On Mon, 20 Apr 1998, Henny Savenije wrote:
> > doubt if they are true. Somewhere I even found a website saying that the Dutch brought Protestantism to Korea, which I seriously doubt, reading Hamel's story and Ledyards story.
> Yes, who would have translated the bible? I think (though I know zilch) the history of Protestanism in Korea is quite well known and traceable....
>Yours,
>Andrew
>p.s. sorry for the short message; in a hurry

On Sat, 18 Apr 1998, Henny Savenije wrote:
> >  > >  That Welteree had taught the Chosôn military how to make modern > >  cannon and muskets (are there any examples left?)
> > Probably more in Holland then anywhere else. I know that there are many things here in Holland brought here by von Sybold, a naturalized German in service of the Dutch government.

I suppose this was a vague question, and it produced a vague answer. I was wondering if there were any of the weapons that Welteree(sp?) had made in Chosôn still extant...
Best wishes,
Andrew

Dear All,
Today I've been to the Maritime Museum in Amsterdam and I can assure you that Wisten's list (I've been reading parts of the book) is as stated, without discussion. I've also read Frits Vos's Article about the subject and I can add, an excellent article, (better than mine) for anyone interested I can make a scan (as in this email) and send it as plain text, it is a good translation of the original text and I am planning to add it to my homepage as well, the notes are very useful to look up references and it's larded with Chinese characters to explain things. Interested people may also download that from my website, but it will take a few weeks before I will be able to do so.
Sincerely
Henny
>At 08:38 7-4-98 +0900, Anthony wrote: >>On Mon, 6 Apr 1998 WALRAVEN@rullet.leidenuniv.nl wrote: >> >>> The complete list of Korean words in Witsen's book can be found in an >>> article by Frits Vos published in Vol. 50 of the Transactions of the >>> Royal Asiatic Society, Korea Branch (1975). >>> >>> Boudewijn Walraven


On Wed, 22 Apr 1998, Henny Savenije wrote:
> > Yes, who would have translated the bible? I think (though I know zilch) the history of Protestanism in Korea is quite well known and traceable....
> > As far as I know it started with some books and/or Bibles some Buddhist monks took with them from China , and maybe even some crown princes were influenced by some Jesuits, actually Gari Ledyard explains that excellently in his:"the Dutch come to Korea" worth reading. As far as I know Korea is the only country in the world that was partly Christianized before any missionaries ever went there.
> Yes,
but that was Catholicism, not Protestantism. Protestantism, I think, came to Chosôn in the last years of the 19th century as US, i think, missionaries began to go there, and Korean converts began to return home to preach...
Yours,
Andrew

On Wed, 22 Apr 1998, Henny Savenije wrote:
> thought. I wonder why you're so interested in the arms "thing".
> >Dear Henny 

  Well, appart from the interest in all things military, I am currently researching (i.e. trying to translate) an 18th century military manual. So, it is of interest to know what/if there is any influence from these early travellers. So far, though, I've been able to trace everything to Chinese or Japanese sources. So, it seems that our travellers were a flash-in-the-pan, or as you put it, one-eyed men in the land of the blind. If they did teach the Chosôn military any techniques, they seem to have been forgotten, not recorded in this manual, or recorded but using Chinese style names....
Yours,
Andrew

Dear Henny,
On Sun, 26 Apr 1998, Henny Savenije wrote:
> At 22:42 25-4-98 +0100, you wrote:
> > > > > > but that was Catholicism, not Protestantism. Protestantism, I think, came to Chosôn in the last years of the 19th century as US, i think, missionaries began to go there, and Korean converts began to return home to preach...
> > There's a flaw in your thinking here I guess,  missionaries went there and converts returned home ? Meaning they went to America first or not ??
Ah, sorry. Another unclear sentence. The missionaries were going from the US to Korea. Then, later, Kns went to America and some converted to Protestantism (or were already Protestants in Korea) and became ministers in the US and then returned home. I think another poster suggested some reading (which I haven't done).
Yours,
Andrew

Dear Henny,
  Thanks for the images. Somehow, the original set were about half size of the second set.. The second set decompressed ok.
Thanks a lot.
YOu asked why it was so difficult to join the mailing list. I'm not sure if anyone answered (perhaps you only said it to me). The reason why you can't find details anywhere is because it is supposed to be an academic list only for those currently involved in academia. The list owners don't want it to become a talking shop about Korea. There are other places for that...
The list is, therefore, a place to exchange technical information, and perhaps more importantly, to ask and recieve answers on where to find information...
Yours,
Andrew

