Talk:Empress Myeongseong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a controversial topic, which may be under dispute. Please read this talk page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure you supply full citations when adding information to highly controversial articles.

	WikiProject Korea invites you to join in improving Wikipedia articles related to Korea. Discussion - Notice board Manual of Style - Naming conventions Key topics - Browse - Portal
	This article: B quality , high priority.  Working group: History.
	Korea-related tasks: purge Create North Korea South Korea Korea North Korean Cities South Korea-India relations Districts of Seoul National Institute of Korean Language Wanghusa Garakgukgi Korea YMCA Ji Cheongcheon Battle at Luozigou Battle at Dadianzi Battle of Bongohdong Battle of Samdunja Sampo Waeran Byeongin Yangyo Goguryeo-Wei War Lelang Conquest Xienpei Campaign Guda-guk Galsa-guk Gaema-guk Hangin-guk Chunchong King Taejong Jeamri Jinju fortress Improve North-South relations Sports Tourism Communications North Korean Missile Test (2006) Law Culture Politics Nat'l Assembly South Korea-U.S. relations Gangpeh Jirisan Joseonsa Pyeonsuhoe Korean architecture Gaya confederacy Samhan Goryeo Namsan (Gyeongju) Nangnang nation Korean royal court cuisine Bangjja Calligraphy Donghak Peasant Revolution Righteous army Korean Liberation Army Independence movement Culture of Korea Korean martial arts Korean swords Korean nationalism Korean knife Korean armour (see also Pages needing attention and Stubs) Images North Korean famine Kim Tschang Yeul Dong-A University Pohang Songguk-ri Japanese General Government Building, Seoul Jirisan Japanese invasions of Korea (1592-1598) History of Korea Dangun Korean pottery Three Kingdoms of Korea Mongol invasions of Korea Goryeo-Khitan Wars Goguryeo-Sui Wars Military history of Korea List of monarchs of Korea Prehistory of Korea Translate Korean Wikipedia articles: ko:이범석 (1900년) ko:유관순 ko:이봉창 ko:박헌영 ko:김원봉 Japanese Wikipedia articles: 第一次日韓協約 第三次日韓協約 Discuss Portal nominations Votes Complete List (edit)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Royalty and nobility work group.

/archive1

[edit] Error of description

[edit] "burned alive" is not true.

By political motivation, we can find a lot of historical informations about this article, and some of them has asome commmon errors. (Maybe copy and paste makes the fact.) We must write from view point of wikipolicies. And, at least, we should confirm the first resource. For example, we'll show the declaration of beginning the judicial trial related to　the Eulmi Incident.This is the South Korea official document( The history of the Kyujanggak Royal Library ,Seoul National University, South Korea)(Ref. 奎17289)

[edit] Consideration No.1

[edit] "burned alive" is not true.

Fig. 0, 1989.11.15

I'll tranlate Old Korean characters as

• 屍體 means "(Queen's) corpse"
• 燒燬 means "burnout"

That is ,the right document says,　There's the witness, His name is "李萬成" (下士:petty officer). Thus the "burned alive" is not true.--Lulusuke 02:55, 29 September 2006 (UTC) --Lulusuke 03:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "stripped naked, her genitals fondled," is true.

See Ishizuka Eizou's report. ( 「法制局参事官石塚英蔵傭聘ニ付朝鮮政府ヨリ依頼ノ件」朝鮮問題5（公信類） 陸奥宗光関係文書 [http://www.ndl.go.jp/en/service/oversea/index.html 国会図書館(International Services , National Diet Library)]憲政資料室　 Ref. 77-2 Fax: +81-3-3508-2934 ）

Who  ?　If you can read and understand Old Japanese document completely, the answer is easy. But I think it may be belong to original research. --Lulusuke 03:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "raped" is true or not true.

Mr. Lee Wha Rang asserted that she was raped by Japanese on his web site http://www.kimsoft.com/2002/jp-rape.htm, and he showed 5 lines of "Eijoh's Report" as below. (this may be copied and pasted from a newspaper), I'll translate it into English.

This section is a stub. You can help by expanding it.

