竹島問題の歴史

26.11.07

1861 - Daedong Yeojido (大東輿地圖) - Ulleungdo Map

Below is a map of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島) from the atlas "Daedong Yeojido" (大東輿地圖), which was made by Kim Jeong-ho (金正浩) in 1861. The map shows Ulleungdo with five small islands off its southern shore, which was a common feature of Ulleungdo maps; however, what is unusual about the map is that it does not show "Usando" (于山島) as a neighboring island off Ulleungdo's east shore, even though Mr. Kim's 1834 map, "Cheonggudo" (靑邱圖), did show the island. Was this an intentional omission or an accidental omission? I think it was intentional.

In 1863, two years after he made the "Daedong Yeojido," Kim Jeong-ho wrote a geography text, called "Daedongjiji (大東地志), in which he described Ulleungdo. In his description, he wrote that Ulleungdo was once called "Usan" (于山), and then he went on to describe the various features of the island, including that it had three towering peaks, seven streams, five to six bamboo groves, dozens of remains of [old] dwelling sites, old boat houses, and stone-piled graves. He also mentioned Jeojeon-dong (楮田洞), Gong-am (孔巖 – "Hole Rock"), Jutogul (朱土窟 – "Red Earth Cave"), and the "four or five small islands" off Ulleungdo's southern shore, but he did not mention Ulleungdo's most prominent island off its east shore, which his 1834 map labeled as "Usan" (于山). If you compare Mr. Kim's 1863 description of Ulleungdo with his 1861 map, you will notice that everything mentioned in his description appears on the map, which suggests to me that it was no mistake that he left the "island of Usan" (于山島) off his 1861 map.

I think that by 1861 Kim Jeong-ho may have come to the conclusion that Usando was not a neighboring island of Ulleungdo, but was just an old name for Ulleungdo, as he said in this 1863 description. Coincidentally, in 1882, Ulleungdo Inspector Lee Gyu-won (李奎遠) told King Kojong that Usando was just an old name for Ulleungdo, and that Ulleungdo had no neighboring island by that name. It is possible that at that time in Korean history that was the common belief, but that is only my guess.

The following is Kim Jeong-ho's 1863 description of Ulleungdo (minus the history) and his 1861 map. By the way, in Kim Jeong-ho's history of Ulleungdo, he did not mention An Yong-bok (安龍福), which may mean that he did not consider him an important figure in Ulleungdo history:

Islands

Ulleungdo is in the sea due east of this “hyeon” (縣) and is the old Usan 우산 (于山). Other names are Muleung (武陵 - 무릉), Uleung (羽陵 - 우릉), and Uleung (芋陵 - 우릉). It has a circumference of about 200 ri, and the distance from east to west is about seventy ri, while the distance from north to south is about fifty ri. Three dangerously high peaks tower above the island and are pure rock. If you climb up to a high place on a clear day and look into the distance, it [Ulleungdo] looks like a shimmering cloud. With a fair wind, it can be reached in two days. The Japanese call it Takeshima (竹島 - 죽도) and it is close to Japan’s Oki district. Japanese boats occassionally come to fish (倭舡漁探者時到).

From the central peak, it is about thirty ri to the shore due east, forty ri due west, twenty ri due south, and twenty ri due north. The are six to seven streams, five to six bamboo forests, and dozens of [old] dwelling sites (居址). There is Jeojeon-dong (楮田洞), Gong-am (孔巖 – "Hole Rock"), Jutogul (朱土窟 – "Red Earth Cave"), “seokjang” (石葬 – stone-piled graves), old boat houses (古址船泊處), and “places to wait for fair wind” (待風所). On the south side of the island are four or five small islands. The center of the island is all deep valleys with streams and rock cliffs. There are many cats and rats that are so big they are unrecognizable. [狙 means “monkey,” but it was probably supposed to be 猫 (cat).] There are also runaways (避人). There are peaches, plums, mulberry, edible herbs, rare trees, and many strange, unknown plants.

