From: seo@capone.ccsm.uiuc.edu (Jong-Wook Seo)
Subject: Re: Sea of East, Korea, Japan.
Organization: Microelectronics Lab - Univ. of Illinios
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 04:32:21 GMT

Since I haven't gotten one of the articles from Mr/Ms Yuji "Xavier" Komatsu, 
I would answer to the questions quoted in the other articles.
I hope I am not missing anything from his article.
I mean, I am not leaving anything not mentioned purposely.

In article <1992Nov6.174242.17046@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>
>>In article <Bx7v42.711@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
>>seo@capone.ccsm.uiuc.edu (Jong-Wook Seo) writes:
>
>>A map has been found lately showing what the truth is.
>>That is a map which was published by professor Antonio Jata in 1777 
under 
>>the sponsorship of the Venetian Senate in Italy.
>> ......
>
>I've investigated about it since I read your article. I mainly refered
>to `Great Soviet Encyclopedia, a translation of the 3rd edition,
>Macmilant Inc., New York.' The library of our university has it. Maybe
>your university has too.
You can see the map in a Korean newspaper.
Choon-Ang-Il-Bo on September 9 (The date might be different by one or two 
days depending on the area.) or Korea Times around that day.
If you have any difficulties to find it, please let me know.
I'll send you a copy of it.

From another article, <1992Nov10.151130.6630@kei.is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp>, 
I got :
> How precise is the map you mentioned ?  The coastlines of Korea
> Peninsula and Japan Islands are correct ?  
Absolutely!
It is a very precise map not like the typical old maps around those days.
You may see it in the news papers mentioned above.
(You don't need to read it in Korean.
Just feel free to see it.)
If you want more examples, please call Choon-Ang-Il-Bo or Korean Naval 
Academy.
I think they have more.
(They don't even report them.
Instead, they just say 'evidences are keep coming.')

>Did professor Antonio Jata visit and survey `The Sea' by himself ?
I don't know about it.
However, I am sure he didn't.
I mean, I think he made the map based on knowledge available at that time.



In article <1992Nov10.151130.6630@kei.is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp>, 
hito@is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp (OMORI Naohito) writes :

>If people are talking from the historical point of view, I think we had
>better go back to the map printed and published in 1602 by Matteo Ricci,
>a Jesuit missionary, who had been in China since 1592.
>In that map, he clearly called the sea "Nihonkai(Japan sea)".
>(He described the map in Chinese.)
>And, as for other maps after Matteo Ricci, I can talk about some of them
>from the book, "OLD WORLD MAPS: AKIOKA COLLECTION" (Kawadeshobo, >1988).
>they call the sea:
>  "MER DU JAPON", J.B.Nolin (in "L'ASIE"), 1704
>  "MARE JAPONICUM OCCIDENTALE", Homann, 1720?
>  "JAPANISCHEN MEER", A.L. von Krusenstern, 1815
>  ...
>  "Meerbusen(?) von Korea"(sorry, hard to recognize), Schneider, 1793
>yes, there is a map in which the sea is called after Korea, though this
>case looks rather exceptional (I mean, in European world) to me.
Could you send me copies of them.
I'll pay for it.

>So,

>seo@capone.ccsm.uiuc.edu (Jong-Wook Seo) writes:

>> As far as I remember, Japan changed the name to 'Sea of Japan' after 
the 
>> war against Russia.
>> (Actually, I am not sure exactly when they did.
>> But, it is around that time.)
...
>> Let me tell you something.
>> 
>> Before the 19th century, it had been called 'Sea of Korea" in the world.
>> As you mentioned, you, the Japanese people, didn't have any proper name 
>> for it.
>> But, we had, and we have cared it much.
>> So, we have tried to bring the original name back to the sea.
...
>> The sea has had the name "Sea of Korea" NOT because it has been Korean 
>> territory, but because the name had been naturally accepted and widely 
used.
>> It is the way how things are called with their names.
>> The problem is that the name was 'forced' to be changed.

>I'm getting quite skeptical about these points of view.
>Can I ask you where you got these ideas?
Haven't you learned anything about what the Japanese government did 
between 1905 and 1910 to make the world to believe that Korea belongs to 
Japan?
I hope you have learned it in your high school.
If you haven't, please ask anybody majoring history in your university.

>And, furthermore,
>> However, whenever we ask international organizations to correct it, the 
>> Japanese government interrupts it.
>This sounds (to me) our government violates legal rights of our
>neighbors, which makes me feel a little uneasy.  Would you also show us
>more detailed informations(when/where/how) about this?
It is NOT a matter of legal right or violation of it.
It is a matter of approach.
Please do not delete the sentence following.
I said 
         "They claimed that the sea used to be called 'Sea of Japan.'."
Do you really want to know 'when/where/how'?
In September each year (latest one is in 1992)/United Nations/Saying that 
"The sea used to be called 'Sea of Japan.'."

This year, Korean governments(? from the South and the North) officially 
asked UN(Unfortunately, I don't remember exactly which organization it is. 
If you want, I can find it out.) to correct it.
Of course, they turned-in supporting materials because you don't want to 
accept what the Korean and any other Asian communities have called it.
(The latest posting from Yuji Komatsu clearly shows your typical 
viewpoint, I guess.
He said :
        "In about 18th or 19th century, which country, beside Korea or 
         Japan, had a biggest interest about `The Sea'? The answer is Russia.
         They knew how to navigate and had some technologies of survey. 
         They DID name or call `The Sea' `Sea of Japan'. Perhaps Chinese 
         might call `The Sea' `Sea of Korea', but by some reasons Russians 
         calling seems to have been accepted internationally."
(I don't want to argue about why he, maybe many of you, completely 
neglects how Chinese called it.))
So, let's see what is going to happen.

>(Note that I don't mean "Sea of Japan" is the unique and legitimate name
>for the sea. 
Exactly same thing to me.
I am not saying that 'Sea of Korea' is the only name for the sea.

>I just want to tell you I cannot agree with you when you
>say "Before the 19th century, it had been called 'Sea of Korea" in the
>world".)
Can not agree about what in that sentence?
Of course, I am NOT saying that 'Sea of Japan' has never been used.
Again, I am talking about the approach and principle.

>By the way,

>>In article <1992Nov7.174144.9467@tc.cornell.edu>
>>jfe@alchemy.tn.cornell.edu (Brian Chung) writes:

>>          Hm, I don't agree with that analogy.  Your analogy seems to 
apply
>> that Japanese people consider the East Sea as their own.  Do they?  As 
long
>> as Dok-do belongs to Korea, Japanese government can scream and howl all 
they
>> want, but they are bound by the Law of the Seas to keep their hands to
>> themselves.  A more correct analogy would be:  You tapped into my bank
>I've been wondering what Koreans are doing on that island which, our
>government claims, belongs to us. (We call it "Takeshima", anyway.)
>Maybe now is the time to ask somebody about this.
Ridiculous!
You are asking every neighboring countries - Korea, China, and Russia - 
to return the islands belong to them to you.
Amazing!

>Omori Naohito



Jong-Wook Seo
Newsgroups: soc.culture.korean