竹島問題の歴史

2.11.07

1750~1768 - Joseon Jido (朝鮮地圖) - Ulleungdo

The following map of Ulleungdo comes from the "Joseon Jido (朝鮮地圖), which is a Korean atlas believed to have been made sometime between 1750 and 1768. The maps in the atlas were unique for the time because they were drawn on ruled paper for relative scale. The map below shows Usan (于山) less than two grid lines off the eastern shore of Ulleungdo. That means that it was just a few kilometers offshore. It also means that it was almost certainly Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Jukdo (竹島), which is about 2.2 kilometers off Ulleungdo's eastern shore. Korea claims that Usando (于山島) was the old Korean name for "Dokdo" (Liancourt Rocks), but the map below shows that Usando was almost certainly Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Jukdo, not Dokdo. The map is stored at Seoul National University's Kyujanggak Institute of Korean Studies.

The map also shows Ulleungdo with five other neighboring islands off the southern shore. This was most likely a mapping error since most of Ulleungdo's rock islets (石島) are off Ulleungdo's northern shore. In any case, this map, and several others, seems to conform with an 1899 Korean newspaper article, which described Ulleungdo as having six small neighboring islands, the most prominent of which was Usando/Jukdo (于山島竹島). The combining of the names "Usando/Jukdo" in the article was most likely done to show that the one island had two names, which is also what Korea's old maps tell us.

1750 ~ 1768 -Joseonjido_Gangwondo_Ulleungdo

37 comments:

  1. I am working on a collection of old Korean maps of Ulleungdo, but I thought I would post the above map to fill the gap. Besides, I think this is an important map that needs to be spotlighted.

    After you click on the map, you can choose to see a larger version of it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Gerry,

    Thanks, it's interesting.
    The word "刻石立標" (carved stone standing sign) can be seen at the north part of the island, which can be the 1711 stone 立標.

    And there seems to have been "刻板立標" (Carved board standing sign) at another side of the island. Are there any information about this carved board?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Pacifist,

    I do not think it is really known what was written on the signs, but this map suggests that the sign on the southwest side of the island said that it was a "shelter from wind" (待風所) since the characters are written right next to the charaters for "craved, erected sign" (刻板立標 (erected craved sign). Korean historians speculate that the signs were claiming Korean sovereignty over Ulleungdo, but I think they may have been Japanese signs claiming certain areas for Japanese fishermen since Japanese and Korean fishermen shared the island for many years. I have often wondered why many old Korean maps of Ulleungdo listed certain areas of the island as Japanese docking or boat storage sites. How did the Korean mapmakers and inspectors know that?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hello, I study the Takeshima issue personally and take a study of Mr. Gerry into account very much. In fact, I am making my homepage about the Takeshima issue now, Though only a little is yet completed, please refer to it if it is useful. Then I utilized the image of the site of Mr. Gerry.
    http://outdoor.geocities.jp/yabutarou01/

    ReplyDelete
  5. yabutarou01さん

    ようこそ!
    実は、ヤフーのスレッドであなたのコメントを見つけてから(同一人物ですよね?)、あれがGerryの大発見につながったんですよ!。改めて御礼を申し上げます。 ここでは、地図を中心に、文献なども皆で論議しています。英語が中心ですが、どんどん、参加してくださいね。(日本語でも構いません。)フェアで論理的なコメントをお待ちしています。サイトも面白そうですね。どんどん充実していってください。

    Gerry,
    Do yo think these "Usando + 5 islands around Ulleundo" started from 1711 map by Park? And do you think this concept through 18-19c affected the 皇城新聞 article in 1899 and Ordinance 41 in 1900 (石島=5 small islands)?

    BTW, yabutarou above is the one who found the similarity of the description of small island with 海長竹 in 1694 鬱稜島事蹟 first.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mr. Yabutarou,

    Thank you for the link to your Web site. It is very interesting, and is something similar to what I was working on. I was especially surprised to see the second map from the right on THIS PAGE, which is a closeup of THIS MAP. It surprised me because it shows that I misread the Chinese characters on the fuzzy map I have. Of course, it is also exciting because raises some interesting questions.

