "juhoi" (周回) referred to the circumference, which is a synonym for perimeter.<BR/><BR/>If you look at the map that GTOMR linked to <A HREF="http://www16.tok2.com/home/otakeshimaoxdokdox/TempPost/1861-63.JPG" REL="nofollow">HERE</A>, you will see the following is written:<BR/><BR/> 東西六十餘里南北四十餘里周二百餘里<BR/><BR/> East to west about 60 <I>ri</I>,<BR/> 東西六十餘里<BR/> South to north about 40 <I>ri</I>,<BR/> 南北四十餘里<BR/> Circumference about 200 <I>ri</I><BR/> 周二百餘里<BR/><BR/>Notice that it gave both the area and circumference of the island.<BR/><BR/>The east-west and south-north distances added together equal 100 <I>ri</I>, which was how they calculated the area (四方) of the island. The 周 character refers to circumference.<BR/><BR/>I am surprised you still do not know this because I have explained it to you several times.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-66490998884130927532008-02-06T15:39:00.000+09:002008-02-06T15:39:00.000+09:00Gerry, the size of Ulleungdo in Chosun documents w...Gerry, the size of Ulleungdo in Chosun documents was said to be sa-bang 100 ri. This was a circumference NOT an area.<BR/><BR/>This was most likely done by sailing around the island and measuring north~south and east west. Then they added the four sides to arrive at a circumference. <BR/><BR/>Perhaps this article calculates the same. 60x2=120 + 40x2=80 put together equals 200ri in perimeter not circumference?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-17942667128717230992008-02-06T01:53:00.000+09:002008-02-06T01:53:00.000+09:00I calcurate most of the Ullungdo's detail maps whi...I calcurate most of the Ullungdo's detail maps which discribed distance from Songirbo to each place of Ulluengdo<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www16.tok2.com/home/otakeshimaoxdokdox/UllunegoMapsDiscography/Ullunegdo%20distance.htm#" REL="nofollow">It show almost 1里=0.2Km</A><BR/><BR/>Wrote 1里 is sometimes 0.2Km.<BR/>Is there any information about 1里=0.2km?<BR/><BR/>Cf:<A HREF="http://www.occidentalism.org/?p=451" REL="nofollow">Occidentalism</A><BR/><BR/>When I calcurate the distance, I realize that 三数十里 means 30里(from 中峯 to 臥達里/石浦)+@(from 臥達里/石浦 to 竹嶼Jukdo).<BR/>Cf:<A HREF="http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2007/10/1882-april-7-king-kojongusando.html" REL="nofollow">1882 April 7 - King Kojong says Usando Neighboring Island of Ulleungdo </A>GTOMRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06881539471132140299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-25406976389715638062008-02-06T00:15:00.000+09:002008-02-06T00:15:00.000+09:00Correction: 200 ri would be 80 kilometers.Also, Us...Correction: 200 <I>ri</I> would be 80 kilometers.<BR/><BR/>Also, Usando was another name for Jukdo, which is why it did not appear in the 1900 proclamation, even though Usando/Jukdo was described as Ulleungdo's most prominent island in the 1899 newspaper ariticle. That article used the Usando/Jukdo combination to show that there were two names for the same island.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-90262184724366244772008-02-05T23:48:00.000+09:002008-02-05T23:48:00.000+09:00Steve Barber,The names Jukdo (竹島) and Seokdo (石島) ...Steve Barber,<BR/><BR/>The names Jukdo (竹島) and Seokdo (石島) being written next to each other does not disprove that Seokdo most likely meant "rock islets." I do not understand your logic.<BR/><BR/>Also, you are confusing "area" and "circumference." The area of Ulleungdo was reported to be 100 <I>ri</I>, but the circumference of Ulleungdo was reported to be 200 <I>ri</I>, which is about fifty kilometers. Circumference is the distance around the island, and that circumference would certainly not include "Dokdo" (Liancourt Rocks).<BR/><BR/>Today, the shoreline of Ulleungdo measures 56.5 kilometers.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-80982647498366657762008-02-05T22:40:00.000+09:002008-02-05T22:40:00.000+09:00Kanganese, you are cutting off the toes to fit the...Kanganese, you are cutting off the toes to fit the shoes.<BR/><BR/>A Chosun ri is .4kms a Japanese ri is 4 kms and a ocean ri is 1.852kms.<BR/><BR/>Here is a chart from a 19th (1894)Century Japanese map. Japanese ri on top, Chosun ri below, kilometers on the bottom.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/ri-scales.jpg" REL="nofollow">Ri Chart</A><BR/><BR/>Gerry, the newspaper article in question shows Jukdo and Seokdo written next to each other. The Hwaseong Shinmun article says Jukdo and Usando written in the same manner. This shows Usando and Jukdo are not considered the same island in the 1899 article.<BR/><BR/>Ulleungdo Island was said to be 100ri in area. This article shows Uldo County to be considerably larger to accomodate outlying islands. They must have considered Seokdo to be somewhat distant.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-53778894713662394912008-02-05T21:21:00.000+09:002008-02-05T21:21:00.000+09:00Yes. the actual diameter of Ulleundo is about 10 k...Yes. the actual diameter of Ulleundo is about 10 kilometers from west to east. If it is 60 ris, it makes almost 0.2km/ri. I thought the region of Uldo County defined by this is about 20kms (0.4km ×60ris), making about in the range of 5-6km around Ulleundo.Kaneganesehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15533339719864245857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-88329029804328797002008-02-05T20:37:00.000+09:002008-02-05T20:37:00.000+09:00By the way, Nidanosuke wrote on his blog, Chosun-R...By the way, Nidanosuke wrote on his blog, Chosun-Ri朝鮮里 is 0.2Km OR 0.4Km,<BR/>><BR/>当時の韓国の里法では1里=0.2km、若しくは1里=0.4kmですが、ここでは、0.4kmと仮定します。<BR/><BR/>I also longly questioned that the Map of Ulluengdo's distance because the actual one ri里 is around 0.213km~0.23km on my calculation.<BR/><BR/>Is there any articles explains 1里=0.2km?GTOMRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06881539471132140299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-36417794604732349062008-02-05T20:24:00.000+09:002008-02-05T20:24:00.000+09:00金正浩's another map 「大東輿地図」(1861) has same descripti...金正浩's another map <A HREF="http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2007/12/1861-daedong-yeojido-ulleungdo.html" REL="nofollow">「大東輿地図」(1861)</A> has same description.Kaneganesehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15533339719864245857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-75192071124157959972008-02-05T19:06:00.000+09:002008-02-05T19:06:00.000+09:00東西が六十里で南北が四十里なので,合せて二百余里だという1861-1863大東方輿図I remind...東西が六十里で南北が四十里なので,合せて二百余里だという<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www16.tok2.com/home/otakeshimaoxdokdox/TempPost/1861-63.JPG" REL="nofollow">1861-1863大東方輿図</A><BR/><BR/><BR/>I remind of Korean's ulluengdo's map which shows the Ullunegdo's area and distance.<BR/><BR/>P/S 祭りに乗り遅れた・・・・GTOMRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06881539471132140299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-30894379920956980612008-02-04T23:22:00.000+09:002008-02-04T23:22:00.000+09:00Thank you, Kaneganese.Steve Barber,How does the do...Thank you, Kaneganese.<BR/><BR/>Steve Barber,<BR/><BR/>How does the document prove that "Seokdo" (石島) was not a catchall phrase for the various "rocky islets" around Ulleungdo? You forgot to tell us.Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-47383916616127609082008-02-04T22:43:00.000+09:002008-02-04T22:43:00.000+09:00pacifist, the map I cited above wasn't included wi...pacifist, the map I cited above wasn't included with the documents for the Dajokan to blow his nose on. It was included for reference. It was by looking at that map that the Japanese came to the conclusion that other islands outside of Shimane were not part of Japan.<BR/><BR/>Kaneganese, the Koreans were not exact in their distance of Dokdo from Ulleungdo. We've known this since reading Shim Heung Taek's objections to the annexation of Dokdo.<BR/><BR/>This document clarifies first the theory that Seokdo is a "catchall" phrase to mean all surrounding islands is wrong.