gv-07



OccidentalismDuc, sequere, aut de via decede!HomeArchivesHall of Shame화병 FAQTagsTemporary DatabaseLies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Part 7
January 3rd, 2007 . by Gerry-Bevers
Liancourt Rocks are essentially two large rocks in the middle of the Sea of Japan (East Sea) that have a combined length of approximately 330 meters. They are located at an eastern longitude of 131 degrees 52 minutes, approximately 92 kilometers southeast of the Korean island of Ulleungdo and 157 kilometers northwest of the Japanese island of Oki. Both Korea and Japan claim the islets.

Japan officially claimed Liancourt Rocks (”Takeshima” in Japanese & “Dokdo” in Korean) in 1905, but Korean forces landed on and began occupying the islets in the 1950s and have been there ever since.

Koreans claim that they have known about “Dokdo” since 512 A.D., but there are no Korean maps from the Chosun Dynasty (1392 – 1910) or earlier that show any island in the Sea of Japan (East Sea) labeled as “Dokdo,” nor are there any Korean documents that mention it before 1906. There are, however, several maps that show Ulleungdo (울릉도) and an island next to Ulleungdo labeled Usando (우산도). Koreans claim that Usando was the old name for “Dokdo,” but Japanese claim that Usando was Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of Jukdo.

Here is a modern-day map that shows Ulleungdo, Jukdo, and Dokdo (Liancourt Rocks). Notice the location of Dokdo and its distance from Ulleungdo.



The following is a modern map of Ulleungdo. Notice that Jukdo (Chukdo) is to the right (east) of Ulleungdo.



The following is a composite of old Korean maps that show Usando (于山島 – 우산도) to the right of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島 – 울릉도), which is the approximate location of present-day Jukdo. Nevertheless, Koreans still claim that the Usando on the maps are present-day Dokdo.


Koreans even claim that the Usan (于山 – 우산) on the following map, which is from a 1899 Korean geography text, is also Dokdo, even though the lines of longitude show that that could not have been possible.



Finally, the following map is from an 1874 book entitled, “Histoire de l’Eglise de Coree” (History of the Korean Catholic Church). The map labels Ulleungdo as “Oul-leng-to” and its neighboring island of Jukdo as “Ou-san,” (Usan – 우산). Notice that the map also includes lines of longitude and latitude, which eliminate any possibility that “Ou-san” could have been referring to Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo).



Usando was not present-day “Dokdo.” It was Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of Jukdo, which is approximately two kilometer’s off of Ulleungdo’s east shore. There are no Korean documents or maps before 1905 that show that Korea even knew about Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo), much less considered them Korean territory.

Japanese Translation Provided by Kaneganese

(Gerryの投稿の日本語訳です。)

Liancourt Rocksは、第一に日本海の真ん中に位置する二つの岩で構成されており、合わせて約330mの幅があります。東経131度52分に位置し、韓国の鬱陵島から南東へ92km、日本の隠岐島から北西へ157kmの距離です。韓国と日本の双方がその領有権を主張しています。

日本は1905年にLiancourt Rocks(日本語で“竹島”、韓国語で“独島”)の領有権を公布し、領土に編入しましたが、1950年代に韓国軍が上陸して占拠し、今もその状態が続いています。

韓国人は西暦512年から“独島”の存在を知っていた、といいますが、(李朝)朝鮮王朝やその前の時代を含めた時代から、その地図上には、日本海の海中に“独島”と名のつく島が一つも無く、それどころか1906年以前にこの島に言及した文献さえ、全く存在しないのです。しかし、鬱陵島と、その隣にある“于山島”という名の島をを描いた地図はいくつか残っています。韓国人は、于山島が“独島”の古称で、日本人は于山島は鬱陵島の隣にある竹島のことだ、それぞれ主張しています。

ここにあるのは、現在の鬱陵島、竹島(Chukudo)、そして独島(Liancourt Rocks)の地図です。独島の位置と鬱陵島からの距離がお分かりでしょうか。

 地図1:鬱陵島、竹島(Chukudo)、Liancourt Rocks(竹島/独島)

次に揚げるのは、現在の鬱陵島の地図です。竹島(Chukudo)が鬱陵島のすぐ東隣にあるのがお分かりでしょうか。

 地図2:鬱陵島

以下に示すのは、全て韓国の古地図で、于山島が現在の竹島(Chukudo)の位置と同じ、鬱陵島のすぐ東に描かれているものです。それにも関わらず、韓国人はいまだに地図上の于山島は,現在の独島だと主張するのです。

