Talk:Empress Myeongseong - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 61.199.1.102 (talk) at 19:34, 19 May 2011 (→Korea was unnamed in the small country.: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 19:34, 19 May 2011 by 61.199.1.102 (talk) (→Korea was unnamed in the small country.: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Empress Myeongseong article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Empress Myeongseong article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on October 8, 2004 and October 8, 2005.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Korea High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by one or more inactive working groups.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Women's History

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

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 File: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 . 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)

The date has to be Japanese, as the rest of the legend. "17th year of Showa", the woman IS Queen Yun, and must be 40~50.81.57.148.99 (talk) 10:11, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

And finally, user Appleby, I think, posted a link to this article (Korean language) 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

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 (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 . 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)

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" ~~1922~~1932 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(~~1922~~1932), 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).

* which it does not. 李王坧 is King Sojeon.81.57.148.99 (talk) 10:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

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

* no way that 妃 could refer to a daughter. It refers to the King's wife 81.57.148.99 (talk) 10:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

"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 ....

* I don't see は there. Looks like 遠 or some other kanji, too blurry to say 81.57.148.99 (talk) 10:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

は第一女　..."is the first daughter ...

し、御...

十七年,,, .."17 years..."

* Showa 17th year looks like the only possibility. "1917" is unlikely to appear in a Japanese publication of the time. Also the date must be posterior to 1926 (Sojeon's death), and the woman looks more fourtyish than twentyish 81.57.148.99 (talk) 10:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

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)

Okay, let me look at the photos...

First photo:...is this Queen Yun??...or another/any of Sunjong's wives???
Second photo: placed in the article, in line with "End of an Era" (describing King Choljong's death without an heir)
Third photo:...I saw this photo in the Chosun Ilbo online article (referring to the German who collected pictures in Korea) (with the photos of Gojong, Sunjong, and the Daewon-gun) with the legend underneath her (in the collection) as "The Assasinated Empress", leading her as Myeongseong...but, as translated above, the label reads above as "Lady Om"... (bit confusing for this photo...)
Fourth photo (again with this!!): the purported picture again of Myeongseong...Heran et Sang'gres 14:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

For the "Assasinated Empress" thing I mentioned...: The legend reads as "Die Ermordete Königin" (is that German?), meaning "The Assassinated Queen"...does that help??Heran et Sang'gres 13:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to be slow answering, Herean. The first photo is Queen Yun, not so much by her appearance but more by the caption, which includes the bit about first daughter of a marquis. Which, now that I think of it, is wrong because Queen Yun had an older sister. The second photo is a mystery. The third photo has been discussed extensively - for my money, that's Queen Min. The fourth photo - the one that's been known for a while, and argued over. I think that could be Queen Min as well, but am less confident about it. --Dan 15:31, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks...But I'm wondering why the above above statements up there argued that the second is not Min...I wonder why is that...one website illustrated the first as Queen Min!!!! (http://www.oldkorea.henny-savenije.pe.kr) The fourth will remain a mystery...

That website clearly got it wrong - you can see in the royal family pictures adjoining the mis-labelled one, the same woman standing next to Sunjong - it's Queen Yun. I'm having difficulty finding firm statements in the jumble above about the second picture. It is from one of those old Japanese travel books, and who knows what the source is......and if I recall correctly, does not have the character 'bi' - denoting the queen - in the caption immediately under the photo, but is labeled more as wife of the Yi King. Still, that one's a mystery - if she's not Queen Min, who is she - and there're a number of possibilities, as you know. --Dan 15:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Guys, I visited a website where originally I was gonna get some pics of kisaeng women, then when I got to the part of sketches made by some french guys, I made a (startling?) discovery. There are some pics there that resemble Min's alleged photo. Here are the links:

http://www.women.or.kr/herstory/WomenArt/frillust/image/illust11.jpg - a colored sketch of a court lady who is in the sitting position similar to her alleged photo http://www.women.or.kr/herstory/WomenArt/frillust/image/illust10.jpg - very similar sketch to her alleged photo http://www.women.or.kr/herstory/WomenArt/frillust/image/illust12.jpg - does this portray Min's assassination??? Heran et Sang'gres 09:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

For the third picture, it says that

The illustrations by foreigners: The assassination of Queen of Joseon (외국인이 그린 삽화: 조선 왕비의 살해)

Etching drawn by 리온 르와이에. However I don't know who is the painter, so searched the transliterated Korean name (리온 르와이에) with the google engine, and then I found out a link. http://nanet.empas.com/search/nanet_detail.html?vt=A&i=620974813&sn=KDMT1200615373&q=&q2=