Hi all,
Jan went to Cheju to checkthe exact spot for the shipwreck:

http://janboonstra.com/hamel/cheju.htm
Later he added a personal note to me:... Hamel might be writing about another place then TaejOng, because TaejOng is more than 50 km. from Cheju-shi. And according to Hamel they left the next day from TaejOng to Cheju-shi. They left with the arrival of the day and arrived in the late afternoon. So the next thing he (and maybe other people as well, for Jan is leaving tomorrow morning early for Namibia) that there might be other places where they landed. Anyhow it's worth visiting the site, because he has a part of the original manuscript over there as well. (I made the scan however ;-) )
My Frits Vos story is in the making, you might take a look how far I am.
Take a look at

http://www.vos.henny-savenije.pe.kr/ and for the word list:
http://www.vos.henny-savenije.pe.kr/eibok_1.htm
It's far from finished, because it takes a lot of time to make the Korean characters, but little by little they will be there.
Cheers

Dear list
After an extensive discussion Jan and I decided that the source of the name Quelpaert might be of Japanese origin. The only thing we don't know what the Japanese called Cheju-do, before it was exchanged for Tsushima . It was called Tamla in the Shilla and Koryo period. Tsushima was called Tymatte by the Koreans, so I guessed there would be a Japanese equivalent for Cheju-do as well. Which has (maybe via the Portuguese come to be known to the Dutch. They on there turn made something out of it, which they could spell and understand. Is there anyone, who can give me the answer to this intriguing question?
Sincerely
-------
Henny  (Lee Hae Kang)
Feel free to visit http://www.henny-savenije.pe.kr/index2.htm and you can feel the thrill about the adventures of Hamel in Korea (1653-1666)

I am not saying you are wrong and I know nothing about this. However, (you knew there was a "however" coming, didn't you?) there must be more behind your reasoning than this. After all, we could extend that logic and say that "Mary's Alley" must be based on the Japanese name for Insa-dong.  Could Quelpaert be a latin name or the name of a girlfriend at home? 
Henny Savenije wrote:
> > Dear list
> > After an extensive discussion Jan and I decided that the source of the name Quelpaert might be of Japanese origin. The only thing we don't know what the Japanese called Cheju-do, before it was exchanged for Tsushima. It was called Tamla in the Shilla and Koryo period. Tsushima was called Tymatte by the Koreans, so I guessed there would be a Japanese equivalent for Cheju-do as well. Which has (maybe via the Portuguese come to be known to the Dutch. They on there turn made something out of it, which they could spell and understand. Is there anyone, who can give me the answer to this intriguing question? Sincerely
> > -------
> > Henny  (Lee Hae Kang)
> > Feel free to visit > http://www.henny-savenije.pe.kr/index2.htm and you can feel the thrill about the adventures of Hamel in Korea (1653-1666)

27.5.98
Dear Ms. Savenije, With regard to the origin of the term 'Quelpaert ' the explanation which I have always heard from Korean friends was that it came from a rendering of the Korean phrase 'kyul pat' (orange grove).  I have never looked into the historicity of this, but makes sense.
If you haven't already done so, see what the 'Minjok munhwa paekkwa sajon' has to say on the subject.
Best wishes, James H. Grayson