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

島嶼

鬱陵島在本縣正東海中右于山一云武陵一云羽陵一云艼陵周二百餘里東西七十餘里南北五十餘里三峯岌嶪聳空純是石山自本縣天晴而登高望見則如雲氣便風二日可到倭人謂之竹島與日本隱岐州相近(倭舡漁探者時到)自中峯至正東海濱三十餘里正西海濱四十餘里正南海濱二十餘里正北海濱二十餘里川溪六七竹田五六居址數十有楮田洞孔巖朱土窟石葬古址船泊處待風所島之南有四五小島島中皆石壁石澗洞壑甚多有狙鼠極大不知避人亦有桃李桑拓菜茹之屬珍木異草不知名者甚多○

1861 Map of Ulleungdo (Click on the map for a much larger picture)

23 comments:

  1. Kaneganese, Pacifist, Yabutarou, or anyone else:

    Please look over my translation for mistakes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Gerry,

    I think the word "址" means ruins, so 居址 should be ruins of residences or wrecked houses.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Pacifist,

    居址 means "dwelling site," but I think you are right to say that it was talking about remains of old dwellings. On the map he wrote 基址 for the old dwelling remains. Therefore, I added [old] in front of "dwelling site." What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Gerry,

    I think they are fine.
    (One thing, though. I don't think it is important, but I'm not sure whether "古址船泊處" or "石葬古址". Or "石葬", "古址"and "船泊處". )

    It's very mysterious why Usando(=Jukdo) disappeared and went back to Ulleundo after 27 years in Mr. Kim's mind. What made him change his conception? It is possible that it was a common sence that Usando was just an old name for Ulleundo in those days as you say.

    Actually, it is true that Usando was old name for Ulleundo ( plus other neighbouring islands sometime), but after Ahn's incident and the official inspection, Usando apparently became to mean Jukdo. I wonder why Korean officals and geographer didn't come to the conclusion for this simple fact(Usando = Jukdo). It is drawn on almost all the maps. Maybe, the real Jukdo was not big enough to be a "桃源郷" they were dreamed of? Or they couldn't believe that Jukdo was the huge and fertile so-called Usando, then they began to think it was another name for Ulleundo after all, or there must be a real huge "Usando" somewhere(百里)in the East Sea?

    By the way, I found very interesting article about 金正浩from 朝鮮日報. I think "서울대 규장각 한국학연구원 이기봉 박사는" is the same person who admitted Usando in the old Korean maps are not Dokdo.

    "김정호, 대동여지도 집에서 짜깁기했다""
    - 김정호, 대동여지도, 쿠키뉴스

    조선시대 최대·최고의 지도로 평가받는 대동여지도(大東輿地圖·보물 850호)는 고산자(古山子) 김정호(1804∼1866 추정)가 직접 전국을 답사해 제작한 것이 아니라 당시 유행했던 지리지와 지도를 총정리한 지도라는 주장이 제기됐다고 28일 쿠키뉴스가 보도했다.

    쿠키뉴스에 따르면 서울대 규장각 한국학연구원 이기봉 박사는 ‘조선의 고지도와 김정호’라는 강연록에서 “일반인은 물론 일부 학자들조차 김정호가 수십년간 전국을 돌아다니며 대동여지도를 그린 것으로 알고 있지만 그는 한평생 집에서 지도를 제작했다”고 밝혔다. 이 박사는 29일 서울대 인문주간 행사로 열리는 규장각 학술대회에서 이 내용을 발표한다.

    이 박사에 따르면 김정호는 ‘동국여지승람(東國輿地勝覽)’이나 ‘문헌비고(文獻備考)’ 등 지리지와 정상기의 ‘동국지도(東國地圖)’,신경준 주도로 제작된 ‘군현도(群賢圖)’ 등 당시 지도들을 토대로 자신의 서재에서 평생 동안 각종 지리정보를 간추려 지도를 제작했다.

    쿠키뉴스는 “이 박사는 김정호가 현장답사를 하지 않은 근거로 혼자서 1만8000여개의 위치정보를 측정할 수 없다는 점,실제 가보면 쉽게 알 수 있는 잘못된 지리정보가 계속 등장하는 점,조선은 당시 각 지역에 대한 충분한 지리정보를 확보해 굳이 갈 필요가 없었다는 점 등을 들었다”고 전했다.

    한 예로 김정호가 제작한 청구도나 동여도,대동여지도에는 충청도 해미현(海美縣· 충남 서산시 해미면) 근처의 서면(西面) 지역이 잘못 표기돼 있다. 이는 서면을 잘못 그린 기존의 지리지와 지도를 참조했기 때문에 잘못을 답습했다. 이 박사는 “김정호는 한양에서 아주 가까운 곳의 잘못된 지명도 수십년간 잘못 기재하고 있다”고 전했다. 그는 “대한지리학회에서 김정호가 백두산을 등정하고 전국을 답사했다는 연구보고서를 냈을 정도로 잘못된 학설이 통용되고 있다”며 “정확한 고증 없이 일제시대 등장한 통설을 그대로 받아들여선 안될 것”이라고 지적했다.

