My Photo

Korean Radio/TV

Blogs about that part of Asia that isn't Korea

« Charity event for North Korean refugees this Firday | Main | Korea could have done it all by itself »

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

Comments

Elysion

Dokdo is corean territory in the east sea ^^;;

love your extraordinary work which is so much more elaborate than the screaming of right-wing japanese dumbasses and korean nationalistic cabbage heads :D

the most interesting part, of course, will be the question what happenened 1905, 1945 and 1948....i'm looking forward to read your answer :D

Plunge

Excellent, excellent post! Keep it up. I'm bookmarking this as a reference on this issue.

passerby

Actually, I'm more interested on what the basis for this conclusion was.
On August 10, 1951, Dean Rusk, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, replies in writing that "Based on the information we have, the U.S. concludes that at no time in history has the Liancourt Rocks ever been a territory of Korea."

What amuses me is that, whenever a Korean presents a map showing Dokdo as evidence, the map never says the East Sea (to their horror, it usually says the Sea of Japan), and whenever they present a map with the East Sea, it never depicts Dokto as their territory.

Plunge

Based on the information we have, the U.S. concludes that at no time in history has the Liancourt Rocks ever been a territory of Korea.

Where did you get this quote?

Gerry Bevers

Yangban: "Whatever the true date of Korea's claim to Dokdo begins, it is a pretty safe bet that it predates Japan's 1618 claim (see below)."

Gerry: That is not a safe bet at all. To begin with, the document referring to the 512 A.D incident said very clearly that Usan-guk and Ullungdo were the same place. In other words, the document said that the island of Ullungdo was once called Usan-guk, "the Country of Usan." There is no mention whatever of Tokdo or any other island. Koreans just assume that a "country" would include surrounding islands, including a group of barren rocks 92 kilometers away. Here is what was said in the Samguksagi:

우산국은 명주(溟州)의 정동쪽 바다에 있는 섬으로 혹은 울릉도(鬱陵島)라고도 한다.

Usan-guk, also called Ulleungdo, is an island in the ocean, directly east of Myeongju."

You can go here to read the Chinese character version.

Not only does the quote refer to Usan-guk as "an island," not "islands," it very clearly says that it is also called "Ullungdo."

Based on the above leap in logic, Korean historians have created a whole history for Tokdo, an group of barren rocks that is not shown on any Korean map before 1905, the year Japan incorporated them.

Yangban: "There may be some validity to the claim that Chukdo (Jukdo) is a reference to the island much nearer Ulleungdo. However, I see no reason to believe that the reference to Seokdo actually means Gwaneumdo. While Chukdo is at least some distance from Ulleungdo, Gwaneumdo is little more than an extension of Ulleungdo's north-eastern corner separated by a small channel (see map here)."

Gerry: Ullung-do has two islands just off its shore, Chukdo and Gwanundo. Here is a picture of the two islands seen together.

It seems obvious to me that the "Seokdo" mentioned in Ordinance 41 (1900) was referring to Gwanundo, not Tokdo. Why would the ordinance specifically mention Ulleungdo and Chukdo, but not Gwanundo? Because Gwanundo is nearer to the shore of the main island? I think it is much more "unlikely" that Seokdo was referring to Tokdo, since Tokdo is 92 kilometers away and out of sight at sea level. If the ordinance were referring to Tokdo, I think it would have, at least, mentioned Tokdo's direction and distance since it was not in the immediate vicinity of Ulleungdo, the island the ordinance was describing.

Also, a 1899 document describes Korea's eastern-most boundary as a longitude that includes Ulleungdo, but not Tokdo. A 1906 revision of the document also fails to include Tokdo within Korea's eastern-most boundary.

Also, even acknowledging that Seokdo could be pronounced as "Dokto" in the Cholla province, which is on the other side of the Korean pennisula, the explanation for the Chinese character change from "Rock Island" to "Lonely Island" is very, very labored.

Plunge to Passerby: "Where did you get this quote?"

Gerry: Here, in footnote 3.

anon

It seems to me that the biggest reason for all this Dokdo-Takeshima nonsense is because it is almost a neologism to apply modern ideas of sovereignity to a (usually) uninhabited island in the middle of the sea. It's not like people could hop on a ferry and have a picnic there. There weren't spy planes keeping an eye on the place. Pirates were a fairly constant problem. Fishing waters were full back then, and no one was thinking about controlling natural gas reserves that might (or might not) be there.