--Lulusuke 08:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

--Lulusuke 03:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Lulusuke - This seems like a very minor point to spend so much emphatic discussion upon. The Queen was assassinated, and quite brutally at that. I, for one, am willing to forego the gory details. Second, your logic fails - if a document or observer says something happened, then to the extent that you trust that document or observer you can call that "truth". However, if a document or observer fails to say something happened (as opposed to actually saying "this did not happen") than this does not constitute logical proof, since there could be many reasons that the particular event was left out of the narrative. See Karl Popper Karl Popper for a better explanation of the reasoning I'm using. --Dan 15:16, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi.Dan

Your wrote> a very minor point

Yes, I know. But the description in detail is false statement. The reason is ver simple, I believe that he didn't read the first resouces or ignore them. I showed one of immediately apparent mistakes, as example. I think dispassionate scholarly research is needed for purpose in science and Wiki.

Your wrote> "this did not happen"

Yes I know. But assertors must saddle with the burden of proof.

His assert is "burn alive and raped", is it ?

Does he show the proof based on scientific evidence? My question is very simple.

I welcome your advice as to read Karl Popper's. Thank you. --Lulusuke 02:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Lulusuke - Kimsoft does not prove his case, but, the point I was making, neither do you. You cannot say she was dead based upon the omission of any statement saying she was alive from the documents. In my opinion, it's possible she was stil alive, but not really worth spending any time over, since I do not see that it can be proven either way. --Dan 15:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

You have liberty to assert that "She was still alive", if you can show the evidence. I showed the two evidence, One is Korean official document(Fig. 0, 1989.11.15) and other is Japanese official report (See red lines at the bottom of this page. This is the, widely known , secret report from Japanese ambassador to Japanese minister of foreign affairs. It is a graphic account of the murder.) And there is a widespread agreement among experts that she was killed and her corpse was burnout. Please show the academic evidence against the fact. If you can show it, it is one of "historic accomplishments".

You misunderstand me. I did not assert that she was still alive. I stated that, in my opinion, there was insufficient evidence to prove anything. That's an opinion, not a statement of fact. I did also say that it's possible she was still alive without anyone there realizing it. That's also just my opinion. Let's leave this topic, please; it's pointless. --Dan 22:15, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is "A late 19th century hand sketch" she ?

A late 19th century drawing hand sketch

"a Lady's maid in Korean emperor's court" (Sekaifuzoku Syashin-cho No.1,) Syogoro Tsuboi and Raisuke Numata 1901.

Please compare the two.

See also http://japanese.chosun.com/site/data/img_dir/2004/08/12/200408120000381minbi.jpg This is a stamped postcard labeled "An Old Waman in the Corean Court".

[edit] the Day

[edit] The Map

1. The map of the royal palace
2. The secret telegram No.51(This is a welknown. )

[edit] The Witnesses

1. Aleksey Seredin Sabatin (in Архив внешней политики Российской империи 113093, г. Москва, ул. Б. Серпуховская, 15)

This section is a stub. You can help by expanding it.

[edit] After the Day

[edit] table 1

This section is a stub. You can help by expanding it.

08/10/1895 She was killed and her corpse was burned(See the above). 10/10/1895 Korean goverment noticed through official gazettes as the right figure.　By Imperial proclamation, she was ousted from the members of royalty because of her family's misdeeds.(See Fig. 1) Myeong's family was outcasted from the authority of government. Remark that her death was not announced officially. Okay, that is true that she was stripped of her title, but let's be very clear that it was because of Japanese pressure. She was later reinstated by Kojong and given higher titles and orders. You're sounding very defensive of Japanese actions and disparaging of Queen Min, Lulusuke. We have already had all those discussions on this page, and you can read through them if you look at the archives. One editor got banned for persistently pushing a pro-Japanese, unbalanced point of view. See WP:NPOV. I realize this article makes Queen Min look better than how the Japanese history books paint her, but that is closer to the truth, and those distorted Japanese history books are part of the reason for the current ill-feeling between Korea and Japan. Don't take this too badly - the US has the same problem with lies in our history books. --Dan 15:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC) Hi. Thanks for all your comments This article is under construction. Your wrote> because of Japanese pressure uummm Please look http://147.46.103.182/OIS/GAN/VIEWER.jsp?xmlfilename=GK17289_00I0003_0026.xml&tablename=KYS_GAN_N_TBL Fig 2.] 11/10/1895 AGAIN She got the royalty position as "princess".. , How ｃan we describe these. "Because of Japanese pressure"? I always keep WP:NPOV. Fact is fact.

