When did South China Sea become China's "core interest"?

[meocoi]

But also in this maps I could not see any islands. Hainan is even not there.[/QUOTE

This is a very special map, astronomy combination of geography, it is only a word in all areas, if you pay attention, will find the East China Sea and South China Sea are marked with. It is already showing something.

The sea is there but what does this mean?

 

[meocoi]

http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/112365-rising-tensions-between-china-vietnam-210.html

I found it.

There are many maps, I have seen all of them. But they are simply geographical maps with no country border. What can we interpret from these maps? How do ancient maps look like?

 

[huzihaidao12]

I will look at a map of Vietnam tomorrow.

 

[meocoi]

http://bbs.godeyes.cn/upload/2006/05/27/193727.jpg

大明混一图

This map looks nice but I could not clearly see the border of China and other countries. Still I could only see Hainan. Where are the two islands? And still there is no Taiwan. Why dont you take it then? It is next to China, it is big, many people can live there for sure.

 

[huzihaidao12]

The sea is there but what does this mean?

Best to go with the text. For example, Zheng charts, Ming Dynasty official records in those islands, their text is "石塘" or "万生石塘" ,they are within the territory of China in the record and then to compare, they have the same location, have the same name (Chinese name) and then, you can make judgments.

http://www.nansha.org.cn/maps/1/zheng_he_hang_hai_tu2.jpg

---------- Post added at 12:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:28 AM ----------

This map looks nice but I could not clearly see the border of China and other countries. Still I could only see Hainan. Where are the two islands? And still there is no Taiwan. Why dont you take it then? It is next to China, it is big, many people can live there for sure.

Best to combine the text in the official records.

 

[huzihaidao12]

1.You can not jsut record it by mouth, we see no map from you to prove that you name correctly those islands, you knew how to draw during that time, so why No map in Tang- Yuan for those islands ??

2. We had clear map about those islands during Nguyen dynasty, ASEAN don't have to worry about it.

On this map, Chinese scholars have questioned.

The Map shown below is claimed as a 1838 (in other resources some say this maps is dated 1834, as shown in the map published by Atlas of Vientnam published in 1999 by Hanoi (Atlat ?ia Lí Viêt Nam / Trung t?m ban ?`? và tranh anh giáo duc.) ,which is map included here.
"However, the Vietnamese classical texts have not provided clear proof of Vietnamese knowledge of the Spratly Islands, let alone the claim.
The few references to Truong Sa almost always identify the islands as part of Hoang Sa - the Paracel Islands. The map of 1838 reveals that the islands lie so close to each other as well as to the Vietnamese coast, that they are practically one island group. The name Van ly Truong
Sa is the same name the Chinese used in acient times for the Paracel Islands."[Lu Ning, Flashpoint Spratlys,Dolphin Trade Press Pte Ltd, Singapore,1995.


Clearly this map can not support Vietnamese so called "historical sovereignty" over the Nansha Islands of China, without more actual proof to support this map itself.

 

[meocoi]

On this map, Chinese scholars have questioned.

The Map shown below is claimed as a 1838 (in other resources some say this maps is dated 1834, as shown in the map published by Atlas of Vientnam published in 1999 by Hanoi (Atlat ?ia Lí Viêt Nam / Trung t?m ban ?`? và tranh anh giáo duc.) ,which is map included here.
"However, the Vietnamese classical texts have not provided clear proof of Vietnamese knowledge of the Spratly Islands, let alone the claim.
The few references to Truong Sa almost always identify the islands as part of Hoang Sa - the Paracel Islands. The map of 1838 reveals that the islands lie so close to each other as well as to the Vietnamese coast, that they are practically one island group. The name Van ly Truong
Sa is the same name the Chinese used in acient times for the Paracel Islands."[Lu Ning, Flashpoint Spratlys,Dolphin Trade Press Pte Ltd, Singapore,1995.