    The map shows two relatively large islands off the east shore of Ulleungdo. One is labeled as 小干島 (Sogando), and the other is labeled as 大干島 (Daegando). Sogando looks like it could be Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Gwaneumdo, and Daegando looks like it could be Ulleungdo's Jukdo. What makes it interesting is that THIS JAPANESE MAP and others show Ulleungdo with a neighboring island labeled as 間島 (Gando). The Chinese characters 干 and 間 are both pronounced as "Gan" in Korean. If we were to switch the characters, then the island that looks to be Gwaneumdo could be translated as "Small Gap Island," and the island that looks to be Jukdo could be translated as "Large Gap Island." That would be a pretty good description of the actual islands since the distance (間 - gap) between Gwaneumdo and the Ulleungdo shore is only about 100 meters, and the distance between Jukdo and the Ulleungdo shore is larger at about 2.2 kilometers.

    Another interesting thing is that 干島 translates in Korean as "Bangbaedo" (防牌島), which was mentioned as a neighboring island of Ulleungdo in a 1794 Ulleungdo survey report HERE. Depending on the dates of the Korean and Japanese maps, it seems likely that either the Koreans or the Japanese learned the name of the island from the other. Anyway, it is something to think about.

    Thanks again. I will include a link to your Web site on this blog. Take care.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Kaneganese,

    Yes, I do think those five islands and Usando influenced the 1899 article because Usando and those five islands appeared even on the 1899 map HERE. I do not know if someone actually told the reporter that Ulleungdo had six neighboring islands, but he could have looked at some Ulleungdo maps and come up with that on his own.

    As for Imperial Edict 41, I am almost positive that the "Seokdo" (石島) mentioned in that edict was a catchall phrase referring to Ulleundo's neighboring rock islets. I plan on writing a post on Imperial Edict 41 sometime this weekend, and I have an fairly interesting map that I want to introduce to support my claim. Even though it is not a map of Ulleungdo, I think it will answer, at least, one question.

    Yes, I remember seeing Mr. Yabutarou's map comparisons before, but I hadn't notice before that he had a closeup of the mystery map that I had recently seen on a KBS video. It was interesting to see that.

    Anyway, just when it seems like you have seen all that there is to see in regard to the Dokdo/Takeshima debate, something new pops up. That is want makes this study interesting for me.

    Take care.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mr. Yabutarou,

    Thank you, again. Wow, I just looked at your site more closely and realized that you have all the maps there. It is great.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Awsome map list of Mr.yabatarou's,thx!!!!!

    Those map list are good to know the difference of Usando=JUKDO from Liancourt Rocks.
    In addition,most of them has 6 small adjunctive island including most prominent island of Usando=Jukdo.

    I think,those map with OPP's location plot map list enables many people to realize the difference of Usando=JUKDO from Liancourt Rocks more easily.

    By the way, Im much interesting
    in the map No.82 ,year 1905.
    There is no liancourt Rocks on the Map#82?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Gerry,

    Thanks.
    I think the direct translation of 待風所 is "the place (所)where ships keep waiting (待) for wind (風)", not "shelter from wind". The ships in those days had to wait for the right wing to blow. The south or southwest place seems to be good to go back to Korean mainland when the "good wind" blows.

    But there was no 待風所 in the east side, which may mean the Koreans usually didn't go far to east from Ulleungdo.

    And I think 刻板立標 was a carved board erected sign, because 板 means board (usually wood board).

    Anyway, it is interesting to see such a map.

    BTW, welcome yabutarou01! Please keep posting!

    ReplyDelete
  11. You're right, Pacifist. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  12. yabutarou014/11/07 02:13

