Japan is simply a lot easier to deal with and they don’t get angry about everything. They simply have more civility when it comes to getting their point across, which is why the west deals well with them.

Japan is simply a lot easier to deal with and they don’t get angry about everything. They simply have more civility when it comes to getting their point across, which is why the west deals well with them.

Did you actually watch the Japanese-produced video? What do you think of the map studies they cite?

All of the aforementioned maps prove that the East Sea was widely known as the “Sea of Korea” during the 17th and 18th centuries.

However, since the East Sea was referred to as the “Sea of Japan” in La Perouse’s map of 1797, maps produced thereafter in Europe began to use the term “Sea of Japan” with greater frequency. However, both “Sea of Korea” and “Sea of Japan” co-existed until the first half of the 19th century. It is difficult to find out how “Sea of Japan” replaced “Sea of Korea” in the later half of the 19th century because a review of all existing ancient maps has not been completed. However, it is believed that such a replacement was a reflection of the easier availability of information about Japan than Korea as Japan’s military power had expanded and the recognition of Japan had increased in the international community.

The evidence in this argument is incredibly weak and does not hold up against the studies of French, American, and British antique map collections conducted by Japanese scholars. That Korean page seems to ignore the fact that over 90% of western maps were using the term “Sea of Japan” well before Japan opened to the world and increased its military power.

In the early 20th century while Korea was under the colonial rule of Japan, the name East Sea was eradicated from the maps of world. The eradication of references to the East Sea started when a resolution was adopted at the first Conference of the International Hydrographic Organization t establish the limits of oceans and seas and attach appropriate local names for safe navigation. A Japanese delegation attended this conference, but there was no Korean delegation. According to the resolution, the East Sea was registered by Japan as the “Sea of Japan” in 1923. No other member country raised any objection. Consequently, the 1929 Monaco Conference adopted a resolution to publish Special Publication No.23 entitled The Limits of Oceans and Seas, which was based on data collected previously, and to make this publication an internationally accepted document. Thereafter, the mapmakers of the world used the standardized names of places based on this publication and the name “East Sea” lost its place on world maps.

Even if Korea had not been under Japanese colonial domination during the 1929 Monaco Conference, what makes you think that a free Korea could have forced all the major western powers, which had been using the name “Sea of Japan” [in accordance with geographical naming conventions commonly used in Europe] since the early 19th century, to change their maps to say “East Sea” or “Korea Sea”?

If you actually believe the link you posted somehow refutes the argument the Japanese have presented, you are the one who should “grow up” out of a narrow-minded worldview.

Did you actually watch the Japanese-produced video? What do you think of the map studies they cite?

All of the aforementioned maps prove that the East Sea was widely known as the “Sea of Korea” during the 17th and 18th centuries.

However, since the East Sea was referred to as the “Sea of Japan” in La Perouse’s map of 1797, maps produced thereafter in Europe began to use the term “Sea of Japan” with greater frequency. However, both “Sea of Korea” and “Sea of Japan” co-existed until the first half of the 19th century. It is difficult to find out how “Sea of Japan” replaced “Sea of Korea” in the later half of the 19th century because a review of all existing ancient maps has not been completed. However, it is believed that such a replacement was a reflection of the easier availability of information about Japan than Korea as Japan’s military power had expanded and the recognition of Japan had increased in the international community.

The evidence in this argument is incredibly weak and does not hold up against the studies of French, American, and British antique map collections conducted by Japanese scholars. That Korean page seems to ignore the fact that over 90% of western maps were using the term “Sea of Japan” well before Japan opened to the world and increased its military power.

In the early 20th century while Korea was under the colonial rule of Japan, the name East Sea was eradicated from the maps of world. The eradication of references to the East Sea started when a resolution was adopted at the first Conference of the International Hydrographic Organization t establish the limits of oceans and seas and attach appropriate local names for safe navigation. A Japanese delegation attended this conference, but there was no Korean delegation. According to the resolution, the East Sea was registered by Japan as the “Sea of Japan” in 1923. No other member country raised any objection. Consequently, the 1929 Monaco Conference adopted a resolution to publish Special Publication No.23 entitled The Limits of Oceans and Seas, which was based on data collected previously, and to make this publication an internationally accepted document. Thereafter, the mapmakers of the world used the standardized names of places based on this publication and the name “East Sea” lost its place on world maps.

Even if Korea had not been under Japanese colonial domination during the 1929 Monaco Conference, what makes you think that a free Korea could have forced all the major western powers, which had been using the name “Sea of Japan” [in accordance with geographical naming conventions commonly used in Europe] since the early 19th century, to change their maps to say “East Sea” or “Korea Sea”?

If you actually believe the link you posted somehow refutes the argument the Japanese have presented, you are the one who should “grow up” out of a narrow-minded worldview.

http://www.prkorea.com/english/eastsea.html

http://www.prkorea.com/english/eastsea.html

–_– It seems this blog is just turning into another Occidentalism. Boo on that.

Eh? Whose fault is it that Korea keeps providing so much absurdist raw material to write about? You might as well condemn The Marmot’s Hole while you’re at it, ’cause these things get written about at least as often there.

�_� It seems this blog is just turning into another Occidentalism. Boo on that.

Eh? Whose fault is it that Korea keeps providing so much absurdist raw material to write about? You might as well condemn The Marmot’s Hole while you’re at it, ’cause these things get written about at least as often there.