Batu Nisan Dipercayai Dari Dinasti Qing Abad Ke-17 Dijumpai Di Rumah Bekas MB

haznor

sarah82 replied at 18-11-2020 11:47 PM
Laaa...jadi faham la tulisan cina tu.. Baru aku tau.

Siannya.. Neutral katanya.. Yela.

saje nak perhatian je tu ...

sarah82

haznor replied at 19-11-2020 07:59 AM
saje nak perhatian je tu ...

Aku rasa aku kena panggil saka aku iaitu @Kurex utk temankan dia.. Sbb dia perlukan perhatian.

Cc @Kurex aku dengar kata bangchak ensem weiii

myoujin

cmf_almondpecan replied at 18-11-2020 09:34 PM
Walaupun saya tak reti baca tulisan cina atau bahasa cina tapi saya ada mengkaji sedikit sebanyak da ...

福神 = mascot? Gugel translate haha..

Tulisan baru kot.. aku tulis kat gugel pun dlm bahasa jepun.. kanji dia fukujin.. sama je tulisan kanji jepun.

Suchi

Kat fb ramai komen katanya mcm baru tanam dan tak logik tak perasan sbb rendah sangat.

tripleid

jgn nak hepi sgt.mamposla kalo pasni china dtg claim pahang..mcm la x tau sblm ni dah byk wilayah cina tuntut atas dasar sejarah perdagangan zaman dulu2

Historical Support for China's South China Sea Territorial Stance

BY MARK HOSKIN 08-10-2019 01:35:00


There have been recent claims in the media that Great Britain and other nations who operate Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPS) in the South China Sea have taken no stance concerning the sovereignty of the three island groups that are the subject of dispute among China, the Philippines and Vietnam. However, there is overwhelming evidence that this is not the case. Instead, that evidence points to prior recognition of the islands as historic Chinese territory.

To examine this question, public statements by government officials regarding the Spratley, Paracel and Pratas Islands (Dongsha Islands) were examined, a common legal practice used by the International Court of Justice to show official intent.

British Government efforts at understanding China’s history in the region were made in 1944 when preparations were underway for post war administration of occupied territories. The British Military Administration, Malaya, was making observations concerning Chinese maritime history in the South China Sea region:

“It must not be forgotten that while Europe was still relying on the galley in the Mediterranean and was only feeling towards the fore- and aft- rig in the North Seas and sailing in ships whose capacities measured in tens of tons, the Chinese were already ocean sailors with junks to be found from their own coasts to the mouth of the Indus whilst the Arabs in dhows of over 1,000 tons capacity were bringing the spices of the East Indies to Egypt and the European markets.”

Chinese ability to sail across the South China Sea region and into the Indian Ocean can be seen as recognized by the U.K. Government in this statement.

Economic exploitation of the resources in the South China Sea region was recognized earlier in Europe; among the first records in the post Roman Empire period were made in 1154. Roger of Sicily’s Court Geographer, the Arab al-Idrisi, provided early recorded details of Chinese junks sailing towards the West:

“All the Chinese ships, great or small, that navigate in the China Sea are solidly constructed of wood. The pieces of timber are disposed geometrically one over the other, protected by palm fibres and caulked with flour and fish oil. In the China Sea and the Indian Ocean there are large animals 100 yards [this is probably feet] long and 25 wide, on the backs of which grow bumps of rocks and shellfish like vegetation, by which the ships are sometimes damaged. Mariners recount how they attack these animals with arrows and thus force them to move out of their way. They add that they pierce the smallest of these animals and boil them in cauldrons, that their flesh dissolves and turns into liquid fat. This oily substance is renowned in the Yemen, in Aden, on the coasts of Fars and Oman, and in the Indian Ocean and the China Sea. The people of these regions make use of this substance for filling the hulls of the ships.”

That al-Idrisi was able to record the hunting of whales in the South China Sea region in 1154 exhibits the longevity of the practice in Chinese maritime history and the long-term presence of the history itself, rendering it unsurprising that President Xi of China would invoke an observation of Chinese maritime use since “ancient times” in claiming the islands as Chinese territory.

The history of Chinese maritime trade in the region is also based on the foundation of Spratly Islands' exploitation and occupation. The Spratly Islands have been historically known to Chinese mariners, who were observed to sail through the South China Sea to Jakarta (then Batavia) by John Crawfurd, a mariner and trader in the 1830s. It was subsequently reported in the Japan Times in 1933 that Chinese fishing parties were leaving members who then lived on the islands.

These records of historical use have been disputed, as the BBC reporter Bill Hayton noted in 2014: “On 13 April 1930, the French Warship Malicieuse dropped anchor off Spratly Island, hundreds of kilometers to the south of Pratas and the Paracels, and fired a 21-gun salute. The only witnesses to this display of imperial pomp were four marooned and starving fishermen unaware that they were witnessing the opening salvo in a still-unfinished battle for their fishing grounds.”

However, reports of rice supplies and other necessities arriving from China contradict Hayton's suggestion that there were four marooned and starving fishermen. Junks were commandeered for military operations on the Southern Chinese coastline, making them unavailable for the 800-mile voyage from Hainan that year, adding to the maritime issues related to the ongoing conflict with Japan (1930-1945).

After World War II, the Spratly Islands were noted by the British High Commission of Singapore as territory that was returned to China. In 1971, the following statement was made: “Spratly Island was a Chinese dependency, part of Kwangtung Province…and was returned to China after the war. We cannot find any indication of its having been acquired by any other country and so can only conclude it is still held by communist China. (Far Eastern Economic Review, December 31, 1974).”

It should be noted that this was outside of any major conflict in the modern period in the South China Sea (1930–1945, 1945–1956, 1974), and made after an exhaustive study was concluded by the U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth Office. It can therefore can be considered a reasoned statement of recognition made by a knowing and authoritative governmental source who was based in the Southeast Asian before and during World War II.

The consistent nature of other statements made by Britain France and Japan suggest that these nations have historically taken the same position as China, and made public statements to that effect.

For example, France occupied the Paracel Islands in the 1930s during the war between China and Japan. The occupation took place over a year after France had refused to abolish its extraterritorial rights in China, which had been held since 1844. The first official announcement concerning the seizure of the Paracel Islands was made by M. Bonnet, the French Foreign Minister at the Quay d’Orsay, stating that the islands were now occupied by two detachments of Annamite gendarmes from Vietnam in 1938. Amid the Sino-Japanese conflict, the Quai d’Orsay took the opportunity to note that “the islands have been visited by Chinese fishermen for generations” (North China Herald, July 4, 1938, June 6, 1934).

Meanwhile, the Chinese Ambassador Wellington Koo informed M. Bonnet that China continued to claim sovereignty over the islands, and Japanese Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Mr Horinouchi also made official representations “regarding the French occupation of the Paracel Islands’ (Japan Times & Mail, July 6, 1938; Portsmouth Evening News, July 7, 1938; emphasis added).

It is clear that the occupation by France of islands used for internationally-recognized Chinese historical economic life was protested by China as an invasion of sovereign territory, and was publicly repeated by Japanese officials, who wished to possess the islands for belligerent purposes that were directed towards China during their war of the 1930s and 40s. The impact today can be derived from a legal interpretation, as UNESCO and UNCLOS provide protections and rights for historic grave sites.

The United States entered the fray quietly, through information published in early US Navy Sailing Directions that Japanese newspapers then published: “West York Island ....The island is of coral formation, about 1 mile in length by half a mile in breadth, and 15 feet in height. On it are a few coconut trees and some other vegetation, and it is frequented by turtles and sea birds. Chinese fishermen from Hainan appear to frequent it during the latter part of the north-east monsoon to gather trepan as a joss-house and three graves were found on the islands, as well as an old iron cannon. Some remains of wrecks were also seen. The island seems to offer no facilities whatever for a naval station, which fact may not have been without influence on it’s being neglected by the French."

The question now arises: what can the aforementioned countries do to resolve this issue?

First, the existence of this awareness and historic knowledge can be given recognition. As publicly available material overwhelmingly supports the Chinese perception, acknowledgment would provide a united understanding of historic use and provide a foundation for resolution.

Secondly, the historic ability of the islands to support human life and provide economic benefits of their own should be exhaustively examined, putting to rest the dispute created by the UNCLOS tribunal in Philippines v China.

Finally, the stipulation in the Treaty of San Francisco which requires any dispute over the meaning of the treaty be taken to the International Court of Justice for a resolution should be followed, leaving the Court to resolve the question over sovereignty of the islands, and therefore the ownership of the territorial waters and Exclusive Economic Zone surrounding them.

However, many countries would probably not support such a path, or uphold the results.

Mark Hoskin is a Researcher at the Center for International Studies and Diplomacy, SOAS, University of London, London, U.K.

This article includes a summary of a paper published in a Special Issue of Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs DOI: 10.1080/18366503.2019.1611173

cmf_almondpecan

myoujin replied at 19-11-2020 08:14 AM
福神 = mascot? Gugel translate haha..

Tulisan baru kot.. aku tulis kat gugel pun dlm bahasa jep ...

Kalau ikut kawan cina yg saya tanya, 福 atau fu maksud dia luck. Dlm bahasa hokkien, sebutannya hock mcm nama org hock seng tu. 神atau shen pulak ertinya god. Jadi fu shen tu boleh diterjemah sbg god of luck. Mungkin org lain yg lebih faham bahasa cina dlm forum ni boleh membantu.

myoujin

cmf_almondpecan replied at 19-11-2020 08:55 AM
Kalau ikut kawan cina yg saya tanya, 福 atau fu maksud dia luck. Dlm bahasa hokkien, sebutannya ho ...

Bahasa jepun pun camtu... Fuku= luck.. shin = god.. tapi gugel translate jadi mascot haha..

cmf_almondpecan

Di Kuala Terengganu juga ada batu nesan cina dari abad ke-17 masa dinasti qing pemerintahan maharaja Qianlong. Ada dilantik oleh DYMM Sultan Terengganu ketika itu sbg kapitan cina di sana suatu masa dulu. Keturunan mereka ni masih ada di KT dan ramai juga yg telah pindah ke KL dan luar negara. Generasi muda mungkin sudah berubah tp generasi 30an dan 40an masih ramai yg ckp Melayu terengganu/Kelantan, makan dgn tangan dan makan budu belacan semua, pakai kain batik di rumah.

cmf_almondpecan

Bangbot replied at 18-11-2020 09:58 PM
Apakah maksud tulisan atas nesan tu??

Yg ni kena tanya org yg boleh baca tulisan cina dgn lancar. Mungkin saudara @I.am.PH boleh bantu?

cmf_almondpecan

myoujin replied at 19-11-2020 08:58 AM
Bahasa jepun pun camtu... Fuku= luck.. shin = god.. tapi gugel translate jadi mascot haha..

Menarik. Sebutan hokkien banyak yg seakan Jepun. 神 dlm bahasa hokkien ialah sin.

Tinot7

cmf_almondpecan replied at 19-11-2020 09:01 AM
Yg ni kena tanya org yg boleh baca tulisan cina dgn lancar. Mungkin saudara @I.am.PH boleh bantu?

Dia boleh baca ke?

Baidewei, saudara bkn ke utk lelaki.. saudari utk pompan

cmf_almondpecan

Tinot7 replied at 19-11-2020 09:06 AM
Dia boleh baca ke?

Baidewei, saudara bkn ke utk lelaki.. saudari utk pompan

@I.am.ph ni laki ke pompuan? Saya pun tak sure dia boleh baca ke tak. Kalau boleh untunglah.

Boomibulat

Tinot7 replied at 18-11-2020 09:26 PM
Iols dok bayangkan adegan pet sematary

Seram gak cite ni..tp dh x berapa ingat ending..

Tinot7

cmf_almondpecan replied at 19-11-2020 09:11 AM
@I.am.ph ni laki ke pompuan? Saya pun tak sure dia boleh baca ke tak. Kalau boleh untunglah.

Gambaq profil dia pompan. Iols ingatkan pompan la... tapi kalau pompan jadian, tak tau la..

Tak pasti dia boleh baca sbb kalau jenis rajin membaca, dah sah2 tak keje sbg rba dan dpt keje lain.

Dlm artikel di atas, tulisan kat batu2 tu bknnya boleh dibaca dgn senang. Kalau boleh gugel translate kan best?

Tinot7

Boomibulat replied at 19-11-2020 09:15 AM
Seram gak cite ni..tp dh x berapa ingat ending..

Iols tak tgk muvi 2019. Tapi yg versi lama tu, si ayah bunuh anak laki kecik yg dah berubah tu. Wndingnya, dia tanam isteri dia yg mati. Isteri dia balik dr pet sematary dan bunuh dia.. ending seram bg iols la. Kalau dah tau semua yg ditanam jadi mcm tu, masih gatal nak buat lagi dan lagi dan lagi.

myoujin

cmf_almondpecan replied at 19-11-2020 09:06 AM
Menarik. Sebutan hokkien banyak yg seakan Jepun. 神 dlm bahasa hokkien ialah sin.

Tu bacaan kanji onyomi... Kalau bacaan asal jepun "kunyomix bacaan dia 神= kami.. cam cerita kami sama mou sukoshi dake

dodolgemok

So cina dh dtg lama lah drpd jawa bugis indon semua tu? Cina bukan pendatang?

JunkMail

underground replied at 18-11-2020 11:14 PM
masa study mrsm jasin dulu, bila gi masjid lalu rumah kampung nampak nisan kubur kat laman setiap  ...

Kat Kuala Pilah N9 pun banyak. Kat kampung2 jalan2 dalam bukan tepi jalan besar tu. Kalau lalu jalan kampung sempit2 tu banyak rumah ada kubur2 lama depan rumah. Seram pulak fikir.

zeed

myoujin replied at 19-11-2020 09:38 AM
Tu bacaan kanji onyomi... Kalau bacaan asal jepun "kunyomix bacaan dia 神= kami.. cam cerita kami  ...

Jinjya no jin jyanai no?

JunkMail

dodolgemok replied at 19-11-2020 10:13 AM
So cina dh dtg lama lah drpd jawa bugis indon semua tu? Cina bukan pendatang?

Kurun ke 17 bro.. sekitar 200 tahun yang lalu. Cheng Ho pun dah datang lama sebelum tu.  Nusantara pula dah establish sejak kurun ke
7/8 rasanya. Kajian terbaru ada yg bahaskan Islam sampai ke nusantara sejak zaman Nabi lagi untuk berdakwah dgn orang-orang timur jauh.

Tapi aku rasa kau tak peduli pun