    Kaneganese さん

    ありがとうございます。私は大学生の時に考証学を学んだことがあって、漢文ならそれなりに読めるんですけども、大変な遅筆な上に英語は苦手なんですよ。。。
    鬱陵島の古地図のうち円形と楕円形の地図のほとんどに属島が六島あることから考えると皇城新聞 の1899年の記事「鬱陵と其 附属一小六島中に最著者于山島 竹島」の六島は古地図に載っている六島の属島のことであって実際の鬱陵島の地理認識によるものではないと思います。実際六島に竹島に含まないと見なすにしろ竹島を一島または二島に解釈するにしろ現代の鬱陵島の地図からは顕著な六島の属島を特定するのは困難です。
    形を比べてみれば『海東輿地圖』の『鬱陵島図』は1899年ごろに成立した『大韓地誌』の『大韓全図』、同じく『江原道図』そして『大韓輿地図』の鬱陵島の形の原型であると推測できること、鬱陵島の形が朝鮮地圖の模写であるのは明らかな高麗大学図書館の『地圖』は、日本の人口が37017302人と書いてあることから考えると成立年は1881年以降であるのがわかること、以上の2点を考えれば1899当時楕円形の古地図がいまだ現役であったと推測しても不自然ではありません。

    ReplyDelete
  13. yabutarou014/11/07 02:22

    Gerry,

    I am honored to help you. I am surely convinced that kbs map and 『国立中央図書館所蔵 古地図 鬱陵島図形 』 are same map.
    干山島 is another name of 于山島 . and 観音島 is smaller than 竹嶼 . so I think 大干島 is 竹嶼 meanning "big 于山島" . and 小干島 is 観音島 meanning " small 于山島" . both 竹嶼 and 観音島 were regarded as 于山島 .

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yabutarou01さん
    "形を比べてみれば『海東輿地圖』の『鬱陵島図』は1899年ごろに成立した『大韓地誌』の『大韓全図』、同じく『江原道図』そして『大韓輿地図』の鬱陵島の形の原型であると推測できること"
    『海東輿地圖』の『鬱陵島図』は何年の成立でしょうか?朴錫昌の「欝陵島図形」(1711)より古いものでしょうか?
    (When was 『鬱陵島図』 of 『海東輿地圖』 made? Is it older than 「欝陵島図形」by 朴錫昌 in 1711?)

    GTOMR wrote;
    "Those map list are good to know the difference of Usando=JUKDO from Liancourt Rocks.
    In addition,most of them has 6 small adjunctive island including most prominent island of Usando=Jukdo.
    I think,those map with OPP's location plot map list enables many people to realize the difference of Usando=JUKDO from Liancourt Rocks more easily."
    I totally agree.

    "By the way, Im much interesting in the map No.82 ,year 1905. There is no liancourt Rocks on the Map#82?"
    This is a very interesting map. Is it a geograpy text book? It does look like excluding Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo. (But I couldn't see the details, since it reject any right-click or anything. Do you know how to enlarge the map?) So far, we have 1899, 1901,1905 and 1907, official Korean map which exclude Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo. In addition, 1922 「大韓民国」 map which was made during Japanese annex era also tells us Korean didn't think Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo as Korean territory at all until 崔南善 answered to Korean delegate that Dokdo used to be called 三峯島 around 1950, and it lead Lee's line and Korean governement fault claim Dokdo is their land.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This map seems bit strange. Only this map is different technology in 18C,compare with other map in 18C of Ulluegndo detail maps.

    1. This map(朝鮮地図.1750-1768) have scale,measure.
    Korean old detail maps of Ullungdo during 18C have no scale except this 朝鮮地図. Those scale are mostly shown after 1830’s,especially 金正活's

    2.Mostly the maps during 18C are circle-shape Ulleungdo map. It is strange only this map(朝鮮地図.1750-1768)is Pentagon shape.Other pentagon shape of Ullungdo shown in the late of 18C like 輿地圖 江原道 and 19C like 金正浩's maps. Circle shape maps are shown in 19C as well.

    3.On this map(朝鮮地図.1750-1768), "Usan于山" locates bit away from Mainlsland of Ullungdo.
    Most of Ulleungdo's detail maps in 18C, they wrote "So-called Usando所謂于山島" instead of "Usan于山", locates Just east of Ullungdo and it is just small island. But this map,Usan locates not just east but bit away and bigger, east from Ulluengdo.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Kaneganese-san 12:59 PM
    >(But I couldn't see the details, since it reject any right-click or anything. Do you know how to enlarge the map?)

    Use Firefox and it enables to use "Right-Click".Internet Explorer couldn't work Right-click when on the website.
    Then Use photo shop to enlarge this map.Ofcourse the photo would be rough but It can confirm no liancourt Rocks in the map.