Fig. 1. The official gazette 10/10/1895(Ref. No. GK17289_00I0003, The history of the Kyujanggak Royal Library, Seoul National University, South Korea. )

Fig. 2. The official gazette 11/10/1895(Ref. No. GK17289_00I0003_0026, The history of the Kyujanggak Royal Library, Seoul National University, South Korea. )

--Lulusuke 08:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] table 2

[edit] Additional sites for researchers and writers

[edit] Advanced

• The Annals of Emperor Gojong (高宗太皇帝實錄)
• Maechonyarok(매천야록,梅泉野錄), Author Hwang-Hyon(황현 黃玹), GS42775_00

--Lulusuke 13:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

• Ilseongnok 日省錄 (Records of Daily Reflections), 1982～1996, 86 volumes.
• The history of the Kyujanggak Royal Library
• Center for Asian Historical Record

[edit] Groups and etc.

• Photo album of world's folkways(Sekai fuuzoku syashin-cyo)

--Lulusuke 06:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

• A study group reseraching Queen Min

--Dan 17:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• A Japanese reference on war history

--Dan 17:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• Review of problematic Japanese history book

--Dan 17:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

uumm Are these academic sites? I think those sites are not academic.

I want to show academic resource to verfy the document, WP:VERIFY

because Information on Wikipedia must be reliable and verifiable.

For example

# http://e-kyujanggak.snu.ac.kr/

# http://www.jacar.go.jp/english/index.html ( http://www.jacar.go.jp/english/index.html)

--Lulusuke 02:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Princess - errr - Queen's Diary

Fellow contributors - I just saw on Korean TV news the other day that a diary of Queen Min's has been discovered, from the year 1883 if I recall correctly. Keep your eyes open for the translation; we should post it here. Maybe we can get an image of the diary - from what I could see on the TV report it was beautiful. --Dan 15:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

have you seen the recent articles on a newly discovered photo? [1] [2]

i think the image now used in the article is a bit problematic, as to accuracy, source & licensing. Appleby 17:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I came across those pics the other day [3]. Are they legit? At least they are old enough to use as pd art? Tortfeasor 06:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Nice catch. Should be PD, more than 100 years old. However, I don't know one way or the other about legit-ness. -- Visviva 14:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Those don't look like the same photos that the Min family recently came across. It'll be interesting to see a comparison. What do you all think of the Queen's outfit in this new photo? That's one of the main criticisms of the old controversial photo, that the clothing wasn't suited to the Queen. --Dan 21:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2 famous and widely known books.

• Isabella Bird

Isabella Bird's Korea and Her Neighbours (1898), shows a cityscape of tiled roofs in northwestern Seoul. Isabella Bird visited Korea four times and met the King and Queen. Her last visit was in 1897 and she described Korea in detail.

• McKENZIE, Frederick Arthur(1869-1931), was journalist for the. Daily Mail.

These books are very famous and filled with truth fact.--Lulusuke 17:22, 20 September 2006 (UTC). And it includes some errors which I checked the accuracy of the intelligence. --Lulusuke 01:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

You might be overstating the "truth" of the books a bit Lulusuke. They are filled mostly with the viewpoints of the writers, who are representive of their particular cultures and times. As such, they tended to be judgemental and biased in their regard of Korean culture, without truly understanding. The books are interesting, but Ms. Bird's observations in particular should be taken with care. Both of these books have been used by apologists for the Japanese occupation to show the backwardness of the Korean country and government. --Dan 17:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear a bit Dan
bit←Are you well-behaved?

Yes. I know the above fact. The authors, however , saw and wrote the "KOREA" at that time.

Disregarding them lacks the balance and hides from the fact.

Did the other authors look and write the "KOREA" at that time ?

If you disregard them,

Please show concrete evidence and source, excluding newspaper articles, that showed the descriptions are not true.

Facts are facts. This is my motto. Thank you.--Lulusuke 06:16, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Lulusuke, I suspect you know the problems with these books as well as I do, since many of us have had extensive debates about sources on these pages. You are misrepresenting what I said. You presented those books as "filled with truth". I cautioned that the books are heavily laden with opinion, and with bias. That's not to say the descriptions are false, but that the observations they present are selected and colored by the background and agenda of the observers. That's okay at the time, but in this day, as you know, those particular books and a couple of others are, as I said, used by those who wish to justify the very unjust Japanese violation of Korea. I would recommend you look through the archived discussion of this page for a thorough, documented debate on this matter. --Dan 16:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I know these have some error representations and misunderstandings.

We have, however, no 1st resource written in English. Other books maybe 3rd and more than resources.

The seens that they saw may be consistent with the photos, which Australian photographer George Rose (1861-1942) took.

Please look [4] --Lulusuke 11:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Deiaemeth was deleted the above references 05:48, 29 September 2006.

