Occidentalism

I have created a new blog to specifically discuss the current and historical issues related to the dispute between Japan and Korea over Liancourt Rocks, which are a small group of rocky islets in the Sea of Japan. Japanese call the islets “Takeshima” while Koreans call them “Dokdo.” All views are welcome, and comments may be made in any language, but personal attacks, foul language, and comments dealing with unrelated issues will be unwelcome and may be deleted. The goal is civil discussion and debate. The address of the blog is as follows:

http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/

So far I have only created a frame for the blog, but I will slowly be filling it in as time goes on. The goal of the blog is not just to discuss and debate the issues, but also to collect and organize the old documents and maps related to the dispute. That means I may be reposting things that some people have already read. If you have any suggestions for improving the site, I have created a “Suggestion Box” specifically for that purpose.

By the way, I hope to continue to use Occidentalism to post on the Dokdo/Takeshima issue and on other issues. I started the new blog because it gives me more freedom to focus on Dokdo/Takeshima and makes it easier to collect and organize the old maps and documents related to the dispute.

I hope my new blog helps encourage healthy discussion and debate on the Dokdo/Takeshima issue.

Sincerely,

Gerry Bevers

P.S. Matt, please fix your format so that my maps are not chopped off.

UPDATE: I have removed the Blogger member restriction, which will allow non-Blogger memebers to post a comment.

The following is my translation of a March 20 article from the “Daegu Ilbo” online newspaper:

Dokdo Museum Head: “It’s just Jukdo”

Japanese Media “Discovery of Old Map Refutes Dokdo Territorial Claims”

Japan’s Kyoto News  Agency and Tottori Prefecture’s “San-in Chuo Simpo” have recently reported, “Old Korean maps have been discovered that refute Korea’s territorial claims on Dokdo.” The “San-in Chuo Simpo” reported on its Web site on the 22nd of last month that American Gerry Bevers (51), who works as an English professor at a college in Seoul and studies the Dokdo problem, had contributed old maps that refuted Korea’s territorial claims on Dokdo. [See the Japanese article here and my post on the article here.]

The contributed data were pictures of three old maps of Ulleungdo that are stored in Seoul National University’s “Gyujanggak” museum. When contributing the old maps, Mr. Bevers said, “Dokdo was not written on any Korean documents or maps before the Japan government incorporated Takeshima in 1905.” He added, “The Korean side claims that the old name for Dokdo on old maps and in old documents was ‘Usanguk.’”

Takashi Tsukamoto, advisor at Japan’s National Diet Library, claimed, “This is a new discovery that only someone living in Korea can research.” He added, “Especially, the map with the writing “haejang bamboo fields” is enough proof to show that ‘Usan’ was not Dokdo.”

Concerning this, the Northeast Asian History Foundation submitted a statement that refuted the claims item by item. [You can see my post on their so-called "refutation" here.]

The Northeast Asian History Foundation said, “The contents of the maps indicated are all known by both domestic and Japanese scholars, but by saying that the date of the map is unknown and by showing only part of the maps, the Japanese side is scheming to make it seem as if the maps were newly discovered.

Dokdo Museum Director Lee Seung-jin said, “After confirming the three old maps, it is obvious to anyone that they showed Jukdo, not Dokdo; and even in our country’s academic circles, it is judged to be Jukdo. By not showing the complete map and by showing only an enlarged section, they are trying to cover up their forced claims.”

In our country, Dokdo has been called “Usando” (于山島, 1432) – “Sambongdo” (三峰島, 1476) – “Jasando” (子山島, 1696) – “Seokdo” (石島, Korean Imperial Edict 41), and Dokdo (獨島, 1904).

Ulleung = Reporter Lee Jae-hun ljh@idaegu.com

Time of article submission: March 19, 2007; 20:09:48

Link to the Korean Article

Am I the only one who sees the contradiction in the above article?

Notice that the director of the Dokdo Museum admits that the Usando on the maps is “Jukdo, not Dokdo,” and added that anyone should be able to see that. He added, “Even in Korean academic circles, it is judged to be Jukdo.” However, then he seems to contradict himself by saying that the Japanese (and I) are schemingly making our “forced claims” by showing only a blow-up of the map instead of the full map. Here is my question:

If scholars in Korean academic circles and the director of the Dokdo Museum agree that the Usando on the maps are Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of “Jukdo, not Dokdo,” then how are Japanese claims and mine forced? And where is the scheming?