John Kim

Takeshima belongs to Japan. It is in the internation accord in 1945.

oranckay
Plunge to Passerby: "Where did you get this quote?"
Gerry: Here, in footnote 3.

Thanks, Mr. Bevers, for your tireless effort searching subdomains of a site either by or about Shintaro Ishihara titled "Declaration of War."

Kimbob

"Thanks, Mr. Bevers, for your tireless effort searching subdomains of a site either by or about Shintaro Ishihara titled "Declaration of War." "

Now why doesn't that surprise me?

Gerry Bevers

Oranckay,

It was no great effort to find the passage. Fortunately for us, Mr. Ishihara seems to believe in supporting his arguments with source material. At any rate, it was quite enlightening to read that the Ameicans, who had just recently fought a bitter war with Japan, agreed with Japan's claims on Tokdo:

Mr Rusk continued: "As regards the island of Dokdo ... 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."

Dingles

Good points mr Beavers. When ever I see your name, lots and lots of koreans seem to insult you. You however never seem to have anything negative to say back.

I share your opinion about the island Takeshima. It seems that if you try and be reasonable you may be attaced in KOrea. So I suggest you be careful.

Andy (AKA: The Yangban)

Uhhhh.... 'Dingles' said 'Beavers.' Huh, uh, huh, huh.

(Sorry, I couldn't help myself. Bonus points for anyone who gets the reference.)

jtb-in-texas

I really think any Japanese territorial clams after 1593 need to be taken with a grain or three of salt...

But my opinion doesn't count anyway...

BTW, does anyone think the current Lee Sun Shin drama is only a coincidence?

Time to bring back the Ko-buk=san, eh wot?

Gerry Bevers

In case anyone is interested, the following is a reply to a post at Oranckay's site. In the post, I try to show that Dokdo is actually Chukdo, the small island just off the east coast of Ullungdo. Here is the post:


Oranckay: "...sneaky slight of hand..."?

Gerry: Actually, Oranckay, you seem to be the one trying to divert people's attention away from the fact that the Korean map shows Usan-do (i.e. Dokdo) direct to the west of Ullungdo instead of to southeast. I linked to the blowup so that people could read the names of the islands, not to divert their attention or attempt any "sneaky slight of hand."

Oranckay: "So, the reason one of the two on that particular map is probably not one of the tiny little sub-islets a few hundred meters off Ulleungdo is because none of the other islands in the *whole* map have their sub-islets drawn next to them."

Gerry: Whether the map fails to show other small islands around the Korean pennisula does not change the fact that it does show Usand-do and Ullung-do right next to each other, and one of those islands has to be relatively small since there is no other large islands in the vicinity. Here are Korean maps showing Usan-do and Ullungdo next to each other:

Usan-do just to the west of Ullungdo (1530)

an island just to the east of Ullungdo

Usan-do just to the east of Ullungdo (1899)

The last map, make in 1899, not only shows Usando in the exact same place as Chukdo (see Chukdo on this map), but the textbook it is printed in says that the Ullung administrative district extended east to a longitude of 130 degrees, 35 miniutes. That longitude includes Ullungdo and its surrounding islands, but not Dokdo/Takeshima, which is farther southeast at a east longitude of 131 degrees 55 minutes. Then one year later, in 1900, the Chosun Empire's Imperial Ordinance 41 placed Ullung-do, Chuk-do, and Seokdo under Ullung County administration. Chuk-do is the small island just on the east coast of Ullung-do, but the name Seok-do appears for the first time. Koreans claim that Seokdo is a reference to Dokdo/Takeshima, but I believe it is a referrence to Kwanundo, another island just off the east coast of Ullungdo (See this map). Also, here is a picture that shows all three islands: Kwanun-do, Chuk-do, and an arm of Ullungdo.

Finally, a 1946 Korean book seems to fill in the last piece of the puzzle. The book says that Korea's eastern most island is "Chuk-do[Dokdo], which is part of the Ullung administrative district of North Gyeongsang Province." As you may remember, Chukdo was the island east of Ullungdo in Ullung administrative district. The same document also says that "including islands" Korea extends east to 130 degrees, 56 minutes, 23 seconds. That is far enough east to include Ullungdo and her surrounding islands, but not Dokdo/Takeshima. Here is the Korean:

II 지리

문; 우리나라의 지도상의 위치는 어떠합니까.
반도만으로는 동경 130 도 41 분 22 초로부터 124 도 18 분 35 초까지
북위 34 도 17 분 16 초로부터 43 도 0 분 36 초까지요,
도서(島嶼; 섬 서, 작은 섬)를 넣으면
동경 130 도 56 분 23 초로부터 124 도 11 분 00 초까지
북위 33 도 6 분 40 초로부터 43 도 0 분 36 초까지입니다.

....

문; 우리나라의 동서남북 극단은 어디입니까?
반도에서는 극동은 함경북도 경흥군 노서면, 극서는 평안북도 용천군 용천면, 극남은 전라남도 해남군 송지면, 극북은 함경북도 은성군 유포면이요,
도서를 넣어서는 극동은 경상북도 울릉군 죽도[독도], 극서는 평안북도 용천군 신도면 마안리, 극남은 전라남도 제주도 대정면 마라도, 극북은 극북은 함경북도 은성군 유포면입니다.
[임성삼의 주(註); 현재의 행정구역과는 약간 다르다.]

Here is the link to the above quotes.

Oranckay, you seem to have a little trouble with math, so I will do it for you.

1) In 1145, Korea's "Samguksagi" said that Usan-guk and Ullung-do were the same island (See here)
+
2) Korean maps show Ullung-do and Usan-do next to each other (1530 Map, 1899 Map
+
3) 1899 map shows Usan-do in the exact location of present-day Chuk-do, and even includes latitude and longitude lines.
+
The Chosun Empire's Imperial Ordinance 41 says that Ullung-do, Chuk-do, and Seok-do are under the Ullung administrative district.
+
4) A 1946 Korean book says that "Chuk-do [Dokdo]," an island that belongs to the Ullung administrative district," is Korea's eastern-most island, and that Korean territory, including islands, extends east to a longitude of 130 degrees 56 minutes, 23 seconds. That longitude is far enough east to include Ullung-do and its surrounding islands, but not far enough to include Dokdo/Takeshima, which is at a longitude of 131 degrees, 55 minutes.
=
"Dokdo" is Chuk-do (Usan-do), which is a small Korean island just east of Ullungdo. It is not Takeshima, which means that Korea is illegally occupying Japanese territory.

sid

Do you have any links without the words takeshima in them gerrysan ?

jtb-in-texas

Maybe "the Beve" is looking to impress a Japanese girl at his high school?

dingles

would that refrence be for bevers and butthead?

By the way Mr beavers, Brilliant truely Brilliant commentary. Its sad that everytime you post logical and polite commentary those people who have already steaked out their side on the issue resort to name calling. In fact they are acting shamefully in their stubborness and closemindedness.

Mr Beavers, I can only say that in the 1930s in Germany there were a few people who went against the Govt and so many of the peop le in their opinions. Like you they felt the wrath of so many people and were attacked and attacked. Like you they calmly evenly and logicaly spoke their minds. Yes many of these people were eventually murdered or expelled from Germany. But now we know that theirs was the message of truth.

Keep up the fight Mr Bearver! Dont be afraid to be calm, rational, logical, and try and discuss the issues without anger or hatred.

The name Shindler comes to mind Mr Beaver. Many many other, Mr Ornicky, are like the those bad bad camp guards who never stop attacking you Mr Beavers. They attack truth, justice and freedom. Others, Mr Yanbang, are like the happpy go lucky baker who look the other way. Simple minded people.

But what about Dingles. I am nobody.

wedgie

Gerry, if you are going to post maps please post ones that prove something instead of something a Japanese 3rd grader could have made.

This official Japanese map of Chosun clearly shows Ulleungo and Dokdo inside the border and is labelled as Map of Chosun (korea). If Dokdo was part of Japan (or not part of Korea)it would have been drawn outside the boundary. It was made in the 19th century before the 1905 Shimane Prefecture Inclusion.
[url]http://www.truthofdokdo.or.kr/kor/html/dataroom_text_map06.html[/url]

wedgie

Try the link to this old Japanese Tokdo map as mentioned it shows Dokdo cleary inside the boundary.