I revered them. --Lulusuke 23:55, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The precious data in the study of history.( the first source)

1. Declaration of beginning the trial
   

South Korea official document( The history of the Kyujanggak Royal Library ,Seoul National University, South Korea)

declaration of beginning the trial (Ref Code GK17289_00I0006)

Three persons, disguised as Japanese outlook, were arrested and prosecuted 14, Dec. 1985.

--Lulusuke 05:48, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] missing citations and/or footnotes.

Please show the first source. --Lulusuke 12:06, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] True or Fake ? Myeongseong's photo (old topic restored)

I am putting this back up because I find the topic of interest and would like other editors to help me out. Last time this was up someone contributed some more recently discovered photos. I don't see those here and hope they can be put up again. --Dan 21:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

See the newspaper. http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200501/200501130035.html

I agree. It's actually never known whether it's really her or not. mirageinred 22:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

This is an interesting problem. The argument against it being a photo of her comes mostly from Queen Min of Korea: Coming to Power) Simbertseva's research, but seems weak to me. It almost all hinges on whether she would have her image portrayed, certainly something that was done by Kojong, by Lady Om, by Sunjong, and Queen Yun. There's even a photo out there of the whole royal family taken when the last child, Princess Deokhye, was about three or four. Deokhye, Princess of Korea. So that argument is not very strong. The other point is that some historians feel a Queen would never sit with her feet apart as in the picture. To me, that doesn't make much sense either, because Koreans back then didn't use chairs often and likely didn't have any particular way of sitting in them. Finally, the question is, if the photo is not the Queen, who is it? Considering how she's dressed, if she's not the queen, she's wearing royal clothes. That would be inappropriate, true? It's an interesting mystery. There are members of the Min family alive today, though, who look a lot like that photo. --Dan 04:10, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

It could have been one of the ladies in waiting. Maybe. mirageinred 00:36, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Alrighty, folks, take a look at these. Here's the Queen Min photo under discussion above. But, some old Japanese travel books also claim this and this are Queen Min. What do the rest of you think? Do any of these look particularly like Min women today? --Dan 18:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

It's really difficult to determine what is genuine or fake. I can't and shouldn't make a statement about such matters. I came across Image:Empress Myeongseong3.jpg also from a Japanese book 《朝鮮風俗風景写真帖》 though it was published in 1911 (明治44年). I thought the woman looked similar to the "court lady" photo but there might be a problem with both. In the KBS news clip, an expert on photography had guessed the "court lady" photo to have been taken around 1910 or 1920. This new photo was in the 1911 issue of the Japanese photobook. Both dates are at least a decade after Queen Min's death. If they are not the same person, then this new photo should have used a caption "明成皇后陛下" (Her majesty empress Myeongseong) and not "李王妃殿下" (Her highness Princess Yi). OK, Dan just mentioned this new photo looks like Queen Yun. I got the photo from this blog page which put this picture as Queen Min. — Nrtm81 20:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, that picture is definitely Empress Sunjeong. I can see the clearer photo. I was thinking her face wasn't as long as the "court lady". I was too quick to use the picture because another website had used it as Queen Min. — Nrtm81 20:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

There's certainly variety in their appearances, isn't there? I think the original source for the photos you saw on the blog, Nrtm81, is probably here [5]. I saw the news account - I wonder what made the expert think the photo dates from 1910 or later? This is a fun puzzle, I must admit. Maybe we should put up some photos of modern Min women who are descendants of Queen Min's father. My mother-in-law, who was such a person, claimed that Queen Min was "moot sengyesa" (unattractive). Since my mother-in-law wasn't born until 1914, I don't know how she knew this, but there it is ;-) --Dan 20:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I've already asked Nrtm81, but anyone else who's reading this, see if you can interpret the date on , most likely using the Japanese calendar but no guarantee. It's in the lower left corner and clipped off a bit. --Dan 21:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I asked my wife to see what she could make out - the main inscription in the bottom right uses the term "bi" indicating this is the highest-ranking royal woman, ie the queen, but her family name is not included. The date in the lower left is clipped, but there is a "17" there. That could be 1917, or it might be a Japanese date - Meiji 17? - but if it's 1917 the woman could only be Queen Yun, King Sunjong's wife. That was my wife's first reaction on seeing the photo, before reading the inscription - she said, "Oh, that's Queen Yun", and since she knew the lady, albeit in the 50s and 60s, I tend to trust her. --Dan 21:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

And finally, user Appleby, I think, posted a link to this article (Korean language) [6] which has recently discovered German photos that could very well be Queen Min. See what you think, and be sure to look at the photo where they compare Sunjong as a child to the photo that could be Queen Min, his mother. --Dan 17:49, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I know her name. She is NOT Empress Myeongseong.