Clearly this map can not support Vietnamese so called "historical sovereignty" over the Nansha Islands of China, without more actual proof to support this map itself.

Your arguments are very confusing. In your map, as far as I can see, I can not clearly distinguish the islands but you say that we have to combine with other records in order to see the islands. In our map, these islands could be easily seen on the west coast (they were combined into one because Vietnamese could not determine the precise position of two islands at that time) and you say that because Vietnamese could not separate these islands so Vietnamese records is incorrect. This is very funny.

Lets come back again, in the map of Zheng, where is China, where is Vietnam, what is the border? I could not interpret much from this map. Other issues, you said that Chinese have the islands for more than two thousand years. Could you give us the official maps of all dynasties which include these two islands, each dynasty one map: Tang, Song, Yuan, Ming, Quin ?

 

[huzihaidao12]

Your arguments are very confusing. In your map, as far as I can see, I can not clearly distinguish the islands but you say that we have to combine with other records in order to see the islands. In our map, these islands could be easily seen on the west coast (they were combined into one because Vietnamese could not determine the precise position of two islands at that time) and you say that because Vietnamese could not separate these islands so Vietnamese records is incorrect. This is very funny.

Lets come back again, in the map of Zheng, where is China, where is Vietnam, what is the border? I could not interpret much from this map. Other issues, you said that Chinese have the islands for more than two thousand years. Could you give us the official maps of all dynasties which include these two islands, each dynasty one map: Tang, Song, Yuan, Ming, Quin ?

Best to go with the text. For example, Zheng charts, Ming Dynasty official records in those islands, their text is "石塘" or "万生石塘" ,they are within the territory of China in the record and then to compare, they have the same location, have the same name (Chinese name) and then, you can make judgments.

http://www.nansha.org.cn/maps/1/zheng_he_hang_hai_tu2.jpg

---------- Post added at 12:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:28 AM ----------



Best to combine the text in the official records.

I said, you need to combine the written records, this is a map of the Ming dynasty, they all are the same and written records. The same location, the same name. One thing is important, ZHENHE to use chinese name to describe those islands, if the islands do not belong to the Ming Dynasty, it belongs to other countries, then he will use only the language of those countries, the use of Chinese name, just to show that they are Chinese territory.

 

[huzihaidao12]

There are a lot of them, for a quick search I could find one published in 1839 by Vietnamese government:

http://www.vinhanonline.com/images/stories/tonghop/hs-ts/6-chot.jpg

This map is rather vague, can not tell, but I will not be too demanding, because it is an ancient map, China is also the same, so need some evidence, the source of this map, there is no record in history? I want to know, you can tell me?

 

[huzihaidao12]

There are a lot of them, for a quick search I could find one published in 1839 by Vietnamese government:

the map of other countries, there are so many, you could find the picture there, sorry that I am lazy to copy the all the links here

Hoàng Sa trong nh

I saw those maps, as expected, all the English map, I think this is not enough, at least it can not be the main evidence. There are two reasons, first of all, lack of comprehensive communication in that era, because the language is different, and their lack of comprehensive understanding of Asian history, particularly in China they completely ignore the historical record, so it is not enough evidence for a major. Second, as I said, Vietnam is a colony of the West, the West wanted those islands, so as the profit motive they will deliberately lie.

So, I hope to see a map of Vietnam and the historical record, preferably before the colonial era.

 

[huzihaidao12]

There are even some maps of the European colonial pioneering era, what you expect from them, they really know Asia? Asia, not Africa and the Americas, Asia has a mature civilization, indigenous records more reliable in that era, you need to know it.

 

[Đảo Bạch Long Vỹ]

I saw those maps, as expected, all the English map, I think this is not enough, at least it can not be the main evidence. There are two reasons, first of all, lack of comprehensive communication in that era, because the language is different, and their lack of comprehensive understanding of Asian history, particularly in China they completely ignore the historical record, so it is not enough evidence for a major. Second, as I said, Vietnam is a colony of the West, the West wanted those islands, so as the profit motive they will deliberately lie.