Dear James,
First thanks for the answer.
>Dear Ms. Savenije,
>With regard to the origin of the term 'Quelpaert' the explanation which I have always heard from Korean friends was that it came from a rendering of the Korean phrase 'kyul pat' (orange grove).  I have never looked into the historicity of this, but makes sense.
Well the problem with this is, that Hamel talks about Quelpaert the minute they are there, he writes. ". In the meantime our coxswain took the latitude and determined that we were at Quelpaert's island, at 33 degrees and 32 minutes latitude." Later "As said, this island which is called Quelpaert by us and Cheju by the Koreans, lies on 33 degrees 32 minutes latitude, twelve to thirteen miles south from the south point of the mainland of Korea." Quelpaert might be derived from Portuguese Quel parte, "which part" this makes also sense, but not likely, because I don't think anyone would call it like that. Quelpaert could also mean "kwelpaard" :an agonizing horse, or "kwel" means also seep, seepage and torture and tormenting and salt marsh, but how does the paert (horse ) come in. I could think of quite a few sensible explanations. But the "Heeren 17" had to agree with a name the Dutch sailors gave to a place, and there is no such document. On top of that, tradition shows also that other names were given, citynames of Holland, well known persons and the like (Harlem =Haarlem, Brooklyn=Breukelen, Nassau (after Dutch royalty) Mauritius (after one of the Dutch princes), Batavia (the romans wrote about the Batavians as the people living here, and so on). Still Hamel emphasizes, "which is called Quelpaert by us and Cheju by the Koreans". So it basically means that someone else before them knew about the existence of the Island, since there were Dutchmen living on Deshima , it seems the most reasonable guess that the Dutch learned from the Japanese of the existence of the Island and gave it a similar sounding name. (think for instance of Manhattan, another tradition, if something has a name, given by the  locals, use the same name) > >If you haven't already done so, see what the 'Minjok munhwa paekkwa >sajon' has to say on the subject.
I didn't do that yet, but it is a very good tip, as soon as I have the chance I will, still I would like to know how the Japanese called it, do you think that is mentioned over there? > >Best wishes,
Thanks again for the good tip.
Sincerely,

Hello,
In order to find possible locations where Hendrik Hamel and 35 other crew of the "Sperwer" shipwrecked in 1653, I am now trying to find out if the village of Taejong on the south west coast of Cheju-do really is the same as "tae chung" which Hamel reports in his journal. I have doubts about this, since the crew walked to Cheju-city in one day from there. This is a long distance, considering that they walked along the coast and that several were wounded.
Could there be any other village on Cheju-do of some importance in the 17th century which could be the "tae chung" where Hamel writes about? Also, it would be a help to know about the administrative division of the island and the local administrative centres in that time. Is there anybody who can help me?
For those who are interested, I made a website about this topic: http://lapulapu.cebu.pworld.net.ph/user/jdnham/hamel/cheju.htm
-- Jan Boonstra http://janboonstra.com/

On Tue, 26 May 1998, Henny Savenije wrote:
> The only thing we don't know what the Japanese called Cheju-do, before it was exchanged for Tsushima. It was called Tamla in the Shilla and Koryo period.
Exchanged for Tsushima? I've never heard such a claim before. According to what I've read of its history, during the Three Kingdoms period Cheju was a Paekche _tam-ro_ or _tamoro_ ('sub-kingdom' and most likely the origin of the such names used for Cheju-do as T'amna and Tamora) and when Paekche fell to Shilla and Tang, became a _sokkuk_ (a tributary state of sorts) of Shilla under King Munmu. Later it was part of Koryo. Why should there have ever been any sort of "exchange"?
Some Korean scholars, such as Kim S^ong-ho, also claim Paekche connections for Tsushima, pointing out that the characters it's written with in Korean could have be read _tam<arae-a>r-sy^om_ (or even _tam<area-a>r-sy^oma_) in the _idu_ fashion, associating the name, therefore, with _tam-ro_. For centuries, Tsushima had an almost independent status as a tiny "kingdom of pirates," prompting Sejong to attack the place to try to overcome this problem. In any case, a Korean family named S^o claimed Tsushima as its own fief from sometime in the 12th century till the mid-19th century (one book I checked says 1868).
> Tsushima was called Tymatte by the Koreans,... Where does the spelling _Tymatte_ come from? And how is it supposed to be pronounced?
Regards, Gary Rector

Dear Richard et al:
Thanks for the answer, though Quelpart seems a pretty odd given name to me, I can check that in one of Witsen's books. Witsen was also famous in his days for his knowledge of ships. It'll take a while before I can do that, but I will come back to this.
Henny