<BR/><BR/>It also shows that Korea's limits extended well beyond the shores of Ulleungdo. Ulleungdo was not the boundary of Chosun as some have stated on this board.<BR/><BR/>If Seokdo was not Jukdo, it must be either Gwaneumdo or Dokdo. If it was Gwaneumdo it would not have been necessary to extend the jurisdiction of Uldo so far beyond Ulleungdo's shores.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-10375588523326031612008-02-04T16:40:00.000+09:002008-02-04T16:40:00.000+09:00I don't want to respond to somebody too but I woul...I don't want to respond to somebody too but I would like to appeal all the readers that the map somebody shows was not made by Shimane prefecture to prove "another island" was Dokdo or not. It was brought for a reference to show the island (Ulleungdo) in the issue looks like. It was an old map from Oya family, as it was mentioned in the 6th document in the 公文録: "We will attach a reduced copy of the map which Oyas had handed down from the Kyoho years (1716-1735). As to the old documents possessed by the two families, we will make it complete after making a copy". <BR/><BR/>The map is not proving anything.<BR/><BR/>I won't argue any more with somebody about this matter, as we have reviewed all the 公文録 documents and it is clear that it only mentioned that Ulleungdo was Korean territory (not Liancourt rocks).pacifisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14100903035796287895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-80990864142110836282008-02-04T15:05:00.000+09:002008-02-04T15:05:00.000+09:00Correction統監府 opened internal documents to the pub...Correction<BR/><BR/>統監府 opened internal documents to the public <BR/>→<BR/>統監府 opened its documents internallyKaneganesehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15533339719864245857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-17075884713431315472008-02-04T15:02:00.000+09:002008-02-04T15:02:00.000+09:00Gerry,Yes, they are only imaginary conversations. ...Gerry,<BR/>Yes, they are only imaginary conversations. Though it makes sence to me...<BR/><BR/>(By the way, I'm not going to respond to "anonymous" anymore who is apparently using anonymous more than twice. This is confusing. I hope you deal with this problem.)<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://photo.ameba.jp/user/nidanosuke/0654h1m2487P2m2121t0a0/078211160711422h218710/" REL="nofollow">This is the page of the article.</A> The date of the article is correct.(光武十年(1906)七月十三日)<BR/><BR/>I'll try the translation. Please correct my translation if you find any. (I was kind of hoping that you would give me a translation.)<BR/> <BR/>"鬱島郡の配置顛末(The whole story of how Uldo County was settled)<BR/><BR/>「統監府で内部に公○された江原道三陟郡管下に所在する鬱陵島に所属島嶼と郡廳設始月は示明する○故○○図され、光武二年五月二十日に鬱陵島監に設證され、光武四年十月二十五日に政府会議を経由して郡守を配置するので郡廳は台霞洞に置き、護郡所管島はチュク島と石島で、東西が六十里で南北が四十里なので,合せて二百余里だという」(Translation by Mr,Sugino)<BR/><BR/>統監府 opened internal documents to the public and it says that the date of the planning(?) of opening the county agency of Ulleundo and adjacent islands which belong to (under the jurisdiction of )江原道三陟郡 started ????? And on 光武二年(1898)五月二十日, Ulleundo'島監 (island administrator) )was opened and the county agency was setlled in 台霞洞 in order to dispatch the head of the island via the government conference on 光武四(1900)年十月二十五日. The islands under the county jurisdiction, are 竹島 and 石島, which is 60 ris from east to west, 40 ris from south to north, thus about 200ris altogether. "<BR/><BR/>I guess this is the report of journalist from 皇城新聞 who inerviewed the 統監府 after their 9th May artricle. And I also guess this internal documents was the result of the communication between 統監府 and Choson government who investigated the 鬱陵島監 and its jusirdiction. I guess Choson government realized that "Dokdo" which 沈興沢 reported to the 春川郡守 李明来 was not under the jurisdiction since the range of the jurisdiction of the Ulleundo County is only 200ris. It is still unknown which island 石島 is, but Central government of Choson who ordered to investigate the shape and the Japanese activity on the island in concern (「指令第三号」by 議政府参政大臣 李齋純 on 20th May. ) must have realized this Dokdo is not their territory after receiving report from 春川郡守 李明来 who received the order(指令第三号). It makes perfectly sence why Choson government didn't do any proper action after they ordered 春川郡守 to investigate the island.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I've already sent an e-mail to the researchers hoping we could get more professional opinion on this article. We need more information, since there are too many bugs in the formar part of this article.Kaneganesehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15533339719864245857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-72980449656976283222008-02-04T14:05:00.000+09:002008-02-04T14:05:00.000+09:00Kaneganese, Pacifist, or anyone:Can someone please...Kaneganese, Pacifist, or anyone:<BR/><BR/>Can someone please explain the following Japanese post for me? Is it just an imaginary conversation?<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://messages.yahoo.co.jp/bbs?.mm=GN&action=m&board=1835396&tid=cddeg&sid=1835396&mid=16253" REL="nofollow">指令第三号と新聞記事</A>Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-42056272995491935712008-02-04T13:49:00.000+09:002008-02-04T13:49:00.000+09:00Pacifist, Shimane inquired to the Shogunate about ...Pacifist, Shimane inquired to the Shogunate about whether Ulleungdo and "another" island were included as part their prefecture.<BR/><BR/>In this document Liancourt Rocks is clearly Matsushima. This is clear by the shape form and distance given on the accompanying map. It correlates with the distances and discription on the attached documents. On many maps of the late 19th Century the Japanese still continued to use the name Matsushima on their maps.<BR/><BR/>Here is the map.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/1877-docmap-2.jpg" REL="nofollow">Kobunruko Map</A><BR/><BR/>In the end the Japanese government decided that Ulleungdo and "the other island" did not belong Pacifist. Please enlighten us, when you look at the attached map which "other island" were they referring to?<BR/><BR/>The purpose of this inquiry was to help Shimane remap their prefecture. All maps of Shimane Prefecture made afterward fail to show Liancourt Rocks and/or Matsushima.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-shimane.html" REL="nofollow">Shimane Maps</A><BR/><BR/>The Japanese did not consider ANY islands beyond the Okinoshimas as part of Japan until they seized Liancourt Rocks during the Russo~Japanese War.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-12180625697273303862008-02-04T10:51:00.000+09:002008-02-04T10:51:00.000+09:00As to the 公文録 (Kobunroku), you should read all of ...As to the 公文録 (Kobunroku), you should read all of the documents in the book. We already reviewed it here:<BR/>http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2007/06/argument-about-another-island-details.html<BR/><BR/>It comprises of 12 parts of documents and only one document referred to "another island", in which Shimane prefecture asked the government about the sovereignty of Ulleungdo (Takeshima) and another island. Shimane prefecture wrote: "And as we guess it generally, it (Ulleungdo) locates at the northwest direction of Oki county so it seems as it should be attached to the west area of<BR/>San-in district, we would like to ask about depicting the island in the prefecture’s map and registration of land. Please give us an order". <BR/><BR/>At this point, Shimane prefecture didn't think Ulleungdo (and another island) didn't belong to Japan.<BR/><BR/>Other 11 documents didn't mention "another island" except the title of the final document. <BR/>All of the other documents only mentioned Ulleungdo (Takeshima). <BR/><BR/>It is natural because they studied about how the shogunate gave Takeshima (Ulleungdo) away to Korea and the history only indicated the Edo shogunate banned to trespass on Ulleungdo but not on Liancourt rocks.<BR/><BR/>The final document says, "As to the matter of “Inquiry to the Ministry of Interior: Registry of land of Takeshima and another island in the Sea of Japan” that was attached separately, the former<BR/>government (= the shogunate) and the corresponding country (Chosun) had exchanged opinions since 1692 (the 5th year of Genroku) when people from Chosun came to the island (Takeshima = Ulleungdo), and in the end they decided that this country (Japan) has nothing to do with the island and stated<BR/>so. Considering the point of the inquiry, the following order was made. I would like to ask you to consult via circular about the matter". <BR/><BR/>So the book 公文録 indicated that Shimane prefecture asked about the belonging of Ulleungdo and "another island" and the Meiji government studied about the records concerning the history how the shogunate banned to trespass on Ulleungdo. So it didn't mean Laincourt rocks didn't belong to Japan. It only stated that the shogunate gave up Ulleungdo, so it didn't belong to Japan or Shimane prefecture.pacifisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14100903035796287895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-26380457756739849072008-02-03T21:42:00.000+09:002008-02-03T21:42:00.000+09:00Anonymous, the map you are referring to are part o...Anonymous, the map you are referring to are part of the Kobunruko documents of 1877. This report concluded Ulleungdo and "another island" were not part of Japan (Shimane Prefecture) <BR/><BR/>I agree with you that Japan clearly excluded Matsushima (Dokdo) from part of Japan in this report.<BR/><BR/>You can see the original report and map here. Notice the maps of Shimane Prefecture all excluded Matsushima from Japan's territory.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-1877-doc.html" REL="nofollow">Kobunruko doc1</A><BR/><BR/>In fact all maps of Shimane Prefecture before 1905 excluded Dokdo from Japan's territory.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-shimane.html" REL="nofollow">Shimane Maps</A><BR/><BR/>The entire report was compiled and translated in Korea on Mr Cho's website.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://blog.naver.com/cms1530/10010622279" REL="nofollow">Kobunruko doc2</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-11203806167701199922008-02-03T18:50:00.000+09:002008-02-03T18:50:00.000+09:00Hi Kaneganese,That article is quite interesting be...Hi Kaneganese,<BR/><BR/>That article is quite interesting because, if the date is correct, then it would seem to be confirming that the newspaper, at least, did not consider Seokdo (石島) to be Dokdo (獨島) since the same newspaper had used the name Dokdo just a couple of months earlier and would not be switching back to Seokdo if they were referring to the same place. Also, the article does not mention anything about Dokdo, which would suggest that Dokdo was not considered a part of Uldo (Ulleungdo) county.<BR/><BR/>It is a little difficult to read the article because some of it is blurred, but I will try to translate what I can. How is it translated in Japanese?<BR/><BR/>Also, it seems that there may be more to the article. I am curious to know what motivated the reporter to write the article? Had a survey been conducted to see if Dokdo was really a part of Ulleungdo?Gerry Bevershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311939520870098017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26948035.post-92229564426752682052008-02-03T18:22:00.000+09:002008-02-03T18:22:00.000+09:00this is 磯竹島略圖 picture.http://dadembi.com/data/boar...this is 磯竹島略圖 picture.<BR/><BR/>http://dadembi.com/data/board/image/2006/1237988922.jpg<BR/><BR/>http://img.khan.co.kr/news/2006/09/13/6i1409c.jpg<BR/><BR/>"Ulleungdo and one other island are not Japan territory -by Japanese govemenrt-" cleary prove this. <BR/><BR/>and i already said, <BR/>Usando = Jukdo theory is impossible.<BR/><BR/>In 1900, Korean Government Imperial Ordinance 41, Jukdo, Ulleung-do, Seok-do(Dokdo). 3 islands already incorporated to Ulleung province. Korea already Incorporated Jukdo in 1900.<BR/><BR/>so it is worthless theory that if Usando was Jukdo.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com