    이 박사는 김정호가 답사하지 않고 지도를 제작했다고 해서 그의 업적이 축소되는 것은 아니라고 강조했다. 이 박사는 쿠키뉴스와의 인터뷰에서 “김정호는 대중에게 정확한 지리정보를 제공하겠다는 일념으로 평생을 바친 위대한 학자”라며 “그는 지도 범례를 표로 따로 만들어 예시하거나 찾기 쉽게 색인표를 제시하고 큰 지도를 엇갈리게 2권으로 나눠 출간하는 등 지도제작 선구자이자 우리 문화의 자랑”이라고 설명했다.

    조선닷컴 internews@chosun.com
    입력 : 2006.09.28 21:05 35' "

    ReplyDelete
  5. Gerry,

    There is 于山島 in 大東輿地図 in the Japanese Diet libary. A xylograph book does not have 于山島 , but there seems to have 于山島  in a transcription book.

    http://toron.pepper.jp/jp/take/tizu/maps2.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Yabutarou,

    Yes, I have seen that map with Usando added on, but how do you explain it? It looks a little strange. Do you think it was added by Kim Jeong-ho or by someone else? Or do you think Usando may have been chopped off the maps in Korea for some reason?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Gerry,

    According to the explanation of the Korean scholar, the reason why a xylograph book does not have 于山島 is because 于山島 deviated from a range of xylograph. It is impossible that a Korean went to the Japanese Diet libary, and added 于山島 to the map. I think so at least.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yabutarou,

    I am not sure if I understand your explanation of the xylograph book, but I assume you are saying that it was left off because it would not fit on the page. If that is what the Korean scholar said, then I think it was a silly explanation. Would they really have left off Ulleungdo's most prominent neighboring island because it would not fit on the page?

    By the way, I was not suggesting that a Korean went into the Japanese Diet and added Usando to the map. I was wondering if the person who originally made the copy of the Diet map added Usando because he thought it was omitted by accident from Kim Jeong-ho's map.

    Anyway, Kim Jeong-ho did not mention Ulleungdo had a neighboring island called "Usando" in his 1863 geography book and it is not on his 1861 maps here in Korea. As far as I am concerned the Japanese Diet map is still a mystery.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Is there any index map of 大東輿地圖 or other maps by 金正活?

    For example,See the index map of "Cheonggudo" (靑邱圖)
    靑邱圖 奇 本朝八道州県圖総目 金正浩

    There are Ullunegdo on 3-4版/18層 on the map.(版=longtitude/層=latitude)
    I think if he knew existence of Liancourt Rocks,he would have put it on 1版/19層. Ofcourse, no discription of Liancourt Rocks on that map.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think Usando in NDL map was added later, too, though I'm not sure if it was done by 金正浩 himself or others after printed. I think Usando was not on the Kim's xylograph itself, because Kim thought Ulleundo and Usando is a same island in 1863. Maybe someone or Kim himself added Usando after it was printed in order to show "another theory" that there is Usando, at least other Korean maps still keep showing Usando as an independant neighbouring island in the late 1800's, so there must have been two theories. The conversation between Lee and 高宗 in 1882 shows there are few theories concerning to Ulleundo and Usando( and 松島/竹島/松竹島)

    FYI, this is what written on NDL HP explaining their map.
    "『大東輿地図』(草風館、1994年 当館請求記号G72-E33 東京本館所蔵、関西館アジア情報室開架) 李朝時代の1861年、1864年に地理学者金正浩が作成した地図。 "
    "『大東輿地図』 : The map was made by geographer 金正浩 in 1861, 1864 during Lee dynasty."

    If you compare this with 1861 Ulleundo map in 『大東輿地図』 by Kim above, it is clear that the NDL map was not printed from xylograph which was supposed to be made by Kim in 1861. Are there any other xylograph by Kim ? Those two maps stored by NDL look similar each other. There must be a xylograph other than 1861 version.

    GTOMR, Do you know the year of the map you mentioned earlier?
    「光(広?)輿図 江原道 関東圖」

    Are there any other Korean maps without Usando or Ulleundo/Usando as one island in the late 1800's? Especially between 1860-1880.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Gerry!!!
    Someone Please translate !!!

    http://www.sanin-chuo.co.jp/news/modules/news/article.php?storyid=445698006

    「石島は独島」説否定 最古の鬱陵島絵図2枚確認


    独島博物館特別展の図録に収録された1699年作製とみられる「欝陵島図形」。右側にある現在の竹嶼の位置に「大于島」、観音島の位置に「小于島」の記載がある
     日韓が領有権を主張する竹島(韓国名・独島)とかかわりの深い韓国・鬱陵島の属島として、現在の竹嶼(チクショ)と観音島の二島を描いた最も古い朝鮮の絵図二枚が、確認された。二島を認識していたことで韓国側が自国領とする根拠が一段と弱まったと、日本の研究者は指摘している。

     「欝陵島図形」で、鬱陵島の独島博物館であった特別展の図録への収録を、島根県の竹島資料室が確認。鬱陵島東側の竹嶼と観音島の位置に「大于島」と「小于島」が描かれ、朝鮮王朝が両島を鬱陵島の属島と認識していたことがうかがわれる。

     韓国側は、日本が竹島を島根県に編入した一九〇五年の五年前に大韓帝国政府が出した「勅令第四一号」で、鬱陵島の行政区域を「鬱陵島と竹島、石島」とし、石島(ソクト)が発音の似ている独島(ドクト)として、自国領の根拠に挙げる。

     竹島(チクトウ)は竹嶼の韓国名。これ以外に属島が韓国側で認識されていたことから、勅令での竹島は大于島で、観音島の位置にある小于島を石島とするのが、絵図上では整合性があるとみられる。

     島根県の竹島問題研究会の座長だった下條正男拓殖大教授は「石島は地理的に鬱陵島から九十二キロも離れた現在の竹島ではなく観音島とみられるとした研究会の見解が、正しいことが裏付けられた」と指摘している。


    1702年作製とみられる「欝陵島図形」。1699年の絵図とは逆方向から描かれており、「大于島」「小于島」は左側にある
     作製時期について下條氏は、朝鮮王朝を記録した粛宗実録を基に「鬱陵島探査を命じられた役人による一六九九年と一七〇二年の官製地図とみられる」と推測。従来、最も古いとされてきた一七一一年の「欝陵島図形」をさかのぼるとした。

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thank you, Yabutarou for letting us know about this. Looks like specialists also agree with your theory. And the maps we were talking about were actually older than 1711 map? Wow !! I think you did another great discovery !! Maybe we really have to thank "You-know-who" !!
    Yabutarouさん、ありがとうございます。何と専門家の意見も同じようですね。しかも、1711年の地図より古いとは!!また、大発見をされたんではありませんか? いずれにせよ、"例のあの人"に感謝すべきかも。ふふっ。


    An article from Sanin-Chuo-shinpou on November 27th

    "「石島は独島」説否定 最古の鬱陵島絵図2枚確認 (Two Oldest maps of Ulleundo which deny Sokto=Dokdo theory are found.)"

    There is 「大于島」 at the place of today's Jukdo and 「小于島」 at the place of today's Kwanundo on the right side of Ulleundo in 「欝陵島図形」 which is considered to be made in 1699 was published in Dokdo Museum's special Exhibition catalogue.

    The oldest maps of Ulleundo which describe Jukdo and Kwanundo as a neibouring islands pf Ulleundo, which has strong relationships with Takeshima竹島/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo which both Japan and Korean claim it's soereignty were newly found. Japanese researchers point out that Koran base of claim of the sovereignty got weaker (一段と弱まったと) now.

    The map is 「欝陵島図形」 and Takeshima Resource centor made sure that it was published in the catalogue od Dokdo Museum Special Exhibition. There is 「大于島」 at the place of today's Jukdo and 「小于島」 at the place of today's Kwanundo on the right side of Ulleundo in 「欝陵島図形」. It suggests that Choson Dynasty recognized both islands as neighbouring islands of Ulleundo.

    Korean claim that "Sokdo" which was included within the district of Ulleundo along with Ulluundo and Jukdo in 「勅令第四一号」 is "Dokdo" since they share similar procounciation.

    Jukdo(竹島:チクトウ) is a Korean name of 竹嶼. And since another neighbouring island was recognized by Korean, it is adequate or natural(整合性がある) in a georgraphical map to consider that 竹島 is 大于島 and 小于島 which is described at the location of 観音島 is 石島.

    Prof, Shimojou who used to be the leader of Takeshima research group points out that the claim by the group which concluded Sokdo is Kwanundo, not Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo which locates 92km from Ulleundo, is again supported to be correct by this map.

    Another 「欝陵島図形」 which is considered to be made in 1702 is drawn from opposite direction from 1699's one and describes 「大于島」「小于島」 on the left side.

    Prof, Shimojou suppose those two maps were official maps which were made in 1699 and 1702 by the Choson officials who were ordered to inspect Ulleundo. And it is older than 1711 「欝陵島図形」 which considered to be the oldest official Ulleundo map so far.

    ReplyDelete
  13. How does Professor Shimojou know the dates of the maps? I think he is only guessing by assuming that they were the maps made in the early inspections.

    Even if the maps were made in 1699 and 1702, that would have little or bearing on the 1900 proclamation because perspectives can change over 200 years. Afterall, there are no other Korean maps before 1900 that show Gwaneumdo.

    I think Professor Shimojou and the Takeshima Research Group came to the wrong conclusion about the meaning of "Seokdo" (石島). I wonder if they seriously considered the possibility that "Seokdo" was not referring to any specific island, but was just a catchall word used to include all the other rocks and islets around Ulleungdo?

    By the way, what does it mean that 大于島 and 小于島 were drawn on the opposite direction on one of the maps?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Gerry,

    "How does Professor Shimojou know the dates of the maps? "

    It was my mistake to omit the part "朝鮮王朝を記録した粛宗実録を基に「鬱陵島探査を命じられた役人による一六九九年と一七〇二年の官製地図とみられる」と推測。"

    It was rather "Based on 粛宗実録 which recorded Choson dynasty, he guessed that those two maps were official maps which were made in 1699 and 1702 by the Choson officials who were ordered to inspect Ulleundo." Sorry about that.

    "By the way, what does it mean that 大于島 and 小于島 were drawn on the opposite direction on one of the maps?"

    I wrote "from" the opposite side, meaning upside down. Does it make sence to you?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Kaneganese,

    As I said, the professor is just guessing at the dates since he cannot be sure that those maps were made from those inspections. There were inspections during other years, as well, so they could have been made during any two of those other years.

    Actually, I think the maps were much later than the 1711 map since they had the names of the coves on them, but the 1711 map did not. In 1699, Koreans would probably not have known enough about Ulleungdo to have names for the different coves.

    I think Professor Shimojou made a big mistake by publishing that article because now he has given Korean researchers the opportunity to tear apart his claim, which the Koreans can then use to cast doubt on other Japanese claims.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Gerry,

    "Actually, I think the maps were much later than the 1711 map."

    I thought so, too. But I'd like to hear more about how and why Prof. guessed. I'm going to ask Web Takeshima Research Center tomorrow. I will reserve my opinion on this until I get more imformation. By the way, does Museum in Samcheok say anthing about the year?

    "I think Professor Shimojou made a big mistake by publishing that article because now he has given Korean researchers the opportunity to tear apart his claim, which the Koreans can then use to cast doubt on other Japanese claims."

    They are doing it in every chance they can get anyway. I've heard and read they verbally bashed Prof. everywhere literally. I understand that you don't agree with "石島=観音島 theory" claim and yes, Korean are definately going to use this to degrade quality of whole Japanese research in order to make their claim sounds more reasonable if it was mistake. And your 石島=catchall phrases (or 五小島 around Ulleundo ?) looks hopeful to me very much. Still, I personally think they both has its' own meaning, and we shouldn't throw them away until one is totally debunked.

    Well anyway, do you have any question about this article other than the year ? I will send an e-mail tomorrow and if you have anything you want to know from them, please let me know.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Kaneganese
    光(広?)輿図 江原道 関東圖 on the same series with the map of Ullungdo(廣(光?)輿圖Early in 19C)Gerry posted before. But dokdo musimu said that is 1737-1776.


    金正浩 produced some maps
    1834.靑邱圖
    1834 靑丘要覽
    ----↑They have Usando with five adjunctive rocks on the southcoast-----
    ----↓They dont have Usando.The have only three rock on southcoast.----
    ???? 大東方輿全圖
    1856-59 東輿圖.  15-1
    1861.大東輿地圖(post here)

    ReplyDelete
  18. GTOMR;

    Thank you, you are an angel.

    So, there is apparently a drastic change in 金正浩's maps and maybe conception on Ulleundo around 1850. Usando disappeared and 5 rocks reduced to 3. (But 5 rocks reappeared in 1861 map without Usando. Though only one mysterious map in NDL has Usando, mostly added later, plus 3 islands. Mmmm...)

    I sort of thought there may be some links between the confusions among Westerners, Japanese and Korean and their own messing up in each country in the late 1800's.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Gerry,

    Even if the maps were made in 1699 and 1702, that would have little or bearing on the 1900 proclamation because perspectives can change over 200 years.

    ゲリー氏は1882年の李奎遠による鬱陵島検察の時に作られた「鬱陵島外図」に観音島が描かれていることをお忘れになっているようです。この地図は1900年の勅令41号の直前に描かれた地図ですからこの地図の認識が勅令41号に反映されたとしても不思議ではありません。李奎遠の書いた『鬱陵島検察使日記』にも観音島の記述があります。

    Afterall, there are no other Korean maps before 1900 that show Gwaneumdo.

    鬱陵島検察の時に実際に鬱陵島に行って描いた地図とそれ以外の地図とでは重要度が異なると思います。鬱陵島検察の時には必ず地図が作られたはずですが現存しているのは四枚だけであり、そのうちの三枚に観音島が描かれています。
    観音島がなくて属島が六島描かれている円形・楕円形の鬱陵島の古地図は、同じく属島が六島描かれている1711年の朴錫昌の「鬱陵島圖形」を郡県図に載せる際に島の形を単純化したものと考えられます。

    ReplyDelete
  20. Yabutarou,

    I cannot read the Japanese in your post, but I saw 1882, and realized that Lee Gyu-won's map of Ulleungdo did show Gwaneumdo, so there was another Korean map besides the two maps that show 大于島 and 小于島.

    I do not know what the rest of your message says, so I will wait for a translation.

    Have a nice day.

    ReplyDelete
  21. (Yabutarou's comment above)
    (Even if the maps were made in 1699 and 1702, that would have little or bearing on the 1900 proclamation because perspectives can change over 200 years. )

    I'd like you to remember that 観音島 was described on 1882. Since it was made just before the Imperial edict in 1900, it is reasonable to assume the conception of 1882 map had influence over the edict. Besides, there's also a description of 観音島 in 李奎遠's 『鬱陵島検察使日記』, too

    (Afterall, there are no other Korean maps before 1900 that show Gwaneumdo.)

    The maps made by official inspector when he actually went to Ulleundo to inspect is much more important than other maps. The official maps must have been made on every inspection, but only 4 remains today. And 観音島 was described on 3 out of 4.

    The round and oval shaped Ulleundo old maps looks like to be copied and simplified Ulleundo's shape of 1711's 朴錫昌「鬱陵島圖形」 in order to describe the island on 郡県図.

    ReplyDelete
  22. As for Imperial Edict No.41 in 1900, I think 禹用鼎's conception has much importance on this. I hope Korean reveal all the 「鬱島記」 ASAP.

    BTW, I've noticed that there are not so many records that mentioned about Ulleundo maps by the inspector. And it does includes both 1699 and 1702. Reference

    And if you read all the documents from King annals of Choson Dynasty, you may notice that inspection on Ulleundo was done frequently in 1700's, but in 1800's, there are not many records. In other words, Korean officials didn't really do proper inspections on Ulleundo in those days.

    I checked 1699? 「欝陵島図形」 and noticed that the insides of the island was not described carefully at all. For example, there are no mention of the distance from each side to the central peak which appears on most Ulleundo maps later including 1711 map. Though it described the shapes of rocks around Ulleundo very carefully.

    If you compare this with other maps which was made after 1750's, it is more distinctive.

    Mid 1700s - "Paldo Yeojido" (八道輿地圖) - Ulleungdo Map (鬱陵島圖)

    Early 1750s - "Haedong Jido" (海東地圖) - Ulleungdo

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

    Anyway, I think it is not so weird to guess the map was made before 1711.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Mr.Gerry wrote.
    >
    I think that by 1861 Kim Jeong-ho may have come to the conclusion that Usando was not a neighboring island of Ulleungdo, but was just an old name for Ulleungdo, as he said in this 1863 description.

    There is another resources that shows Mr.Gerry's opinion.

    金正浩 hadn't draw Usan(JUKDO) on the 1860's maps, though he wrote Usan(JUKDO) on 1830's maps.

    It mignt be changed his recognization of Ulleungdo on 1860's that Usan is another name of Ulleungdo

    See not only text of 鬱陵島 but also the attached map in 大東地誌, he draw Usan于山, instead of Ulleungdo鬱陵島.(P16 and P30 in the PDF file)
    Cf: 1863-Description of Ulleungdo from Kim Jeong-ho's "Daedongjiji" (大東地志)

    ReplyDelete