>Dear Henny et al:
> >What the Japanese might have called Chejudo back in Hamel's time is not something I can tell you, although today it goes by the name "Saishudo" (imagine macrons over the u and o), which is simply the Japanese reading of the Hanja (Kanji) for the name. >
>As for Quelpart, I quote to you from a relatively recent English translation of Hermann Lautensach's _Korea: A Geography Based Upon the Author's Travels and Literature_ (originally published in 1945, translation 1988 by Catherine and Eckart Dege), p. 374: "B. Hoetink has demonstrated astutely that the island [Chejudo] was probably sighted again in 1642 by the Dutch "quelpart" _de Brack _.  The Dutch word quelpart referred to a type of sailing ship at the time, and the Dutch named the island after it."
> >The reference Lautensach gives is, of course, Hoetink's  1920 edition of Hamel's account.
> >So, if someone has access to a 17th century Dutch maritime dictionary, can they look this up? The other alternative is to look for a copy of the report written by the skipper of the _de Brack_, presumably to the VOC, to >see if some other explanation is given there.
> >--Richard Miller
>--University of Wisconsin
>Henny  (Lee Hae Kang)
Feel free to visit http://www.henny-savenije.pe.kr/index2.htm and you can feel the thrill about the adventures of Hamel in Korea (1653-1666)

Dear Gary et al;
Tymatte would have been pronounced as Teematte; since Hamel wrote it like Tymatte, I would assume that the double t was pronounced like that as well. Where the name comes from is a question I can't answer, might be ChOlla dialect?
Concerning the exchange I quote van Hove: " Between 1592 and 1598 the Hideyoshi invasions took place and in 1636 the Manchu's invaded the country. Hideyoshi was a Japanese farmer's son who made it to general. In 1590 he united Japan. After that he decided to conquer Korea. He led two invasions into that country. Although that didn't lead to the wanted result, it resulted in huge destructions. Almost all the potters were kidnapped to Japan, because of that the ceramical art in Japan gained to a high level while in Korea this art went downhill. At the peace treaty in 1598 the Koreans had to give the island of Tsushima to the Japanese. In exchange they received however the island of Cheju, which was called Quelpaert by the Dutchmen. Furthermore the Koreans had  to condone that the Japanese established a trade post at Tongnae, in the south near the city of Pusan . "
Thanks for the extensive answer and efforts to help me.
Henny