This old military map from 1936 shows that Dokdo was still under Chosun or Korean jurisdiction despite military occupation of the peninsula. map showing Dokdo under Korean jurisdiction This map is also Japanese.

This Japanese map shows Dokdo was under the administraion of the Kyeongsang Province in July of 1945 July 1945 Korean map

Korea doesn't have to show ownership of Dokdo by using ancient records. Japanese documents verify it for them.


wedgie

In this Japanese map of Korea. The Japanese cartographer drew Korea and included Ulleungdo and Dokto. Notice he even included great detail of the islands. Also note Japan is not included on the map.

"http://kr.img.blog.yahoo.com/ybi/1/86/03/shinh_k2002/folder/9/img_9_212_2?ext=.jpg">Japanese map

wedgie

Try link again
In this Japanese map of Korea. The Japanese cartographer drew Korea and included Ulleungdo and Dokto. Notice he even included great detail of the islands. Also note Japan is not included on the map.
Japanese map
Another Japanese map of Korea has a closeup of the island to prove they are well inside the boundary showing Dokdo as Chosun or Korea.
Japanese map of Chosun
French map shows part of Ulleungdo and Usando as part of Korean Land. You can see the French cartographer like the Koreans called Dokdo Usando (in French).
French map of Chosun
A Russian Navy map of Korea also includes Dokdo Island as part of Korea and well within the boundary of the map.
Russian map of Chosun Korea

passerby

Gerry,
Thanks for providing the follow-up info.

Wedgie,
1) Old Japanese Tokdo Map
ttp://www.truthofdokdo.or.kr/kor/html/dataroom_text_map06.html
Now let’s see.
Since the meridian skimming the west coast of the Korean peninsula is 125 deg, and that between the two islands (which you seem to think are Ullungdo and Tokdo), are 130 deg, you find that the meridians are drawn at 1 deg intervals. So are the parallels. This means that the island on the left of the 130th meridian is located between E129-130 deg. long. and N37-38 deg. lat, and the island to the right is located between E130-131 deg. long. and N37-38 deg. lat. Since this map was created during the period of the two-Ullungdo confusion (Dagelet and Argonaut), I think a natural conclusion as to the identity of the two islands is: left = Argonaut and right = Dagelet.
Liancourt Rock (= present-day Takeshima) is located near the 132th meridian.
See Arrow Smith map 1811 & James Wyld map 1868
http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/takeshima/4westmap.html

2) Map showing Dokdo under Korean jurisdiction
ttp://kr.blog.yahoo.com/realtimejr/1461189.html
This is not a map showing the administrative jurisdiction, but is a map showing the Japanese Army jurisdiction. Since Takeshima was closer to Ullungdo, Takeshima was covered by the same unit. Remember, all of Korea was a part of Imperial Japan at the time, Just like Okinawa is presently a part of Japan. For example, even if the same Self Defense Force unit were to cover Okinawa and Amami-Oshima (a part of Kagoshima), Amami would still be a part of the Kagoshima prefecture. I have telephoned the Shimane prefecture to ask whether Takeshima had ever been removed from its administrative jurisdiction during the annexation, and the answer was NO.

3) July 1945 Korean Map
ttp://news.kbs.co.kr/news.php?id=715651&kind=c
I don’t know what this implies, since the Chinese character written on the triangular island on the left says Utu-to (the first of the two characters in Ullung + island), and seems irrelevant. Furthermore, from its triangular shape, I'd say this is Chukto (bamboo island) adjacent to Ullungdo. If this were Dokto, there would be two islands drawn.

4) Japanese map – Can’t seem to view this.