The report in the the newspaper HanKooki is fake. See Fig. 20, 世界風俗写真帖(1901) , Tokyo TOYO Co. LTD..

--Lulusuke 04:20, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Lulusuke, why do you think the photo is fake and if you know the woman's name please tell me. --Dan 04:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Please look my answer section.--Lulusuke 09:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I do not see it there. This woman is certainly not Lady Om - she's too young, for one thing. If you could answer here it would help. I have seen fuller accounts pointing to some early collections where that photo is labelled (in German) as a Korean court singer. That appears to be a mislabelling, however. Scholars have not positively concluded that the woman is Myoungsong, but the fact that she is sitting in the same studion where Taewonggun, in the photo below her, had his photo taken, makes a very strong argument. It is also known that Myoungsong was an educated, intelligent, and curious woman who was interested in western technology. --Dan 15:20, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Dan

Please compare the two photos

1. http://photo.hankooki.com/gisaphoto/inews/2006/07/25/0725110103840.jpg
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Gen2.PNG

The two are same. !!!

You can get the second photo at National Digital Library

Thus the article is fake.

The reason is simple, I think the writer of the article did not know the book, since he is a amateur . And the authorities on Korean history cannot read ,exactly and correctly, OLD Japanse documents.(Even if modern Japanese, it is very difficult to read old Japanese documents. Only about 1% or less than 1% of Japanese may read them. hahahahahah....)

--Lulusuke 18:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I am still skeptical. The photo was taken by German, as explained in the book from which the photo comes. It was taken in 1894; that is known for sure. It seems to be easy for a Japanese who label the photograph to make a mistake. I don't have time right now, but I will post links to the book these photos come from, an interview with the man who assembled the book, and I have a photo of Lady Om which I can upload. One quick question...how old was Lady Om compared to Taewongun, since they appear photographed together? --Dan 20:37, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Lulusuke, take a look at this article. It gives more of the debate and includes an interview with the man who published the photos. If he is accurate that the photo was taken in 1894, and that seems to be the case, since we see that it was published in the two European magazines in 1894, then it would have been unlikely to be Lady Om, since Kojong did not marry Lady Om until after Myoungsong's death. See this site: The Royal Ark..". m. (fifth) at the Russian Legation, Seoul, 1897, Lady Om [Sunhon Hwang-kwi-bi] (b. 5th November 1854; d. from enteric fever, at Toksu Palace, Seoul, 20th July 1911, bur. Yonghwi-won, Ch'ongnyang-ni)". Furthermore, the Taewongun, who was also in the picture (as 'minister'), was in ill health by 1897, and died the next year. I'll post photos later. --Dan 21:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Here are photos of both Lady Om (mother of Yi Kang) and Kwi-in Yang, mother of Princess Dokhye, Kojong's last child. . To me, that photo of Lady Om does not look like either the usual photo supposed to be Queen Min, , nor the more recent photo, at [7]. Here's a detail from that photo comparing the woman labelled as Queen Min with Sunjong: . That woman looks nothing like Lady Om. --Dan 16:36, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Answer

Look at the captions written in Japanese. These photos are well-known to competent historians. But I don't upload these, since I cannot confirm a photographer and shooting date, respectively.

純貞孝皇后 尹氏: One of King Sunjong's(純宗) wives

明成皇后(明成王后): One of King Gojong's(高宗) wives This photo was published as a supplement book "Who's who in Modern Korea" 19221932 in Japan. Ref.--Lulusuke 03:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

One of Gojong's wives. According to the label this is Ombi （嚴妃)(?--1911). 世界風俗写真帖　第１集(Sekaifuzoku Syashin-cho No.1,) Syogoro Tsuboi and Raisuke Numata 1901. National Digital Library Ref. YDM2735.

Labelled as "a Lady's maid in Korean emperor's court" but also thought by many to be Myoungseong, Queen Min 世界風俗写真帖　第１集(Sekaifuzoku Syashin-cho No.1,) Syogoro Tsuboi and Raisuke Numata 1901. National Digital Library Ref. YDM2735.