I find the discussion of Tsushima's status very interesting. Thank you Mr. Savenije and Prof. Rector for commenting on its history. There are a few things about its history as seen from Korea that deserve some elaboration.
1) The only mention of Tsushima in the _Samguk Sagi_ (Book 3 of the Silla pongi, SilsOng 7, month 3) reads (in rough translation): `In the second month of the seventh year of [King] SilsOng (408), the king heard that the Wae had established an installation on Tsushima and were laying in weaponry and supplies in a plot to invade our [country].' This particular passage has figured rather prominently in historical debates over whether the Wae were from a northern Kyuushuu kingdom or from a powerful kingdom located in the Kinki region of Japan.  Inoue Hideo argues that the name Tsushima could have been added to the passage in later centuries, so that Kim Pu-sik's transmission could be a corrupted tradition.
2) There are no entries about Tsushima in the _Samguk Yusa_.
3) A cursory survey of entries concerning Tsushima in the _KoryOsa_ and the _ChUngbo MunhOn Pigo_ indicates no entries claiming possession.
4) The oft-repeated belief that Tsushima was Korean territory in antiquity seems to be an idea which originated during the Chosôn period.  We see what may be the origin of the idea in the _Sejong Sillok_, where T'aejong speaks on the eve of the attack on Tsushima in 1419, mounted during Sejong's reign, to suppress piracy: `...Tsushima is an island and originally it was our land.  Merely because it was cut off and secluded, confined and squalid, did we allow the Wae bastards to set themselves up there, but they are scheming curs and thieving rats with plots to steal [from us].' (again, a rough translation) (Sejong Sillok, 1419 [wOnnyOn], month 6, im'o day)
5) Although there is no entry in the _Sejong Sillok Chiriji_ for Tsushima, T'aejong's opinion became orthodoxy and was repeated and elaborated upon in the _SinjUng Tongguk YOji SUngnam_, first compiled in 1481.  This statement is taken verbatim and inserted into the _Tongnaebu Upji_ for 1759, 1832, and 1871.  In rough translation, it reads: `A long time ago Tsushima was subordinate to Kyerim.  It is unknown when it was occupied by the Wae....'
6) The same statement appears almost verbatim in O Suk-kwon's (1525-1554) _P'aegwan Chapki_ and is repeated in the widely-read, late  eighteenth-century _YOllyOsil Kisul_.
7) In the later Chosôn period, this Korean belief was voiced often by Koreans to the Tsushima men in Tongnae at the Waegwan, much to the latter's consternation.
8) Finally, a curious item is to be found in the changes made in protocol following the Yanagawa Affair (1635).  The bakufu dictated that the term for Tsushima's tribute to Chosôn, `chinsang', was to be changed to 'pongjin'.  `Chinsang', according to the _KobOpjOn yongOjip_ and the _KomunhOn yongOye_,  described the act of offering local products from Korean provinces to the king and was a term customarily used in connection with local taxes.  'Pongjin', a term which meant the offering up of goods to the king or court, was used by Chosôn when sending tribute goods to China .  It appears that `chinsang' was used to refer to domestic matters, and `pongjin' was used for international matters.  Did the bakufu, in changing these terms, seek to clarify Tsushima's tribute to Korea as coming from a foreign territory, or in other words, to assert that Tsushima was a part of Japan?  Korean records cloud the matter.  The _ChUngjOng Kyorinji_ (1802) and the _Tongnaebu Saye_ (1868) use `pongjin' only in the passages referring to receptions for the *envoys* from Tsushima.  The *goods* that these envoys brought to offer to the Chosôn court are referred to as `chinsang'.  Was the envoy recognised as foreign while the goods he brought for tribute regarded as domestic?  By implication, was Tsushima's territory regarded as a part of Korea, while the people who lived there regarded as foreigners?  In the eyes of Chosôn Koreans, was Tsushima a Korean land under foreign occupation?
9) Kim SOng-ho's suggestion, as reported to us by Prof. Rector, is interesting and deserves investigation, but the only archaic Korean claim to Tsushima that I've been able to locate is in reference to Silla. I wonder if you could supply us with a citation for Kim SOng-ho's argument? Tsushima-han was abolished with all other han in the early years of the Meiji; I'm afraid I don't have the exact date to hand.  Possession of the Tongnae Waegwan seems to have been transferred to the central government by 1873, and the Waegwan itself became modern Japan's first foreign consulate as a result of the 1876 Treaty between Korea and Japan.
10) To my knowledge, no "exchange" of Cheju for Tsushima ever occurred, least of all at the time of the Imjin Waeran.
Thank you for raising these points.  To some of us, the identity of Tsushima is an intriguing question.  It is beyond any question that Tsushima was dependent on the Korean peninsula and deeply involved in its economy, but it also seems beyond question that Tsushima has been held within historical memory by Japanese-speaking people.
Regards, Jay Lewis

Jay Lewis is right about Tsushima, of course. It was no more Korean than those areas of north China that many nationalists are claiming for Korean history. The only possible argument for a Korean claim to Tsushima is that the So family (I had never heard that they were Korean. Where did you get that information, Gary?) allowed themselves to be called vassals of the Chosôn kings in order to serve as intermediaries between Chosôn and Tokugawa Japan, and to have privileged acess to trade with Chosôn.
It is possible that the Wa [wae] who occupied Tsushima were as much Korean as they were Japanese in the early centuries of recorded history, but that doesn't make Tsushima Korean anymore than it makes northern Kyushu Korean.
As for Cheju, I wonder how much actual control mainland Korean powers actually exerted over Cheju until the Mongol period. Just because a Korean government sources says that Cheju was under Korean control doesn't mean that it actually was. It is probable that Cheju in Paekche and Silla times was no more Korean than Korea was Chinese.
DON BAKER Department of Asian Studies, University of British Columbia Canada-Korea Business Council Chair in Korean Studies

Ha!  To say Jay Lewis is right about Tsushima is like saying Ted Wlliams was a pretty decent batter!
DM

Dear Cheju Scholars, As a former PC in Cheju, I was wondering if anyone has contacted scholars on Cheju?  I realize all wisdom comes from Seoul , but I do recall a number of very knowledgable people who might be able to answer some of your questions, certainly about place names. One scholar comes to mind, Mr. Chin Song-ki, who runs a small folk museum just outside of Cheju City. There are others. And of course there is the possibility that Cheju dialect played a part. Thus, linguists familiar with Cheju saturi might be helpful. Jim Shon

At 21:39 29-5-98 , David Richard McCann wrote: >Ha!  To say Jay Lewis is right about Tsushima is like saying Ted Wlliams >was a pretty decent batter! > > DM