So, I hope to see a map of Vietnam and the historical record, preferably before the colonial era.

God, I don't think our Dutch friends want to conquer Vietnam in 17xx, because they had lost several times

http://hoangsa.org/forum/downloads/45585-Algemeen_aardrijkskundig_woordenboek_tweede_deel.pdf
This is a historial book printed in Amsterdam and Leiden, 1772. In chapter XV at pages 647 to 674, the book treats of Cochin-China and islands of this country such as Pullo Sicca, Pullo Secca de Mare, Pullo Cambir, Pullo Canto. Especially, Paracels has been considered as initial part of Pullo Secca de Mare island chain. In the ancient maps, Paracels was used to draw like tail of scorpion extanding as far as Poulo Cerci de Mer forming Pullo Secca de Mare.

And I know Chinese, both Vietnamese and Westerners' sources are unbelievable, only Chinese source is believable, ya, so who can beat that argument?

Anyway, want Vietnamese map? Here you are:

1741

1838

Do you need Vietnamese text?

http://bbs.godeyes.cn/upload/2006/05/27/203924.jpghttp://bbs.godeyes.cn/upload/2006/05/27/203924.jpgSpratly Islands History Timeline - Nansha Islands of China

Spratlys - Nansha Islands (Spratly Islands) of China

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Spratly Islands Maps | Spratly Islands History | Spratly Islands Photos | Spratly Islands News
Spratlys > History of Spratly Islands
Spratly Islands History Timeline
200BC around China firstly discovered the Spratly Islands and other Suthern Sea Islands
111BC China started to occupy and govern the Southern Sea Islands
206BC-24AD Most of the Paracel, the Spratlys and Pratas Island were known by Chinese geographers of the Han Dynasty
23-220AD Yang Fu of the East Han Dynasty made the reference to Nansha Islands in his book entitled Yi Wuzi (Records of Rarities)
220 Nansha (Spratly) Island was settled by Chinese monks, building up a monastery on that island.
220-280AD General Kang Tai one of the famous ancient Chinese navigator of East Wu State of the Three Kingdoms Period mentioned Nansha Islands in his book Funan Zhuan (or Journeys to and from Phnom) (the name of an ancient state in today's Cambodia).
265-420AD Fei Yuan of the Jin Dynasty(265-420 A.D.) wrote about the fishing and collecting of coral samples by the fishermen of China on the South China Sea in his article Chronicles of Guangzhou.
789 The Tang Dynasty, China included the Nansha Islands into its administrative map
990 Spratley Islands became a part of the Northern Song area in Hainan
1121 Kublai Khan controlled most of the islands during China's Yuan Dynasty
1211 The island group shown on a Chinese Map
1250 Chinese frishermen became the right by the Pan-Han Dynasty to settle on some of the northern islets and reefs.
1405 Cheng Ho, the official minister of the Ming Kings, visited several northern islands of the Spartly Islands Group, Cheng Ho made several vojages to the Spratly Group and mapped most of the northern reefs and island, today a reason for China, to occupay the complete group. In 1436 an excellent map of the reefs is shown by the Ming-Dynasty.
1406 - 1444 most of the reefs and islet were successsively maped by Chinese geographers
1478 A China brigg run on Amboya Cay's reef and Archeologists found about 300 ancident vessels, made by ceramics.
1530 Alvarez de Diegoz, one of Albuquerque's navigators found several scattered tiny islets and reefs on his way to the future Macao area
1606 The Spain adventure and sailor Andreas de Pessora reached some of the western Spratly islands and named 'a larger islet' with the name Isla Santa Esmeralda Pequena. Today it is unknown which island Pessora reached, but it could be Spratly Island, or also one of the south-eastern islets.
1710 The Chinese Ching Dynasty claimed two northern islands and errected a small temple on North East Cay.
1730 Pirates settled on several islands and hold up British, Portugese and Dutch ships, crossing the area. In 1735 the British troups runn over and destroyed several priate camps located on some islands.
1791 Captain Spratle arived in the group and named the islands by his name. He was one of Captain Collets navigators.
1798 The British built up an iron observation tower on Itu Aba Islet. The remainds are visible till today.
1804 The British vessel HMS Macclesfield run on a drying reef in the southwest corner of the shoals, known today as the Macclesfield Shoals (Bank)
1883 The Germans wanted to claim several islands in the Spartly Group, but the Chinese Government threatened with war. After several government notes between Berlin and Peking, Germany gave up Spratly Islands and Paracel Islands but became controller of the area of Tsingtau.
1885 China officially claimed all islands of the Spratly Group
