The real locations of "Hoang Sa" and "Truong Sa" appeared in Vietnamese historical maps and records referred to a long belt like area directly not far off the Vietnam coastline, which were regarded as navigational dangers at that time. South Vietnam purposely made use of this and transplanted the names of "Hoang Sa" and "Truong Sa" to the "Paracels" and "Spratlys" group known in modern time, basically they faked their claims and then started to interprete almost anything in their historical records with the words of "Truong Sa", "Hoang Sa" or "Cat Vang" (means hoang sa or yellow sand). Based on maps and historical record, Hoang Sa or Cat Vang actually referred to the Canton Island which the Europeans translated from Cat Vang to Catouang and then wrote as Caton or Canton; and based on the distances calculations "Truong Sa" actually refers to Ly Son island, which is not far from the Vietnam coast.

In fact, the name "Paracel, Pracel" in western maps were also developed over a long history, for quite some time the ancient western maps showed reefs and shoals at a long belt like area not far off the central Vietnam coast and called it Parcel/Pracel(s) /Paracels. It was only until in recent times they discovered the Xisha Islands, and then started to draw these islands on the right upper corner of the long belt area, and gave different names to it. Only very recent maps like the plate 6 in 1851 started to remove the long belt area and transfered the name "Paracles" to today's Paracel Islands.

The 1812 map of East India Islands by William Darton shows clearly the "Hoang Sa & Truong Sa" belt area, Amphitrite of today's Paracel Islands, Siamete Shoal of today's Macclessfield Bank, and Scarborough Shoal, and some features of the Spratly Islands. Comparing this map to the Dai Nam That Thong Toan Do ("Unified Map of the Great Nam") which was dated somewhere between 1820 to 1840 (no clear proof to confirm the date), one can clearly tell where the Vietnamese "Hoang Sa" and "Truong Sa" area refer to. The Vietnam claims to Paracel (Xisha) Islands and Spratly (Nansha) Islands were simply fabricated lies. "Truong Sa" and "Hoang Sa" in Vietnamese historical records have nothing to do with China's Nansha and Xisha Islands.

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

“从欧洲早期地图中找寻南海的踪迹 Paracel/Pracel区域变迁研究”
“结 合他们所对应的时间,一定程度上验证了韩振华先生和李金明先生的“越南长沙与黄沙群岛非中国西沙、南沙群岛”的观点的正确性。西方对于中国海的认识过程 中,正和中国古地图中所传递信息一样,曾经一度把越南中部海岸外不远处的一些浅滩、沙洲画成一个长条形,并称之为Parcel/Pracel(s) /Paracels, 但是直到近代,他们才发现中国西沙群岛,并且开始在这个长条形的右上角画出中国的西沙群岛,并给了好几个不同的命名,后来非常近代(比如Plate6中的 1851年)的地图中才开始在地图中去除这个长条状,但是把Paracels这一名称转移到现在真正的西沙群岛上。”

最能反映出19世纪初 paracels与中国南沙群岛、西沙群岛的相互关系的地图是西方1812年的这幅地图。在这幅地图中,Paracels与中国西沙群岛、南沙群岛、中沙群岛并列出现,可以让越南的谎言不攻自破。

1812 East India Islands

在这幅地图中:
1. 越南近岸的岛屿和暗滩区标注为Paracels,并用一个长条形的框给框起来。
2. 而中国的西沙群岛则被标注为Amphitrite。(直到今天,西沙群岛中的东半部分(永兴岛、七连屿等)仍然被西方称为Amphitrite,这一部分对应于我国所说的宣德群岛。西沙群岛==宣德群岛+永乐群岛。)
3. 在中沙大环礁的位置,出现的标注是siamete shoal. 这与西方人今天对中沙环礁的标注也有吻合。因为中沙环礁中的西门暗沙至今仍被西方人称作siamete shoal。
4. 黄岩岛的位置,出现的标注是Scarborough Shoal。这与今天西方人对黄岩岛的称呼完全一致。
5. 中国南沙群岛的位置,出现了大量的岛礁名称标注。反映出的轮廓与今天的标注基本一致,即大体是西南--东北走向。

再把越南奉若至宝的“大南一统图”(1834年)给拿出来对比一下,就更能揭露越南人的谎言了。
大南一统图中的“黄沙”和“万里长沙”不过就把对西方1812年地图中的paracels分成了两部分,北边的叫“黄沙”,南边的称为“万里长沙”。

Dai nam nhat thong toan do

至此,事情很明了了。越南古代关于黄沙和长沙的记载,西方19世纪初以前关于paracels的记载,都是关于越南近岸岛礁和暗滩区域的,跟中国的西沙和南沙没有半点关系。

Also see:

http://www.nansha.org.cn/maps/1/ancient_maps_pracel.html

http://wmliaodong.blog.163.com/blog/static/137258444201051701737984/

总评分 (0)

0 (满分5分)

发表评论

以游客身份发表评论

0
您的评论提交之后需要经过管理员审查才能发表。
服务条款.
  • 还没有人发表评论。