Dear David at al.
I might be completely wrong and I don't know who Ted Williams was, but this sounds like an insult to me. I am not a Koreanologist (I know it's not the official term but I like the word) but I am a scientist and I am sure that in a scientific discussion this is an invalid argument.
If you have better arguments about the subject I would be pleased to know.
Sincerely
-------
Henny  (Lee Hae Kang)
Feel free to visit http://www.henny-savenije.pe.kr/index2.htm and you can feel the thrill about the adventures of Hamel in Korea (1653-1666)

Dear Don et al.
With the arguments Jay used, I would say he's right, I know too little about the subject and I am defending van Hove who died already. So I am not sure but I think Van Hove quoted from Takashi Hatoda, A History of Korea (1969). I think your argumentation is very interesting too. So I agree with you and Jim that it might be wise to ask the people Jim is referring to. I think Cheju-do's an Tsushima's historical documents might shed an interesting light on this discussion.
Sincerely
Henny

Dear Jay,

Thank you Jay for the very interesting contribution to this argument, I have no way to meet your arguments because I know too little about the subject but your arguments gave me a lot to ponder about. Actually I wrote already in another part of this thread that Van Hove probably used Takasi Hatoda as his reference and since he is Japanese (I presume) he might be reflecting the Japanese historical point of view. But it is something to dive into. I really think I have to revise my homepage with this issue.
I sincerely thank you for this information

Dear Jim,
Could you, or anybody else for that matter, provide me with the addresses of Cin Song-ki? I would be delighted to write him a letter and add his information as well to my homepage as share this with this group.
Thanks for the suggestions and names.
Sincerely
Henny
P.S. If you want to contact me off the list my email address is: postbus at henny-savenije.pe.kr

Dear List,
Today I heard another interesting possibility, which I was not aware of: a "Paert" is also the line on which the sailors stand hoisting the sails. So a Quelpaert might also refer to an agonizing rope!
Since there were no safety rules, I think quite a few of them might have fallen down from these things, landing on the decks several meters below.
Sincerely
Henny
BTW "Paert" is/was pronounced as "part" in French only the "t" was clearly pronounced as well, "Quel", as you might have guessed, as "Kwell", like in dwell. -------
Henny  (Lee Hae Kang)
Feel free to visit http://www.henny-savenije.pe.kr/index2.htm and you can feel the thrill about the adventures of Hamel in Korea (1653-1666)

Dear Jiwon,
Thanks for the correction, Sorry David, I was mistaken.
Sincerely
(What am I doing in the middle of the night replying email ;-)
Henny

While David McCann is perhaps guilty of assuming everyone on this list is familiar with the history of American baseball, his comparison of Jay Lewis with Ted Williams was nothing less than the highest of compliments.  (Ted Williams was arguably the greatest batter in the history of American Major League Baseball.)
    JS

It is most unlikely for the late Hatada Takashi to have said about the exchange of Chejudo with Tshushima.  He is a Japanese scholar who is well respected in both Japan and Korea for his scholarship as well as for his active works to promote genuine understanding and reconciliation between the two peoples.
Yong-ho Choe

Talking with my fellow-Brother Jean-Paul Buys over the weekend (the revised and much-improved edition of his translation of Hamel's Journal is now available from the Korean RAS) about the name Quelpaert , a few additional elements of information emerged that I want to share with the List. First, several years before Hoetink's edition was published, in 1917 an article was published in the Tydshrift of the Kon. Nederlandsch Aardrykskundig Genootschap (the Royal Dutch Geographical Society) 2nd series Volume 34 no. 6 by a certain Dr. J. De Hullu, with the title 'Iets over den naam Quelpaertseiland' (something about the name QuelpaertsIsland) in which he quite firmly asserts that the name comes from the kind of ship known as a Quelpaert, (a name which seems to disappear from currency after the mid-17th century, by the way) and in which he concludes that there is no obvious explanation as to why the Dutch applied that name (rather than the ship's name, for exampl) to the island. We know about the 1642 sighting of the island by the Dutch Quelpaert 'de Brack ' from which the name presumably dates, but we were puzzled by the text from Lautensach quoted by Richard C. Miller which says that the Cheju-do was 'probably sighted again in 1642' as if it had been certainly sighted before that by someone European. Could you clarify this for us? The boat De Brack was plying between Taiwan and Nagasaki, like many Dutch ships. Presumably they gave the name Quelpaerts Island to the island, which Hamel says was 'bij ons (who is 'we' here?) het Quelpaertseylandt genaemt'. The person with Hamel who seems first to have recognized the place when they got there was Hendrik Janse, the 'stuyrman' (Navigator) (on Hoetink page 9, Buys trans. page 5) who took a sighting and established the island's coordinates. Was Janse on the ship 'Patientie ' which may have seen the island in 1648? That could explain his familiarity with the name of the island. The 11th edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica says that it was Hamel's account which made Europeans at large aware of the existence of the island together with its mysterious Dutch name (although we note that the Dutch name is always Quelpaertseylandt, not Quelpaert on its own). Nothing very important, but let us at least recall J. De Hullu's name for a moment, as someone who thought about the question long before we did, and had the modesty to admit that he did not know the full answer. Brother Anthony Sogang University, Seoul

Dear Yong-Ho et al,
Thanks for the answer.
I think however that one doesn't exclude the other. If it's about historical documents then it's merely a matter of quoting and not about personal opinions, although one might omit certain information if it doesn't suit one's opinion. IF it's him who Van Hove quoted, I think it just proves the scholarship of Hatada Takashi, because he sticks to what he has seen. I think it might even fit in his efforts to promote genuine understanding and reconciliation.
Regards,

Dear Brother Anthony,
The reason that the term "probably sighted again in 1642" in the text from Lautensach quoted by Richard C. Miller seemed puzzling is that it was referring to the previous sentence, which he did not quote. It reads:
"Since the sailing route Formosa - Nagasaki passes in sight of the mighty island, it was known to the Portuguese in the 16th century, who called it Ilha dos Ladrones (Isle of Thieves). B. Hoetink has demonstrated... "
Sincerely, Katherine Dege

Prof. Dr. Eckart Dege Geographisches Institut der Universitaet Kiel D-24091 Kiel

Dear Henry and others: Jin Song-Ki Cheju Min Sok Pang Mul Gwan Cheju Shi 3 yang 3 do 2505 Tel (064) 55-1976

I would like to see the quotation Van Hove is supposed to have made from Professor Hatada's works.
Yong-ho Choe

Dear Yong Ho et al;
I didn't say he did quote Prof. Hatada,  I said (and I quote): "another part of this thread that Van Hove probably used Takasi Hatada as his reference and since he is Japanese (I presume) he might be reflecting the Japanese historical point of view", since it was the only work which seemed suitable. But I might be wrong.
At http://www.hendrick-hamel.henny-savenije.pe.kr/holland20.htm you can see from which book of Prof. Hatada Van Hove at least has taken some material.
Sincerely

On Fri, 29 May 1998, Donald Baker wrote:
> Jay Lewis is right about Tsushima, of course. It was no more Korean than those areas of north China that many nationalists are claiming for Korean history. The only possible argument for a Korean claim to Tsushima is that the So family (I had never heard that they were Korean. Where did you get that information, Gary?) allowed themselves to be called vassals of the Chosôn kings in > order to serve as intermediaries between Chosôn and Tokugawa Japan, and to have privileged access to trade with Chosôn.
I've looked, but can't find a citing that comes right out and says the So family were Korean. Perhaps I was misled by the fact that they are always referred to as "Chong" in Korean (e.g., Chong Ch^ong-s^ong, the lord of Tsushima during Sejong's time, when Chosôn attacked Tsushima in order to stop the frequent pirate raids originating from there), that the same _Chong_ character is a family name in Korea, and that so many Japanese clans do trace their ancestry back to one or the other of the ancient Korean kingdoms. In any case, I wasn't proposing that the Japanese should give Tsushima back to Korea. In view of the way they behaved, I doubt that they felt any greater allegiance to the Japanese court than they did to the Koryo or Chosôn courts, at least early on.
> It is possible that the Wa [wae] who occupied Tsushima were as much Korean as they were Japanese in the early centuries of recorded history, but that doesn't make Tsushima Korean anymore than it makes northern Kyushu Korean.
An excellent point. In those early times, I doubt that there was any sense of "Koreanness" other than the sharing of linguistic and cultural attributes, any more than there was a unified nationalistic sense of being Japanese.
Regards, Gary Rector

An interesting side-note on the earlier discussion about Tsushima:
I found a reference to the So family in the _Minsok Paekhwa Saj^on_ (do I have that title right?) which gives the pronunciation as "Mune" rather than the usual "Chong."
Gary Rector

I received the following most interesting and informative message from Ken Robinson. He had trouble getting it through to the list, so I'm posting it for those who might be interested, just in case he is unable to get through to us.
I'd be interested in learning what character was used to write the "Kore-" part of the name.
(By the way, though I profess to be lot of things, a professor is not one of them. Please just address me as "Gary.")
Gary Rector
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 14:53:13 +0900 (JST) From:
> >Dear Prof. Rector,
> >Regarding the So family, before calling themselves by this family name they were known as the Koremune.  "So" is another reading for "mune," the second character in the earlier name.  They converted "Koremune" into their -kabane- ("clan name"?), but changed the -kabane- to "Taira" in the mid-fifteenth century.  The So also constructed a family origins which linked them to a son of Emperor Go-Shirakawa (r. 1155-1158) who survived the Genpei War of 1180-1185.  So far as we know, the So made no effort to attach their family origins to a peninsular history or myth. 
> > >Ken Robinson

A quick look at the index of Hatada's A HISTORY OF KOREA does not yield any result that might be interpreted as justifying the exchange of Tsushima and Cheju Island.
Boudewijn Walraven

To the list,
Please allow me to make a correction in my posting about the So family name.  I used the Japanese term -kabane- to describe the clan names Koremune and Taira.  This term is, of course, incorrect.  -Kabane- refers rather to titles.  The romanization I should have used is -sei-, or sOng in Korean.
Thank you.

Ken Robinson

To the list,
The computer problems which I was experiencing earlier, to which Gary Rector kindly referred, appear to have been resolved as my post of a few minutes ago seems to have been accepted.  Below is a response to Gary's query about the character for "Kore" in the So family's earlier name.  I sent this message to Gary awhile ago, and at that time asked him to forward it on my behalf.  I apologize in advance to Gary and to you should he kindly forward the message before reading this message.  Now, to the message.

Dear Gary,
The "Kore" character is Nelson's dictionary no. 1709, or the tenth character on page154 of the small Tonga "HyOndae hwalyong okp'yOn," or "Shinjigen" no. 2533.

Ken Robinson

Hello Boudewijn (long time no see) et al;
Well I am basically quite illiterate if it comes to certain parts of history, but I assume that Van Hove didn't invent this, so he must have had a source. So if it's not Hatada, it must have been one of the other resources he's referring to.
Probably I'll drop by one of these weeks to discuss one and the other.
Thanks for the effort to look things up.
With kind regards
Henny

Dear Gary,
The "Kore" character is Nelson's dictionary no. 1709, or the tenth character on page154 of the small Tonga "HyOndae hwalyong okp'yOn," or "Shinjigen" no. 2533.

Ken Robinson

Gary,
The radical for the character "kore" in the earlier So family name is the three-stroke heart radical, joined on our visual right by an eight-stroke character (which also stands as a radical in other characters) which is read in Korean as "ch'u" and in Japanese as "tori" and refers to "birds." In Japanese the character for "kore" also may be read as "omo(u)" or "omom(miru)," to consider/reflect.
For those whose computers will cooperate, I provide this character in the next line of written text.
"kore":  $B0T(B

Ken Robinson

Dear Richard et al,
Paert, could have more meanings, basically it would have been horse , if we look at the Witsen list, it would have been "een Paerd", written with a "d", nevertheless, one was pretty sloppy with spelling in the 17th century, so written with a "t" might have been a possibility, it also means the rope on which sailors stand, when hoisting the sails. I wouldn't know of any other meaning, though that might misleading since there were a lot of words in normal life referring to one thing, which in the shipbuilding guild were used for completely other things. Nevertheless, some other interesting explanations have come up on this list, which I think are just as interesting. So I still have to look up the origin of the name of the ship Lautenbach, through Hoetink, mentions. I still didn't have the time to go to the Maritime Museum where they have extensive amount of books, amongst others the Witsen edition about ships, which I think would be the most appropriate.
Regards
Henny

 

Previous page

Back to menu

Next page