5) Japanese map of Chosun
ttp://www.dokdomuseum.go.kr/exh/exh1_1_10.html
Same as (1).
Note that Takeshima is the island CLOSER to the Korean peninsula. This is the non-existent Argonaut Island. It wasn't until after 1880 when the navy vessel Amagi was dispatched by the Japanese government that the Japanese government formally acknowledged that Argonaut (then called Takeshima) was non-existent, Dagelet (then called Matsushima) was Ullungdo, and the Liancourt rocks (then called Rianko-jima) was what had formerly been known to the Japanese as Matsushima Island. Note that both the coordinates and the shape of the Matsushima Island in this map correspond to Ullungdo. Takeshima is drawn as a simple bubble, probably due to the fact that its shape couldn’t be confirmed, for obvious reasons.

6) French map
ttp://www.dokdomuseum.go.kr/en/exh/exh1_1_02.html
Though Koreans claim that Usan = Dokto = Takeshima, I do not find their line of logic convincing, because in Korean historical records (San-guk ki), it says that there was a permanent settlement of 86 people (15 houses and farmland) on Usan. The description simply does not fit Takeshima. I think the two islands depicted here are Dagelet Island (Ullungdo) and either Boussole Rock or Seal Island. Besides, it wasn't until 1849 that Liancourt Rocks were “discovered” by westerners.

7) Russian map
I don't know what you want (or the person of this website wants) to point out using this map, as it only shows Ullungdo. This map contains no borders, colors, etc. indicating that the Russians were not even minutely concerned with who owned the islands or the peninsula. Instead, the Russian painstakingly map out islands in the sea and the coastline, which indicate to me that they are preparing for an invasion southward. The original map was made by the Russian navy in 1857, immediately after the Russian loss of the Crimean War, in which the Russian hope for reaching open waters on its western side was crushed. It seems they promptly turned their eyes to the east. On May 15, 1861, the Russians occupied Tsushima by force, and refused to leave until the Japanese government gave a written lease of Tsushima to Russia. (Thanks to the British, the Russians were driven away on this attempt.) Mapmaking is not a simple pastime for a nation. Even today, charting of seafloor is of national importance, and that is why you see Chinese subs entering Japanese waters. The fact that the Chosun dynasty allowed the Russians to map their shores in detail shows how woefully unaware they were of the danger.

This map shows the situation of the Argonaut, Dagelet, and Liancourt as acknowledged by Japan and the world at 1872, before it was finalized that Argonaut was non-existent (and was the result of poor measurements by a British man, James Colnett back in 1789).
ttp://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/takeshima/t-weller1872.jpg

wedgie

passerby you can't be serious!!

You critize and scrutinize the maps posted and then you post those scrawlings (that look like a neanderthal did them) as gospel.

You've got a serious case of "Gerry Bevers" syndrome.

passerby

Wedgie,
You can ignore the "neanederthal" drawings, my logic is still valid without them. I gave the link to the "neanederthal" drawings as schematic illustrations to show the coordinates and names of the islands since the other elaborate antique maps need more magnification than the images offered on the web to see the names, etc. You're not going to say that the last map I gave is a neanderthal drawing, now are you?

I do not take the illustrations as gospel. For that matter, I do not trust wholeheartedly any information presented on the web. However, after making independent searches through online collections of 19th century antique maps, I have reached the conclusion that this drawing correctly illustrates the situation back then. At least, I do not take as gospel colorful elaborate maps that does not even contain Tokto or Takeshima and try to convince others that they do. You, wedgie, seem to be the one with the blind faith.

BTW, the 1945 Korean map in your link does seem to be a map of Ullungdo. The Korean government renamed 鬱陵島 to 鬱島 in Ordinace 41. The map on the right-hand side, I guess, is the main island of Ullungdo.

>You've got a serious case of "Gerry Bevers" syndrome.
Why thank you. I'll take that as a compliment any time.

wedgie

The Japanese forgot something on this map.
The Japanese forgot something on this map

The Japanese also argue that Korea didn't dispute the illegal incorporation of Tokdo into Shimane Prefecture or even know Dokdo existed. Apparently the govenor of Ulluengdo was pissed enough to raise the Korean flag in defiance in 1906.
Angry Hangooks
I think it's absolutely hilarious you call the Shimane Prefecture office for their opinion on the matter!! Everyone knows the terra nullius claim of Dokdo was a sham. The Shimane Prefecture Inclusion was declared dead by the signing of the SCAP agreement. If the Shimane Prefecture office wants to live in denial that's their perogative I guess.


The comments to this entry are closed.