    ReplyDelete
  17. GTOMR,

    Thank you. I will try Firefox when I get back home tonight. I’m using other person’s PC at the moment
    Do you know when the Korean map with grids started? I somehow thought it was 金正浩 who started it. Then I automatically thought those maps with grids are 19C maps, actually.

    correction
    So far, we have 1899, 1901,1905 and 1907, official Korean map which exclude Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo.

    So far, we have 1899, 1900(学部編集局「大韓輿地圖」), 1901, 1905 and 1907, official Korean maps which exclude Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Kaneganeseさん

    右のサイト(http://yeoju.golibrary.go.kr/)でキーワード海東輿地圖で検索してみると1776~1795年となっています。海東輿地圖は朝鮮地圖の後継の地図であることと金正浩はこの地図をモデルにして靑邱圖と大東輿地圖を描いたことは韓国の学者の間でも定説になっているようです。
    それからNo.82 ,year 1905. の地図は近代デジタルライブラリーにある分道詳密韓国新地図の江源道図ではないでしょうか。

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thank you, Mr. Yabutarou, but I am not really a historian. I am just an English teacher who is interested in this history.

    Yes, the Ulleungdo map I posted from the KBS video and the Ulleungdo map from the Korean National Library on your site are almost certainly the same. My map was quite fuzzy, and I just misread the Chinese characters on it. Actually, I was hoping someone would point out my mistake and tell me about the map and maybe give me a link to it. I guess my wish came true. :)

    I know that 干山島 is an alternate spelling of 于山島, but I had never seen 干山島 reduced to 干島, and I have never seen anything that suggests that Gwaneumdo (觀音島) was also referred to as Usando (于山島). Do you have any examples, besides the map in question, when 觀音島 was referred to as 于山島?

    Anyway, your ideas are very interesting, and your maps of great. Thank you for posting here, and I hope to read more of your posts in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Yabutarouさん
    “海東輿地圖は朝鮮地圖の後継の地図であることと金正浩はこの地図をモデルにして靑邱圖と大東輿地圖を描いたことは韓国の学者の間でも定説になっているようです。”
    なるほど~。海東輿地圖そのものは、朴の1711年の地図より後であることは確かなのですね。彼の情報を元にUsando+5島を描いた可能性はありますね。

    “それからNo.82 ,year 1905. の地図は近代デジタルライブラリーにある分道詳密韓国新地図の江源道図ではないでしょうか。”
    本当ですね!いろいろ貴重な情報をありがとうございます。はっきりと見えますが、竹島どころか竹嶼もありませんね。ところで、これ、1907年の「大韓新地誌」の江原道の鬱稜島の形にそっくりですね。

    Gerry,

    Yabutarou told me that the map without Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo in 1905 on Korean site, which GTOMR showed us above looks like from the Atlas by Japanese in 1905 (「分道詳密韓国新地図 江源道図」). You can see those maps from National Diet Library site below. Is it possible that Korean copied it since the shape of Ulleundo in 1907 「大韓新地誌」map looks similar? The difference is, there is no Jukdo in 1905 Japanese map.
    http://kindai.ndl.go.jp/BIBibDetail.php

    ReplyDelete
  21. I felt some turning point changing those maps.
    One is around 1700,especially around 1700, espeically 鬱陵島図形 and after that round-shape maps are common widely.Both Maps and record it shown "So called XX所謂”.

    Second phase is ,Im not sure the events ,but it woulb be around 1750,by someone's reserch result reflets on the 朝鮮地図, pentagram shape one.Then this shape were succeeded to the 金正活 through 1830'S-1860's.

    Third、by the survey of 李奎遠,they would know more details,especially Gwanmundo.He wrote two Usando,one is 大干島(Jukdo?) and 小干島(Gwanmundo). And he wrote Jukdo and two Seommok島項. I feel he want to put emphasiss on 島項.

    Forth, after that they depends on the map making technology by Japanese.

    Yabutarou-san,
    Thx u for yr suggestion ,year of 海東輿地図 and it solves my questioin of 朝鮮地図.