 地図3:韓国古地図集

韓国人は、1899年の韓国の地理の教科書に載っている次の地図を見ても、ここに描かれた于山島が、独島だと言い張ります。地図の経線からすれば、それはありえないのに、です。

 地図4:大韓全図(1899)

最後に、下の地図は 1874年発行の“韓国カトリック教会の歴史(Histoire de l’Eglise de Coree)”という本からの抜粋です。この地図では、鬱陵島は“ウルルント(ul-leng-to)” 、その隣の竹島(Chukudo)は“ウサン(u-san) ”と記載されています。この地図には経度と緯度が明記されていて、“ウサン(u-san) ”がLiancourt Rocks (竹島/独島)では有り得ないことがお分かりでしょう。

 地図5:“韓国カトリック教会の歴史(Histoire de l’Eglise de Coree)” (1874)より

于山島は、現在の“独島”ではありません。それは、鬱陵島の北東沖約2.2kmというすぐ隣にある竹島(Chukudo)です。1905年以前の韓国側の文献や地図で、彼らがLiancourt Rocks (竹島/独島)を、韓国領として考えたていたことはおろか、その存在を知っていた、ということすら示すものは一つも存在しないのです。

Links to More Posts on Takeshima/Dokdo (With Japanese translations)

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 1

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 2

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 3

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 4

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 4 Supplement

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 5

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 6

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 8

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 9

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 10

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 11

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 1

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 2

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 2 Supplement

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 3

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 4

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 5

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 6

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 7

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 8

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 9

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 10

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 11

Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 12

Posted in Verus Historia | 40 Comments »



40 Responses to “Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Part 7”
comment number 1 by: wjk
January 3rd, 2007 at 1:41 pm

I wish you find a much better job and just compensation from your old employer.

comment number 2 by: wjk
January 3rd, 2007 at 1:55 pm


Hey, Matt, Shadkt of Occ, why don’t you also write about this Japanese US citizen’s patriotism?

comment number 3 by: empraptor
January 3rd, 2007 at 6:38 pm

That Watada dude rocks, though I thought wjk’s link would have something to do with Dokdo.

This entry is great. Clearest summary of Gerry’s reasoning on Dokdo? Or is one of the others better?

comment number 4 by: Errol
January 3rd, 2007 at 6:58 pm

Watada’s mother is Chinese. What is wjk’s point? The USA doesn’t frown on interracial relationships?

Very clear summary by Gerry. Not sure it will get him a job though. Maybe a guest spot on Oprah. She’s always looking for interethnic conflict stories.

comment number 5 by: Japan Probe » Blog Archive » Japan News for January 4, 2007
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:53 pm

[...] Gerry Bevers has posted some new material debunking Korea’s historical claim to the Dokdo/Takeshima islets. [...]

comment number 6 by: James
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:55 pm

Another great entry, Gerry!

comment number 7 by: myCoree
January 4th, 2007 at 1:11 am

Hi. Gerry.
It seems to me that you imply you are free now to say about Dokdo and you want to reset or restart your claims.
And, there will be more pupils than before.

I am not happy to visit, read or write here, but okay.

Happy new year

C U

comment number 8 by: HanComplex
January 4th, 2007 at 1:27 am

Great post, Gerry! I’m glad you decided to continue your writings online on this subject. Now, wouldn’t it just be great if someone could translate your research into Korean so Koreans would have access to the OTHER side of the argument.

Anyhow, I’m certain you’ll gain better employment after all this. Best of luck to you!

comment number 9 by: ponta
January 4th, 2007 at 6:42 am

myCoree
Feel free to comment on Dokdo.
We need opposing views to balance.
It was through discussion with wedgie=toadface with the help of Gerry that I learned the issue of Dokdo.