1887 The France built up the first lighttower on Amboyna Cay
1902 Chinese war-ships surveyed and erected sovereignty stone on Paracel Islands.
1908 China gave the right to mine guano from the islands to the British Australian Guano LTD.
1909-03-21 China (Qing Dynasty) set up Paracel Islands administrative committee.
1909-04 China (Qing Dynasty) war-ships surveyed Paracel Islands and affirmed Chinese sovereignty over these islands, fired cannon and hoisted flag.
1911 China - Guangdong Government reaffirmed Paracel Islands is under Qiongya (Hainan Island) Adminstration.
1930 French - Japan War over the rights on the Paracel Islands, and some of the north-western Spratley Reefs.
1932-1935 The Chinese Government set up a committee for the review of Maps of Lands and Waters of China. This committee examined and approved the 132 names of the islands in the South China Sea, all of which belong to Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha Islands.
1933 France raised first official claim to the Paracel and Spratly Islands after invaded and occupied 9 of Nansha Islands, including Taiping and Zhongye. The Chinese fishermen who lived and worked on the Nansha Islands immediatedly made a firm resistance against the invasion and the Chinese Government lodged a strong protest with the French Government.
1939-44 The Spratly Islands were invaded and occupied by Japan and used as a submarine base during the Second World War. The two major bases were on Itu Aba and on Namyit Island in the Tizard Bank.In line with the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of China, in consultation with the Navy and the government of Guangdong Province, appointed Xiao Ciyi and Mai Yunyu Special Commissioner to the Xisha and Nansha Islands respectively in 1946 to take over the two archipelagoes and erect marks of sovereignty on the Islands.
1946 China declared the Spratlys as a part of the Guangdong Province, and seized the biggest island of Tai Ping Dao (Itu Aba).
1947 The Ministry of Internal Affairs of China renamed 159 islands, reefs, islets and shoals on the South China Sea, including the Nansha Islands. It subsequently publicized all the names for administrative purposes
1947 The Philippines claimbed some of the eastern islands in the Spratly Group and claimbed too the Scarborough Reef.
1948 The Philippines claimbed the offshore Scarborough Reef, one of the most outlier reefs in the northeastern Spratly Islands. A light was errected and an oberservationtower on the South Rock, a 5 ft high rocky and steep sided islet.
1951 At the San Francisco conference, Japan renounces all rights to the Spratly Islands. No resolution is made on who owns them.
1956 The Philippines built up a mailitary base on North Danger Reef.
1961 Taiwan annexed several reefs in the northeastern part of the Spratly Group.
1969 On Spratly Island the American Navy errected a Radar Station, closed in 1971.
1974 China occupies Paracel Islands to the north of the Spratly Islands, taking them from South Vietnam.
1978 China occupies six atolls in the Spratly Islands, taking them from Vietnam.
1979, 21.Dec. Malaysia claimbed Swallow Reef (Layang Layang Reef) and built up a base. In January 1980 Malaysia continued in claimbing and annexed several reefs in the southern and south-western group. A second Malayan station was built on Amboyna Cay, heave disputed with Vietnam
1982 Internatinal conflict between Vietnam and Malysia, when Malaysia claimbed Amboyna Cay.
1984 Brunei claimbed the Louise Reef in the eastern group
1988 Chinese and Vietnamese navies clash at Johnson Reef. Two Vietnamese gunboats are sunk and seventy people die. Chinese troops has been garrisoned on the reef.
1991 Indonesia organises the first of its annual informal meetings (The South China Sea Workshop) of the six claimants to the Spratly Islands to find a peaceful solution to the dispute. Malaysia begins to develop a reef for tourism.
1992 ASEAN nations and China call for restraint in pursuit of territorial claims in the Spratly Islands.
1994,November The US oil giant Exxon signs a US$35 billion deal to develop the gas fields north of Natuna Island. This area is partly claimed by China.
1995,8 February The Philippines's armed forces discover Chinese-constructed concrete markers on Mischief Reef, within 200 kilometres of Palawan Island, in the Philippines.
1995,20-28 March The Philippines seize Chinese fishing boats and crew, and destroy Chinese markers on Mischief Reef.
1995,31 March Taiwanese naval mission of armed patrol boats to the Spratly Islands is called off midway to its destination.
1995, 7 April Indonesia expresses concern over Chinese maps claiming sovereignty over part of the huge Natuna gas fields to the south of the Spratly Islands.