    In addition,分道詳密韓国新地図の江源道図,year 1905.
    Before I'd interesting in which shape of 鬱島 in 大韓新地誌 quoted from.


    Before I'd created website to comparison Usando and Liancourt Rocks for a BBS post.But it is abandoned because the post of not only liancourt Rocks but also JUKDO had been locked ever.So I posted other BBS.

    I hope you complete it to the end as far as possible. It must surely be good to know the difference of Liancourt Rocks from JUKDO-Usando.

    ReplyDelete
  22. yabutarou015/11/07 22:13

    Gerry,

    I do not know the written map of 干島 in substitution for 干山島. However, I know the written map of 于島 in substitution for 于山島. The guess that 觀音島 is 于山島 is possible only in this map. because no other ground is exist , I do not do the claim that 觀音島 was 于山島 for all chousen kingdom periods.

    GTOMR,

    朝鮮地図や大東余地図の形を韓国のウエブサイトでは楕円形と表記していましたので私も楕円形と表記しています。私は円形地図と他の円形地図との間、楕円形地図と他の楕円形地図との間には相互に由来に関連があるのではないかと考えました。そして方形地図は同じ立場の人間が作ったということで韓国の学者と私の見解が一致しています。そこで私は鬱陵島の古地図を円形地図、楕円形地図、方形地図の三種類に分けて論証する方法を思いつきました。
    円形地図がどのようないきさつで作られるようになったかは全く分かりませんが鬱陵島検察が始まって以降だと考えられます。1700年前半の円形地図に書かれている文字と1711年の朴昌錫の鬱陵島圖形に書かれている文字とほとんと一致しているので相互に関連があると考えます。ただし、朴昌錫の鬱陵島圖形には円形地図と楕円形地図に共通する六島の属島がそろっていないので、六島の属島認識は朴昌錫の鬱陵島圖形とは無関係だと思います。
    楕円形地図については、科学の進歩によって従来の地図より正確な方眼のつけられた朝鮮地図が誕生してこれを原型にして大東余地図まで連なる一連の楕円形地図が作られたと考えられます。
    エンコリでGTOMRさんがそのような主張をしているのは知っていました。実は反日ブログの地図は一年ぐらい前に入手したもので形が同じことは分かっていたんですけど、いかんせん情報源が曖昧なので独島博物館のページで似たような地図があることが確認できるまで公表出来なっかたんですよ。
    あと日本語か日本語と英語の併記でお願いします。私は英語が苦手なんですよ。。

    ReplyDelete
  23. yabutarou015/11/07 22:21

    GTOMR

    あと 大干島のある地図は1882年の 李奎遠の地図ではありません。それ以前の年代不詳の地図です。

    ReplyDelete
  24. 小生のような若輩者にさまざまなご教授、誠に有難うございます。とてもためになります。

    あのWebsiteは昔、知人の韓国人及び外国人に聞かれることがよくあったので、其の説明のために以前製作し、たまにUpdateしてきたのですが、知人達に結構な効果がありました。しかしながら技術的な問題があるのと時間の関係上、現状進展が見込めません。よって、Yaburarouさんに、ぜひ完成していただきたいと思います。そしてそのほうが知名度的にも効果が見込めます。

    私的には、歴代の検察官の鬱陵島での行程を地図上で示すようなこともしたいのですが、時間があるときにいじっている程度でございますので・・・

    ところで、鬱陵島圖形(1711又は1823?)ですが、
    南西部から南東部にかけて、薄く、五つの岩が書かれているように見えますが、薄くて少し不自然なように感じます。円形地図等でははっきり書かれているのですが、巷ではどのように言われているかご存知でしたらお手数では御座いますがご教授お願い致します。

    ReplyDelete
  25. Yabutarou さん
    なるほど。言われてみて再度貴方のサイトを見直して、円形地図、楕円形地図、方形地図の意味がようやく分かりました。工事中のページが完成すれば、一目で分かる様になるでしょうね。何らかの結論が導き出せるのでしょうか。楽しみです。(これは考証学の手法なのでしょうか? お時間あれば、各地図の年代もお分かりになる範囲で入れていただければ素人には分かりやすいかと思います。)お手伝いいたしますので、ある程度まとまったら是非、英語に翻訳してバイリンガル版にして下さい。といってもYabutarouさんの英語とレベル的に上とは思えませんが、Gerryが添削してくれると思うので。

    "1700年前半の円形地図に書かれている文字と1711年の朴昌錫の鬱陵島圖形に書かれている文字とほとんと一致しているので相互に関連があると考えます。ただし、朴昌錫の鬱陵島圖形には円形地図と楕円形地図に共通する六島の属島がそろっていないので、六島の属島認識は朴昌錫の鬱陵島圖形とは無関係だと思います。"
    実は、私もGTOMRさんと同じ考えで、あの薄い楕円は南部から南東部の海岸にある船舶航行上留意すべき岩や海底などの表記なのだと思っていました。それが以降の地図にはっきりと描かれるようになり、最終的に五島として認識、もしくは誤認されるようになったのかと...いずれにせよ、推測の域を出ないので、Yabutarouさんのような考証学の手法を是非とも学びたいものです。ただ、もしそうでないとしたら、この六島が誰の報告から地図に反映されるようになったのか、せめていつからか分かるとより多くのことが理解出来るようになるでしょうね。

    GTOMRさん、
    "私的には、歴代の検察官の鬱陵島での行程を地図上で示すようなこともしたいのですが、時間があるときにいじっている程度でございますので・・・"
    ここでも皆、時間のある時にだけできる事をやっているだけですので、是非続けていって下さい。鬱陵島周辺の漁業についての考察も、少しづつでもアップデートして行って下さい。あれもとてもおもしろいです。私も夏の初め頃似た様な論考をまとめようかと思っていたのですが、貴方の投稿に気が付いてやめました。かなり重なりそうだったので。

    ReplyDelete
  26. Gerry,

    We were talking about some maps on Yabutarou's site. Did you notice he categorized old Korean maps into 3 categories? Circle(円形地図), Oval(楕円形地図), Square(方形地図). According to him, Korean academics calls maps like this 朝鮮地図 and 大東輿地圖 as 楕円形(Oval). And among Korean academics, "海東輿地圖"(1776~1795) is commonly considered as the successor of this 朝鮮地図, plus 金正浩 drew 靑邱圖 and 大東輿地圖 after the model of this map(朝鮮地図).

    Square maps like famous Lee's one and the one you captured in KBS documentary, those were considered to be drawn by the official inspector when they visited the island on official trip. This is what he thinks and it looks like Korean academics also do the same.

    As for Circle ones, though it is unknown why those types were started to be drawn, it is considered to be after the beggining of official inspections. The sentences of former 18c square maps and 1711 Park's maps were almost identical, thus we can assume that they were related to each other. But he thinks that there are not all 5 islands in Park's map, then it might have nothing to do with the concept of 6 islands (Usando + 5 island) on the other square maps. (GTOMR pointed that there are 5 ovaly object faintly drawn on 1711 map, so it may have something to do with others. And I agree with his idea, actually.)

    And finally, as for Oval maps, he considers that when scientific mapmaking method were introduced, more precise maps like this "朝鮮地図" with ruler lines than traditional ones emerged and it led to 大東余地図, modeling this 朝鮮地図. This is GTOMR also claimed before.

    I hope he soon finish other pages which is under construction at the moment.

    Gerry, I'm sorry that we talked in Japanese, but sometimes, when we want to talk in detail, it sometimes gets confused if we speak in English each other. I hope you don't mind. I'll translate what I and others thinks important for everyone. BTW, he studied historical investigation at Uni. and he could read 漢文 fairly. It's really nice to hear, isn't it? Maybe we could reduce silly mistakes...?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Kaneganese,

    No, I did not notice that Mr. Yabutarou had categorized the maps. I guess I was too excited to see them. :)

    If Mr. Yabutarou thinks that the " "海東輿地圖"(1776~1795) was the successor to this map, then does he think the date I gave for this map (1750 ~ 1768) might be wrong since this map was supposedly made before 1776? Actually, I just used the date from the Dokdo Museum site HERE, so I cannot be sure about it. Anyway, the dates for a lot of Korea's old maps are just guessed at since putting the dates on the maps did not seem to be a common thing to do.

    Koreans usually guess the map dates by looking at how the placenames on the maps change. There is often a Korean record of placename changes, so if a map is using a new placename, then they know that it was made after the date of that placename change. If a map is using an old placename for one place and a new placename for another, then they guess that the map was made after the date of the new placename for the one place, but before the date the old placename for the other place changed its name. Of course, that assumes that the mapmakers kept updated with placename changes.

    The 5-island argument is really only important in that it shows that the Hwangseong Shinmun reporter probably just looked at the Ulleungdo map in the Daehanjiji to come up with his 6-island description, with would mean that the "Usando/Jukdo" in the article was the sixth island.

    Besides being square, another thing in common with the known inspector's maps is that they all seem to have been labeled as "鬱陵島圖形."

    Yes, I think we are lucky to have Mr. Yabutarou to consult with, and, "No," I do not mind at all when you write in Japanese. Anyway, thank you for giving me the details of your discussion.

    Take care.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Gerry wrote;
    "If Mr. Yabutarou thinks that the "海東輿地圖"(1776~1795) was the successor to this map, then does he think the date I gave for this map (1750 ~ 1768) might be wrong since this map was supposedly made before 1776? "

    In English, when you say "A is a successor to B, that means B is older than A, right? Since, the date "1750 ~ 1768" is older than "1776~1795", then the date 朝鮮地図 (1750 ~ 1768) does make sence. He (and Korean academics too)thinks 海東輿地圖 (1776~1795) is, sort of copy or modeled 朝鮮地図 (1750 ~ 1768) which already existed between 1776-1795. Does it make sence to you? Anyway, I don't think he says the date is wrong.

    By the way, I read your post on Occidentalism about DNS server error. But I think Steve was keep commenting here normally when you couldn't, and pacifist said the same thing. This is odd.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "No, I did not notice that Mr. Yabutarou had categorized the maps. I guess I was too excited to see them. :)"
    Me either. I noticed only after we had a discussion in Japanese and he sort of explained it to me....

    ReplyDelete
  30. Kaneganese,

    I'm sorry. You are right about "successor." I was reading it wrong. I have had a migraine for the past couple of days and have not been able to think straight.

    As for Steve, I think there are a lot of things odd about him, but I also think it is a waste of time worrrying about him.

    By the way, do you know the first Chinese character and its use in the writing next to the small island in the lower, right-hand corner of the following 1877 map?

    http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka44/takeshimamap-1877/2map.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  31. "此嶌(=島)廻リ壱リ半" "此" means "this". The sentence means "The circumference of this island is 1 ri and a half. "

    And I wasn't worrying about him, but I was just curious he could have accessed normally on this site from Korea while others couldn't. Anyway, I hope you get well soon.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Kaneganese,

    Thank you. I guess I should have been able to guess that character, but the mapmaker had a unique way of writing it, and I am still not very good with those shortcut characters.

    As for Steve Barber, I suspect that he lives in Arizona, if he is the same Steve Barber that I wrote about HERE. Anyway, I think we give him too much attention.

    ReplyDelete
  33. yabutarou016/11/07 18:56

    GTOMR さん

    ところで、鬱陵島圖形(1711又は1823?)ですが、
    南西部から南東部にかけて、薄く、五つの岩が書かれているように見えますが、薄くて少し不自然なように感じます。円形地図等でははっきり書かれているのですが、巷ではどのように言われているかご存知でしたらお手数では御座いますがご教授お願い致します。

    ややこれは失敬、よく見ると観音島を除いて丸型地図と同じ所に六島の属島が見えますね。私はここの五つ下のFriday, October 26, 20071694 - Jang Han-sang (張漢相) Finds Sambongdo (三峯島) の記事にある画像を使っていたので気がつきませんでした。私の使っていた画像は左側が一部切れていました。。。
    あとこの地図が不明瞭なのは写真撮影した画像ではないからですよ。これは独島博物館のこの地図の画像(鬱陵島圖形1711)を見れば分かります。

    小生のような若輩者にさまざまなご教授、誠に有難うございます。とてもためになります。

    誤解のないようにいっておくと私はただの竹島おたくであって学者や専門家や学校の先生として給料をもらっているわけではありません。

    "私的には、歴代の検察官の鬱陵島での行程を地図上で示すようなこともしたいのですが、"

    これについては私の脳内ではすでに完成しています、しばらく時間がかかりますが期待していてください。

    ReplyDelete
  34. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Kaneganese-san,
    I guess they just want to say, "there are two rocks for navigation sign,from just a story of "passing number of two rocks between one landing point/beach to next landing point/beach.

    The Rocks in northeast has cleary their own details,shapes,because I guess northeastern part with many rocks and bay are suitable for hide. On the other hand southern rocks has no details,just rock sign.When they came from Peninsula to Ulleugndo, they can easily find Limestone beach,it is good to landmark and zero-point.

    Checking the map in 1711
    Usually,flat field or langing point are nearby rivermouth and it is suitable for residence.
    And those rocks drawn between landing/residence points.
    L:Landing point/R:rocks/islands
    R)穴巖,石峯(Jugam,三仙巖 and so on)
    L)舡泊所謂楮田洞民人可居●
    L)刻石立標●
     舡泊所倭舡艙民人可居●+"川"
    L/R)所謂于山島 海長竹田(E)
    L)窟
    R)One rock(SE)
    L)舡泊民入可居●,river(長斫之?)
    R)Two rocks (S)
    L)舡泊民入可居●, river(桶丘尾津?)
    R)Two rocks(SW)
    L)刻板立標●(W)
    舡泊待風所●●一島最大● ,river
    (黄土邱尾?)
    岩間朱土窟●

    I agree your suggestion that those are just a rocks but it turned to be adjunctive 5 islands" on the map.
    By the way,I guess if 舡泊所倭舡艙民人可居● were originally meaning of 舡泊所(謂)倭舡艙民人可居●"but they wrote without”謂"

    MR.Gerry could you enlarge the map of Ullungdo year 1711,west part of the maps if possible.
    I want to know what is written bisides 穴巖 west of 三仙岩,and beside 黄土邱尾 in western part.
    Regards.

    Yabutarou-san、
    この問題は、知っている人にとっては文章読めばわかるのものの、知らない人には文章を読んでもなんだかさっぱり、とおもいます。
    私も最初は、事の顛末がよくわからん人間でした。いきなり旅先で知らない韓国人にこの件で喧嘩を売られたのがきっかけでした。今まで、比較図など効果的にやさしく事を理解できるものが少なかったと思います。
    Yabutarouさんの考証学の手法を取り入れた比較図ならば、万人に優しく理解できる、と確信しております。

    ReplyDelete
  36. GTOMR,

    "there are two rocks for navigation sign,from just a story of passing number of two rocks between one landing point/beach to next landing point/beach."
    Interesting, indeed. I think they must be something very important for people to visit Ulleundo. Beause all other distinctive islets around Ulleundo had dissapeared or omitted from later maps, but only those "5 plus Usando" remained and especially highlyted in the map. (海図や水路誌のような役目を持っていたのではないでしょうか。どうして後に"島"と標記されるようになったのかはよく分かりません。Yabutarouさんの考証に期待したいです。)

    By the way, what R) and L) means? right and left? I tried to identify the sentences you wrote with place names, tiny rocks and contour line in 「鬱陵島図」 by 朝鮮総督府 in 1918 which I copied from National Diet Libraly, but I couldn't get an answer. Looks like I'm not a map person like you guys...(If you want to see the copy, I can scan it for you. It has place names with Korean pronunciations.) (大正六年測量の記載のある大正七年発行の鬱陵島図です。等高線があって、治系がよく分かります。竹嶼の形がちょっと違うような気がするんですけれど。)

    1902年 外務省通商局編纂「通商彙纂」に各村の戸数や船舶停泊場所についての記述がありますから、そちらも参考になるかも知れませね。)

    ReplyDelete
  37. GTOMR,

    Here is a link to a little larger version of the 1711 map:

    1711 - Ulleungdo Dohyeong

    ReplyDelete