(I knew little about it. In general Japanese are not crazy about Dokdo and wonder why many Korean go crazy when the truth about Dokdo is told to them, when they are told that Korea government didn’t know Dokdo before 1905—it has nothing to do with Japan invading Korea again).

comment number 10 by: helen
January 4th, 2007 at 7:46 am

Dear Mr. Gerry

Hello. I am Hyun-jeong Hwang, an intern journalist of Joongang Daily.
I want to conduct an interview with you regarding that the University had dismissed you for Dokdo problem. I can be reached to the e-mail below.
I look forward to an early reply.
hwanghelen@korea.com

comment number 11 by: GarlicBreath
January 4th, 2007 at 10:08 am

I smell BS. If this is real, great. Be careful.

comment number 12 by: James
January 4th, 2007 at 2:47 pm

Sounds pretty dangerous. There is definately a chance that the reporter could be looking to twist whatever Gerry says and create an article condemning him, which could make it harder for Gerry to take legal action regarding his case, should he want to.

comment number 13 by: ponta
January 4th, 2007 at 6:29 pm

Frogmouth’s comment on Marmot
These Korean maps show, contrary to his intention, that Korean geographers were nor familiar with the geography of Ulleungdo at all.

In contrast, Japanese are familiar with Dokdo/Takeshima.

Yes, in 19 century, Japan was confused about islands in that some people consider it Ulleungdo, others jukudo, still others Dokdo, but finally reconfirmed that Dokdo belongs to Japan and reconfirmed it is Japanese territory in 1905.

It might be true that both countries lacked th modern concept of territory, but the difference in perception is obiovious,

Korea was not cognizant of Dokdo.
Japan was cognizant of Dokdo.
In modern days, when Korea and Japan tried to make the territory clear,
—-for instance, Korea announced Sekto is under Ulleungdo’s jurisdiction in 1900—-Korea was not cognizant of Dokdo and Japanese government included Dokdo.

comment number 14 by: Korea’s Looking to Add to UNESCO Sites, Is Dokdo Next? at ROK Drop
January 5th, 2007 at 4:09 pm

[...] This wouldn’t be the first time an area has been given UNESCO recognition that was controversial. Look no further than the ancient Korean kingdom of Koguryo enshrined by China in 2004. The claiming of the Koguryo kingdom by China has been hotly contested by Korean scholars and UNESCO enshrined it anyway in the name of China. What better way than UNESCO recognition to settle the Dokdo dispute? No more talk about old, inaccurate maps, no more ex-pats losing their jobs over disputing Dokdo ownership, no more people chopping off their fingers, no more bee man, no more disrespecting Japanese flags by Korean politicians, just generally no more wackiness over Dokdo. However, I don’t see it happening because Korean politicians don’t want to settle the Dokdo issue just like they don’t want to settle the Yongsan Garrison issue either, because it provides them an issue that is easy to manipulate to promote nationalism within the general Korean population to their own political advantage. [...]

comment number 15 by: ponta
January 5th, 2007 at 10:28 pm

wedgie(Steve Barber)씨의 독도 홈페이지는 아래 주소입니다

why don’t you ask them to give you a good idea about Korean claim. Do they not worth listening to? Is their idea so useless you are ashamed of publising it in English?

comment number 16 by: ponta
January 6th, 2007 at 3:44 am

Fromouth at Marmot

.Why?
It’s simple, the Japanese only visited Dokdo as a stop-over enroute to Ulleungdo there are no records that Japanese visited Dokdo as a sole destination and with the loss of their claim to Ulleungdo Japan’s use for Dokdo was lost.

This is not true.
Even after Japan forbade to sail to Ulleungdo, there is no record Japan forbade to sail to Dokdo.
For instance, there is a record in 1886 the Japanese man called Yauemon was sentenced dead by the government official because “he sailed to Ulleungdo, saying he would sail to Dokdo.”
toron
What does it mean?

It means
1) Japanese were allowed to sail if its destination was Dokdo.
And it is most likely that
2) Japanese fishermen in fact often sailed to dokdo by getting a permission to sail to Dokdo.

Moreover, the Japanese maps of Dokdo was getting more and more accurate after Japan ceding Ulleungodo. That also shows Japanese visited Dodko after the cession.

What is crucial here is Korea has absolutely no map of Dokdo while Japan has the detailed map of Dokdo.

And you can not regard Dokdo as belonging to Ulleungdo.

1) Historically there is no record Korea was cognizant of Dokdo

2) Legally


CASE CONCERNING SOVEREIGNTY OVER PULAU LIGITAN AND PULAU SIPADAN(ICJ)
The Court further recalls that it stated above that the words “the islets belonging thereto” can only be interpreted as referring to the small islands lying in the immediate vicinity of the three islands which are mentioned by name, and not to islands which are located at a distance of more than 40 nautical miles. The Court therefore cannot accept Indonesia’s contention that it inherited title to the disputed islands from the Netherlands through these contracts, which stated that the Sultanate of Bulungan as described in the contracts formed part of the Netherlands Indies.

Even islands at a distance of 40 nautical miles (75km) can not be interpreted at belonging to the main island. The distance between Dodko and Ulleungdo is 92 km.
oppekepe

To sum up,
In view of international law, to acquire the sovereignty over territory, roughly you need
1) effective control or
2) discovery, or
3) cession by treaty

I realised after the long discussion that what is crucial in this debate is the examination of Korean positive, concrete evidence that Korea was cognizant of Dokdo;for it is relatively clear that Japanese was cognizant of Dokdo/Takeshima during Edo period.

Suppose for the sake of argument that Korean so called protest in 1906 was valid.(or suppose she couldn’t protest at the time of
the inclusion). Then that day of the protest is the critical date
at which the dispute between the two parties becomes crystallized and after which no acts can be taken into account in determining sovereignty.

Korea held the empty island policy over Ulleungdo, so there is little evidence, if at all, that Korea had effective occupation over Dokdo.
The only evidence available for Korea is probably the discovery.(But note that even the discovery must be reinforced by the effective control)
If it is proved that Korea was not cognizant of Dokdo before so called protest, it is most likely that the case favors Japan.

So it is crucial for Korea at least to show Korea was cognizant of Dokdo positively and affirmatively before 1905.
Unfortunately Gerry debunked the myth that Korea was cognizant of Dokdo before 1905 What is more unfortunate is that Gerry is about to be substantially expelled from Korea because he debunked the myth.

And since Korea can not show Korean positive evidence of the claim to Dokdo, Korea is trying to win the territory which had never belonged to Dokdo by appealing to her victim-hood during the colonization.
You might want to read Frogmouth’s comment from this view point.

comment number 17 by: thor56
January 7th, 2007 at 3:29 am

History distortion is Korean culture:-P

comment number 18 by: Occidentalism » Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Maps 3
January 20th, 2007 at 9:22 am

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 19 by: Occidentalism » Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Maps 7
January 20th, 2007 at 1:32 pm

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 20 by: Occidentalism » Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Part 1
January 21st, 2007 at 1:46 pm

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 21 by: Kaneganese
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:02 am

(Japanese translation for Gerry’s post)
(Gerryの投稿の日本語訳です。)

Liancourt Rocksは、第一に日本海の真ん中に位置する二つの岩で構成されており、合わせて約330mの幅があります。東経131度52分に位置し、韓国の鬱陵島から南東へ92km、日本の隠岐島から北西へ157kmの距離です。韓国と日本の双方がその領有権を主張しています。

日本は1905年にLiancourt Rocks(日本語で“竹島”、韓国語で“独島”)の領有権を公布し、領土に編入しましたが、1950年代に韓国軍が上陸して占拠し、今もその状態が続いています。

韓国人は西暦512年から“独島”の存在を知っていた、といいますが、(李朝)朝鮮王朝やその前の時代を含めた時代から、その地図上には、日本海の海中に“独島”と名のつく島が一つも無く、それどころか1906年以前にこの島に言及した文献さえ、全く存在しないのです。しかし、鬱陵島と、その隣にある“于山島”という名の島をを描いた地図はいくつか残っています。韓国人は、于山島が“独島”の古称で、日本人は于山島は鬱陵島の隣にある竹島のことだ、それぞれ主張しています。

ここにあるのは、現在の鬱陵島、竹島(Chukudo)、そして独島(Liancourt Rocks)の地図です。独島の位置と鬱陵島からの距離がお分かりでしょうか。

 地図1:鬱陵島、竹島(Chukudo)、Liancourt Rocks(竹島/独島)

次に揚げるのは、現在の鬱陵島の地図です。竹島(Chukudo)が鬱陵島のすぐ東隣にあるのがお分かりでしょうか。

 地図2:鬱陵島

以下に示すのは、全て韓国の古地図で、于山島が現在の竹島(Chukudo)の位置と同じ、鬱陵島のすぐ東に描かれているものです。それにも関わらず、韓国人はいまだに地図上の于山島は,現在の独島だと主張するのです。

 地図3:韓国古地図集

韓国人は、1899年の韓国の地理の教科書に載っている次の地図を見ても、ここに描かれた于山島が、独島だと言い張ります。地図の経線からすれば、それはありえないのに、です。

 地図4:大韓全図(1899)

最後に、下の地図は 1874年発行の“韓国カトリック教会の歴史(Histoire de l’Eglise de Coree)”という本からの抜粋です。この地図では、鬱陵島は“ウルルント(ul-leng-to)” 、その隣の竹島(Chukudo)は“ウサン(u-san) ”と記載されています。この地図には経度と緯度が明記されていて、“ウサン(u-san) ”がLiancourt Rocks (竹島/独島)では有り得ないことがお分かりでしょう。

 地図5:“韓国カトリック教会の歴史(Histoire de l’Eglise de Coree)” (1874)より

于山島は、現在の“独島”ではありません。それは、鬱陵島の北東沖約2.2kmというすぐ隣にある竹島(Chukudo)です。1905年以前の韓国側の文献や地図で、彼らがLiancourt Rocks (竹島/独島)を、韓国領として考えたていたことはおろか、その存在を知っていた、ということすら示すものは一つも存在しないのです。

comment number 22 by: Gerry-Bevers
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:49 am

Thank you, Wjk.

comment number 23 by: pacifist
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:53 am

Gerry,

It was Kaneganese who translated the text, not wjk.

comment number 24 by: Gerry-Bevers
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:59 am

Pacifist,

I was thanking Wjk for what he said in the very first comment. I just noticed it.

Of course, I should have also thanked Kaneganese for the translation.

Thank you, Kaneganese. You are doing a great job.

comment number 25 by: pacifist
January 22nd, 2007 at 7:08 am

Gerry,

Sorry for my misunderstanding.

BTW, do you understand the meaning of the name Kaneganese?
It may sounds like English or French like Japanese, Chinese, –nese…but it means “I have no money” in Japanese (Kane ga Neze). It’s a joke. I laughed when I saw the name at first.

Kaneganese, am I right?

comment number 26 by: Gerry-Bevers
January 22nd, 2007 at 7:29 am

Pacifist,

Yes, I was curious about the name, Kaneganese. I always have to check the spelling when I type it. But I cannot believe Kaneganese would have no money, considering how diligent of a translator he or she is.

comment number 27 by: Kaneganese
January 22nd, 2007 at 8:10 am

You are right!! Pacifist.
I’m really happy that you understood my joke.
It does have one more personal meaning, but I leave it there.

And Gerry, you don’t have to thank me at all. It is nothing compared to what you are doing.

By the way, I changed the spelling of modern name of Chukudo from 竹嶼 to 竹島 after I ralised it’s 竹島 that is on the modern Korean map.

comment number 28 by: Occidentalism » Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Part 4 Supplement
January 29th, 2007 at 6:35 am

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 29 by: New Takeshima (Dokdo) Article in Japanese Newspaper » Occidentalism
February 21st, 2007 at 8:17 am

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 30 by: Dokdo Museum Head Admits Maps Show “Jukdo, not Dokdo” » Occidentalism
March 20th, 2007 at 6:55 am

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 31 by: Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Part 8 » Occidentalism
April 7th, 2007 at 6:51 pm

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 32 by: Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Maps 8 » Occidentalism
April 13th, 2007 at 8:54 am

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 33 by: Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Maps 9 » Occidentalism
April 22nd, 2007 at 9:26 am

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 34 by: Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Maps 10 » Occidentalism
April 25th, 2007 at 9:44 pm

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 35 by: Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Maps 12 » Occidentalism
April 29th, 2007 at 8:05 am

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 36 by: Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Part 9 » Occidentalism
May 1st, 2007 at 9:24 am

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 37 by: Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Part 10 » Occidentalism
May 4th, 2007 at 11:32 am

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 38 by: Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Maps 11 » Occidentalism
May 5th, 2007 at 10:26 pm

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 39 by: Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Part 11 · Occidentalism
May 23rd, 2007 at 9:56 am

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

comment number 40 by: Absurd claims - Korea Times | Occidentalism
July 10th, 2008 at 11:55 pm

[...] Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7 [...]

  





Search this blog:

  • 最終更新:2009-08-22 10:42:39

このWIKIを編集するにはパスワード入力が必要です

認証パスワード