---------- Post added at 11:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:57 PM ----------

Found a good post, note.

---------- Post added 09-08-2011 at 12:00 AM ---------- Previous post was 09-07-2011 at 11:57 PM ----------

唐一行山河分野图,Tang astronomical and geographical map,new picture


http://bbs.godeyes.cn/upload/2006/05/27/203924.jpg

Seem that you guys don't know that fishing and discovering movements are not something legal to claim sovereignty You need to send force to set sovereignty, or at least your gov have to claim sovereignty (like what the Qing did in 1900s)
Vietnam did both of them from at least in 17th, 18th century

Check it: #1504

 

[meocoi]

This map is rather vague, can not tell, but I will not be too demanding, because it is an ancient map, China is also the same, so need some evidence, the source of this map, there is no record in history? I want to know, you can tell me?

But if one look at this map, he could easily see the two islands but in your maps I could not find any of them. I could only see Hainan as the southernmost part. And one more questions, why China did not take Taiwan. In comparing to these islands, Taiwan is much closer, much bigger, much more value and surely many people could live there.

 

[Viva_Viet]

But if one look at this map, he could easily see the two islands but in your maps I could not find any of them. I could only see Hainan as the southernmost part. And one more questions, why China did not take Taiwan. In comparing to these islands, Taiwan is much closer, much bigger, much more value and surely many people could live there.

Taiwan is in US hand, and well protected by US senven fleet, CHinese think they have No chance to win bcz their radar still got heavily jammed by US jammer during 80s .

Then they think fighting with VN to expand thier territory is easier bcz Vn is poor and don't know about Mordern warfare, but they forgot that their weapons have nothing better than US weapons during VN war, and VN resisted being jammed by US in 1972 already.

 

[meocoi]

Taiwan is in US hand, and well protected by US senven fleet, CHinese think they have No chance to win bcz their radar still got heavily jammed by US jammer during 80s .

Then they think fighting with VN to expand thier territory is easier bcz Vn is poor and don't know about Mordern warfare, but they forgot that their weapons have nothing better than US weapons during VN war, and VN resisted being jammed by US in 1972 already.

No, I want to mean why China claim that they possessed these two islands two thousand years ago but they only took Taiwan in 17th century (the reason was that Hans Chinese were defeated by Manchurian and Taiwan was the only place to retreat)? In the maps shown there were no Taiwan. The value of Taiwan is surely much much larger than these two islands and it is also surely much much easier to capture and maintain large force there, especially with the ancient ship building and housing building technique, maintaining some military base at these two very small islands at a region with dozen of large tropical cyclones/typhoons every year was really impossible.