It is a Ph.D thesis on "Portraits of Gojong of Korea: The introduces of modern visual media and transformations of eojin (고종 황제의 초상 : 근대 시각매체의 유입과 어진의 변용 과정). Eojin refers to portrait paintings of Kings in Joseon dyansty. This thesis has the etching illustration and is likely to describe it in detail but I couldn't reach it with my Mac. Korean people with PC could solve the problem. Btw the name of the painter is LionesRoyer in alphabet without blank. ---Appletrees 15:30, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Guys, here's a pic about the Eulmi Incident... http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Image:Queen_Min_Eulmi_Incident.jpg Can anyone analyze? Thanks... Heran et Sang'gres (talk) 07:50, 20 January 2008 (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)

my edit

After all the current drama, I was a little reluctant to edit this article again however it needed it.

I have made an edit based mainly, but not entirely on grammar issues.

If anyone has a problem with the text ie. use of Queen Min instead of Empress Myeongseong, or any other choice of word that could be considered POV, leading, undue weight etc - then please edit that section instead of just reverting it - if you change minor wording, I will consider the change - I don't really care if you wish to use Empress Myeongseong instead of Queen Min, as both as currently in use in the article, however if you just revert and go back to the previous section, I will consider this to be disruptive and I will undo your revert as it will go back to the state that had major English grammar issues. カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 06:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Her royal seal

Is it possible to display in to the article her royal seal? I saw a pic in flickr displaying her royal seal, which had the first 4 characters "Empress Myeongseong"... Heran et Sang'gres (talk) 12:13, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Regent ?

"Efforts to remove her from the political arena, orchestrated through failed rebellions prompted by the father of King Gojong, Heungseon Daewongun"

How can this be right ? How can the King's father be regent ? Would he not be the king ? Usually a regent is the King's uncle of some kind.122.106.255.204 (talk) 05:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Regent is correct. Koreans do not follow strict patrilineal succession, but prefer to select the best person for the job at the time, so to speak. Daewongun was emphatic in promoting his son as a good choice, but a lot of that was because he would be in actual power himself, and Kojong would be easily manipulated. A good part of Daewongun's falling-out with Myeongseong was because she helped Kojong grow a backbone. --Snow (talk) 16:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

When did she become queen?

The article points out on several occasions, that she did not have the title of Queen for years after her marriage, but it does not say when she received the title. I know that it is not the same thing as in Europe, when a woman automatically becomes queen when she marries a king. So, when during the marriage was she given the title? In the 1880s? --85.226.41.65 (talk) 22:19, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Nice question. Actually, at that time, when a Korean lady (15-16 years old) marries a King of Joseon, she automatically becomes his Queen Consort through a ceremony called "chaekbi" (冊妃 책비). So, summary, Myeongseong became Gojong's "Queen Consort" (mind the actual title, since "Queen" can also be mistakenly & confusingly mean "Queen Regnant", as with Elzabeth II) when she got married. I hope this satisfies you... Heran et Sang'gres (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the interesting information. It seems that at the time the question above was made, the article seemed to claim that she did not have the title of queen for some time, and that she was given it later during her marriage. But perhaps that was due to some misunderstanding, and it does seem as if that article has been corrected now. So it was similar to Europe in this case. Did the king have several wives, but only one queen? --85.226.42.215 (talk) 02:11, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi again. A Korean king (like any other kings of the world) can have several wives as concubines, but can only have one primary & legal wife as Queen Consort.

For some interesting information (on your part), concubines in the past (during the Joseon Dynasty) were sometimes given the special honor of being the King's primary wife (the Queen Consort; if the King wishes it so, and if he had a male son (in most cases the first-born) with her); there were 3 noted cases before 1700. The last one (died in 1701 by execution thru poisoning) was the worst case; so much, that in 1701, Sukjong (the king at that time) decreed that no concubine should ever be a Queen Consort.

Hope this satisfies you. Heran et Sang'gres (talk) 15:53, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Eulmi Incident grammar and style issues

There are numerous grammatical errors and style issues in the Eulmi Incident section. A bit of it will require familiarity with Misplaced Pages style standards, which I don't have.

Korea was unnamed in the small country.

The assassination of the Korean Empress ignited diplomatic protest abroad. To appease growing international criticism.

I think that this description is self-conceit. Other countries were not interested in Korea. 61.199.1.102 (talk) 19:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Categories: