|
Dòng
|
Nội dung
|
|
1
|
从“牛角Paracel”转为“西沙群岛Paracel”——18世纪末至19世纪初西人的南海测绘 = Name Change from“Horn-shape Paracel”to“Xisha Qundao Paracel”: On Westerners’ Survey in South China Sea between the End of 18th Century and Early 19th Century. / WANG Tao.
// Journal of Nanjing University: Philosophy, Humanities and Social Sciences 2014, Vol. 51, No. 5.
// 南京大学学报 : 哲学社会科学 2014, 第一卷 201435-47 p. In the dispute over the sovereignty over Xisha Qundao,Vietnamese side has taken historical Pracel or Paracel as its pivotal evidence for its claim of sovereignty. In different periods of maritime navigation history,Paracel has been used to confusingly refer to different geographic entities: The hornshape Paracel and Xisha Qundao. Both being dangerous for navigation in South China Sea,they are yet completely different from each other. Jean D’ayot’s survey along the Vietnamese coast in the eighteenth century proved that the horn-shape Paracel was but nonexistent. In order to keep the name on,James Horsburgh brought into Paracel the area east to the "horn",that is,the present day Xisha Qundao. In 1808,Captain Daniel Ross surveyed South China Sea,and found that the dangerous area on the outer navigation line,i. e. Xisha,was in reality a group of islands,whereas the majority of the islets that constitute the so-called horn-shape Paracel were non-existent. Thereafter,Paracel became an exclusive name for Xisha Qundao. This name became popular as a result of Horsburgh’s insistence. After 1830,the horn-shape Paracel disappeared completely from Western literature. This is to say that the evidence offered by Vietnam can never stand.
Đầu mục:0
(Lượt lưu thông:0)
Tài liệu số:0
(Lượt truy cập:0)
|
|
2
|
西沙群岛主权:围绕帕拉塞尔(Paracel)的争论——基于16-19世纪西文地图的分析 = The Sovereignty of Xisha Qundao: An Analysis of Disputes over the Paracel on the Basis of Western Maps Dating Back from the 16th-19th Centuries. / XU Pan-qing;CAO Shu-ji.
// Journal of Nanjing University: Philosophy, Humanities and Social Sciences 2014, Vol. 51, No. 5.
// 南京大学学报 : 哲学社会科学 2014, 第一卷 201419-34. Some Vietnamese scholars just take it for granted that Paracel,as recorded in western literature,is a proof of Vietnamese sovereignty over Xisha Qundao(Xisha Islands). The refutation of this claim has been made by such Chinese scholars as Han Zhenhua. Based on previous researches and the western literature of ancient maps collected,the present authors try to go through and make clear the history of the name changes in Xisha Qundao. In the period of the early 16 th up to the early19 th centuries,Paracel was used to exclusively refer to the horn-shape sandbanks in the sea east to Vietnam. Between the years 1808-1810,the westerners began to name Xisha Qundao after Paracel.The horn-shape sandbanks then disappeared from Western maps after 1832. Since 1845,Paracel has been used to exclusively refer to Xisha Qundao. Geographically,the horn-shape Paracel and Xisha Qundao were two independent geographic entities of clear distinctions. Technically,it was Daniel Ross and James Horsburgh’s misuse of the name of the horn-shape Paracel,a geographical nonexistent,to refer to Xisha Qundao that resulted in the duplication of name,and hence confusion in naming two geographical entities with distinctive features. The Annam Dai QuocHoa Do,published in1838 by Bishop Jean-Louis Taberd,was a product based on the map information from the Indian Directory complied by the British hydrographer James Horsburgh. His directory recorded Xisha Qundao Paracel as surveyed,but not the horn-shape Paracel as described by Taberd in his Note on the Geography of Cochin China,in which he narrated that King Gia Long once planted a flag on it.
Đầu mục:0
(Lượt lưu thông:0)
Tài liệu số:0
(Lượt truy cập:0)
|
|
|
|
|