By the way, I am the one who blew up the maps and sent the selected portions to the Japanese newspaper–not to hide anything but–to show the maps close enough so that the writing on them could be easily read. Showing the full maps would have hidden the details, which is what many Korean Web sites on Dokdo seem to be doing. Also, if the map showing haejang bamboo was so well known among Korean scholars, then why couldn’t I find that map on any Korean Dokdo Web sites? That makes me suspect that it is the Korean Web sites that are trying to hide the facts and “force their claims.”

Here are the old Korean maps that I sent to the Japanese newspaper:

The above map is from the “Yeojido,” which is believed to have been made in the late 1700s. The map shows a red line drawn from Uljin, on the Korean mainland, to Ulleungdo and says that it was “two days from Uljin with a fair winds.” Since there was no red line drawn to Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of Usando, we can assume that the neighboring island was Jukdo, not Dokdo, since Dokdo would have required, at least, another day’s travel time and a red line indicating that. Jukdo would not have required a red line since it is only 2.2 kilometers off of Ulleungdo’s east shore.

The above map is from the “Cheonggudo” (1834) and shows Usan (于山) as a neighboring island of Ulleungdo, about four kilometers off its east shore. We know that it was about four kilometers because the grid markers along the edge of the map represent distances of ten ri. One Korean ri was equal to 400 meters, which means that ten ri would have been 4,000 meters (four kilometers). The map shows Usan (于山) at about one grid space, or less, from Ulleungdo. That means that Usando was almost certainly Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of Jukdo, which is about 2.2 kilometers off Ulleungdo’s east shore.

The above map is the “Ulleungdo Dohyeong,” which is stored in Seoul National University’s Gyujanggak museum. Though Gyujanggak’s Web site says the date of the map is unknown, some Korean scholars and others say it was made in 1711. The map shows “Usando” off Ulleungdo’s east shore. On the island is written “fields of haejang bamboo” (海長竹田), which means that the Usando on the map could not have been Dokdo since Dokdo does not have the soil needed to grow haejang bamboo.

The above map is corroborated by an old Korean document that describes a 1694 inspection of Ulleungdo. Called Ulleungdo Sajeok, the document says that Ulleungdo had a small neighboring island two kilometers to the east that was covered in haejang bamboo. Here is the exact wording and my translation:

東方五里許有一小島不甚高大海長竹叢生於一面

There is a small island about five ri (two kilometers) to the east that is not very high and not very big and has thickly growing haejang bamboo on one side.”

The small island was almost certainly Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of Jukdo, which is about 2.2 kilometers off Ulleungdo’s east shore.

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, 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

The Japanese newspaper, “San-in Chuo Shimpo,” has posted a new article concerning Usando and haejang bamboo. Here is the link to the article:

�??�??�?��’?�??Ś+�?’�??�’?�?’�”�?’�’?�??�-T�T?Ɂ’

The article mentions the 1694 inspection of Ulleungdo talked about in the Ulleungdo Sajeok, of which a file copy was recently provided to us by myCoree, a fairly frequent commenter on this blog. The pdf file copy of the Korean document can be found here: Ulleungdo Sajeok

I cannot read the Japanese article, but I assume it is making the logical connection between the 1711? Korea map posted below, which shows an island off Ulleungdo’s east shore labeled��%?Ƀ’�??�++�? �ޞ���’?�’��(”the so-called Usando, fields of haejang bamboo”), and the�1694 Korean inspection report, which talks about a small�island two kilometers off of Ulleungdo’s east shore that is covered with haejang bamboo (�?+�-?�?’ʼ?ɳ+�?%ģ?Ŝ?�?ģ?�’?�’?�?�ޞ���’?�??�’?�-?ģ?�??).

The map and the report seem to corroborate each other. In other words, the map gives us the name of the island�that had fields of haejang bamboo off Ulleungdo’s east shore, and the 1694 report gives us the distance to the island (2 kilometers) off of Ulleungdo’s east shore�that had�fields of haejang bamboo. Together they essentially tell us that Usando was a�small�island two kilometers off Ulleungdo’s east shore and was covered in haejang bamboo. In other words, Usando was Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of Jukdo, which is about 2.2 kilometers off Ulleungdo’s east shore, not Dokdo (Liancourt Rocks), which is essentially two large rocks that are 92 kilometers southeast of Ulleungdo and do not have the soil to grow bamboo. Korean historians claim that “Usando” was the old name for “Dokdo” (Liancourt Rocks), but the 1694 report and the 1711? map, used together,�seem to refute that claim.