--Lulusuke 01:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC) --Lulusuke 02:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC) --Lulusuke 08:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Lulusuke, can you read the date on Queen Yun's photo? Would it be 1917 or a different, maybe Japanese, calendar? --Dan 15:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes I recognize very clearly that the book was PRINTED, on the Japanse year , Syowa 7(19221932), although she was killed 1895. Additionally we cannot confirm the the photo shooter and shooting date. We must't write this issue, since there is no concrete evidence and no internatiol historical society doesn't recognize the photo. Thank you. --Lulusuke 00:47, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Lulusuke, if you can, please get a little help with your English - reading and posting - we are not communicating very well; I have difficulty understanding you and I think you have difficulty understanding me. On the left-hand photo, in the lower left, there is a caption which includes the Chinese characters for 17. Is that part of a date? If so, what date? --Dan 15:45, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I really appreciate your advice.　

Well, this left book wriitenn in Japanese was printed before　1944, since the style is based on OLD Japanese. Note that the bellows are NOT "full and complete sentences".

I'll show and interpret the right caption as followings

故　李王坧 妃殿下（勲一等）

”故” means ”The deceased”.　"李王坧" means King Gojong(고종 광무제).

"妃殿下" means "Their Royal Highnesses"(That is Gojong's daughter.)

"勲一等" means "She got the Grand Cordon of the Order" or "She got the first class medal."

Therefore I identify her as "순정효황후(純貞孝皇后)". It is not so easy, because Korean king has many wives and kids.

Please look "KOREANDB and compare the two photos.

The left Chinese characters( 한자,漢字)) for 17 are a part of Japanese written in vertical direction.

故李王 ..."The deceased King Gojong"

は侯爵　... "is(or become)a marquis ....

は第一女　..."is the first daughter ...

し、御...

十七年,,, .."17 years..."

日。........

:-).--Lulusuke 01:57, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay - Queen Yun's father was a marquis. The woman you refer to at KOREANDB is Lady Om, consort of Kojong and the mother of the prince who succeeded Sunjong. --Dan 04:49, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes. You are right. I show her photo above. Please see the photo and compare the two.--Lulusuke 08:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I can read Cantonese(a little Chinese) , Japanese, and Korean.

Cantonese is a diffent language from Chinese!

Cantonese:我對你唔起 Bejin: 我對不起你

If you can read Korean, I recommend to visit to http://www.koreanhistory.or.kr/ to get the first source. But a little of resource is not available to the public.--Lulusuke 03:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Who Keeps Deleting The Citations?

A while back I put in citations for the sections that people are asking for citations on. I had an article from the Chosun Ilbo, I had an article from Japan times. Also there was a citation for the Japanese Diet Library and other history websites. I come back to this article after a few months and now I see that these same sections are requesting citations. I had a reference for Miura's trial, where due the citations go. Who keeps deleteing the citations? I really don't want to go through the History section to look them up again.--Tyler 09:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll begin to confirm them by the first resources. See the above .--Lulusuke 08:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding that and the above discussions, please note Wikipedia:Reliable sources... as that makes clear, Wikipedia relies principally on secondary sources, since the unsupported use of primary sources would violate Wikipedia:No original research. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding... but the above discussion contains extensive research from primary sources, which is not generally appropriate on Wikipedia. -- Visviva 08:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I know what you say. But, the some of documents in the citations are unauthorized

by internatiol historical societies.

For example, http://www.kimsoft.com/2002/jp-rape.htm include some errors, since it isn't published in a　scientific journal, which 　is a refereed.

I would certainly not want to research extensively and originally.

Do you believe history reports by newspapers and homepages?

For example,

1. XINHAU news ?, Accoring to this, Goguryeo's history is belong to China's.

2. Official Homepage - Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK, North Korea), According this, people in DPRK is very happy.!!

Do you believe the above?

Again, I would certainly not want to research extensively and originally.

Thanks --Lulusuke 12:06, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Were you perhaps logged in under a different ID? Or is it possible that you were unable to save the changes at the time (maybe due to a server outage)? Reviewing the history back to 2004, I don't see your name prior to October 2 2006. Of course, it may just be that I missed it. Cheers, -- Visviva 08:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Visviva, I think Lulusuke is simply new to the English Wiki - his Japanese user page shows a longer history. --Dan 15:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, that question was directed to Tyler111 (hence the separate indentation) -- I couldn't find the revision of which he spoke. -- Visviva 02:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] OLD Japanese document

Source address ?

They showed the woman's corpse to the maids, All of the maids answered "This is the queen",... We reported the incident to the Daewon-gun, ...

This section is a stub. You can help by expanding it.