Update: Thanks to two Occidentalism commenters, Infimum and Pacifist, here is a rough translation of the above Japanese article:

Concerning Japan’s and Korea’s competing territorial claims on Takeshima (Korean name: Dokdo), Takashi Sugihara, vice-chairman of the�Takeshima Dispute Research Committee, has found a Korean historical record that�supports the assertion made by Mr. Gerry Bevers, an American English teacher in Korea, that old maps debunk Korea’s claim on the island.

The record is called �’?�T��?�?’�?? (Ulleungdo Sajeok) and was written in 1694 by�an official sent by the Chosun dynasty to survey Ulleungdo, which is an island 92 kilometers�away�from Takeshima.�The record�says, �??There is a small island five ri to the�east that is not so high and not so big that is covered with�haejang bamboo.”

One�Chosun�ri was equivalent to 400 meters, so five ri was two kilometers. The small island corresponds with the location of Jukdo, which is located�two kilometeres�east of Ulleungdo,�where we learn that haejang bamboo grew.

Mr. Bevers, who�studies the�Takeshima issue, found an old map in Seoul National University’s Gyujanggak museum that shows “Usando” (an old Korean name for Dokdo) and “fields of haejang bamboo”�written on a small island east of Ulleungdo. He supported Japan’s claim by pointing out�that the�island�was not Takeshima because�Takeshima�is a rock formation without bamboo.

Vice chairman Sugihara said, �??There is no doubt that the small island Mr. Bevers indicated�was Jukdo, as well. Through the investigation, the Chosun dynasty grasped the geography of Ulleungdo�quite accurately, and it is apparent that the island called Usando had bamboo on its surface, which means that Usando was not Takeshima.”

A Korean historical study foundation refuted our article that introduced the study results by Mr. Bevers by�saying, �??The map was made only by hearsay,�?? and denied the reliablity of the map. On his Web site, Mr. Bevers refuted the group’s claim by saying that�they were just trying to evade the issue.

My post on the Korea history group that deputed the accuracy of the map can be found with the�following link:

“Korean History Group Responds to Japanese Article on Usando”

Also, here is a link to Toron Talker, who also writes (in Japanese)�about the 1694 report and the 1711? map:

http://toron.pepper.jp/jp/take/tizu/18c-usan.html�

Here�is the section of the 1711? Korean map that shows the small island off of Ulleungdo’s east coast that is labeled with “the so-called Usando, fields of haejang bamboo”:

Steve Barber, who is also known as Toadface, Frogmouth, Wedgie, and possibly other names, and who manages a Web site at www.Dokdo-Takeshima.com, wrote the following:

Kanganese, don’t lump me together with other Koreans on the Dokdo issue. I have done my studies on this subject on my own. My only connection with Koreans on this is for gathering maps and documents. Unlike Ponta and Pacifist I’m not an errand-boy for my local political organization such as Shimane Prefecture. I’m not Korean nor am I a part of a political movement like Ponta.

The following is an August 31, 2006 letter from Steve Barber (Toadface) to a Mr. Cho, who appears to have been a member or who has an association with members of the anti-Japanese Web site, Killzap.cafe:

—–Original Message—–
From: steve barber [mailto:maemi30@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 1:01 AM
To: spar@paran.com
Subject: RE: Hanmaumy

Dr Mr Cho:

I went onto Hanmaumy’s website and just by the visual images I saw I can say his website is the best I’ve ever seen !! I’m very impressed.

The problem is that it is all in Korean language. Koreans already believe Dokdo is Korean land so Hanmaumy is in a sense wasting his time. We must get this valuable information out to the global community. If the Dokdo issue ever goes to the ICJ it is absolutely necessary that all of the related information be available to the public in English.

Mr Cho I must stress these days there are more Japanese working with foreigners promoting Takeshima is Japanese and they are doing it in English while working with idiots like Gerry Bevers. Like after WW2 Korea isn’t getting its message out there about Dokdo.

That being said, Mr Lovmo’s site is up and running and I’ve been working on my own to try to gather information and translate it but to be honest my lack of ability in Korean language makes it impossible to gather images on some of these Korean National Archives Websites because they are totally in Korean.

We should use Mr Lovmo’s site because it is already quite popular and it has the greatest amount of exposure on the English/Foreign Internet.

Please me must work together to get the message out there. I will do my best. In addtion please tell Hanmaumy I am going to gather images from his website and translate as well as I can for Mark.

I would love to meet both of you someday.

Yours Truly:
Steve

Link to my post on Mr. Barber’s letter.

So, Toadface, your “only connection with Koreans on this is for gathering maps and documents”? No other connection? By the way, Toadface, could you get me a cup of coffee?