竹島問題の歴史

22.2.08

Surely you are joking, Prof. Hosaka ! (ご冗談でしょう、保坂先生!)

Professor Hosaka, a naturalized Japanese-Korean, who falesly claims finding the evidences of Japan's so-called renouncement of Takeshima/Dokdo did it again. Despite of his efforts, all he had found so-far only makes him doubtful as a decent scholar.

This time, he claims that the map called 「新撰朝鮮全図(Newly Made Whole Map of Chosun Country) 」 (1894) by Japanese civilian 田中紹祥 is a proof that Japan recognized Takeshima/Dokdo as Korean territory.

Notice that the lines are neither latitude nor longitude. In this map, vertical lines are numbered, from right to left, as 8, 9, 10, 11,… in Chinese characters (八, 九, 十, 十一,…), and horizontal lines are numbered, from bottom to top, as 32, 33, 34, 35,… (三十二, 三十三, 三十四, 三十五,…). Since lines are drawn in equal spacing for both vertical lines and horizontal lines, the grids form squares in this map. The positions of the lines correspond to neither longitude nor latitude used in canonical maps. ( explained by Aki here.) If you see the location of Tsushima, you will instantly notice that those lines are not longitude nor latitude in fact. (Update : The lines of the map seems to be incorrect longitude lines, which was not drawn in east longitude based on the Greenwich point but it was drawn in west longitude based on the Japanese standard point at Azabu, Tokyo (139 degree 44' 28" E). Read more.)

The so-called Matsushima locates on the line from Tomangan River and to Kokura, Kitakyushu on the map. It's definately Ulleundo=Daglet as you can see on the modern map below, and Takeshima on that map is non-existant Argonaut apparentrly. It only shows that Japanese are still confused of the two islands(Argonaut=Takeshima, Daglet=Matsushima=Ulleundo), and also that Japanese excluded today's Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo from this map of Whole Choson.

It is well-known that Japanese in Meiji called Ulleundo as Matsushima which they used to call Takeshima/Dokdo and Takeshima as well. It explains why Meiji Government used the expression "other island" in Dajoukan order in 1877 which excluded "Takeshima and other island" which has no name on it. This "other island" is apparently this Matsushima (Ulleundo) or Jukdo which was labelled as "Mano-shima" on the map attached to the order, which has no record in Japanese documents.

I understand Korean desperately feel like doing "something" since it's a Takeshima Day in Japan. But professor, this is too shabby. I sincerely hope intelligent Koreans will not be fooled by his tactics.

Surely you are joking, Prof. Hosaka !

Ref : “独島=韓国の領土”立証する日本古地図発見…保坂祐二教授 その① ②(Japanese)

1894-新撰朝鮮国全図_1_2._3 2006 国際関係が分かる世界地図096

Other maps which Prof. Hosaka falesly insists Ulleundo=Daglet=Matsushima as Takeshima/Dokdo.

吉倉清次郎「実測日清韓軍用精図」(1895)

鈴木敬作「朝鮮國全圖」(1882) , 大須賀龍潭「大日本全圖」(1883)

18 comments:

  1. pacifist,

    Could you check my English? I didn't have much time to ask Gerry to do that.

    By the way, Prof. Hosaka's hair............nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kaneganese,

    I think the posting seems good. Anyway, this is my first time to see the "famous" professor Hosaka. Thank you Kaneganese.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank you, pacifist

    The article says that he's going to publish a book in Japan. I'm looking forward to see his "works".

    ReplyDelete
  4. dokdo-takeshima.com23/2/08 00:51

    Wow, this map is a great find. It really helps to show the truth that Japan considered Ulleungdo and Dokdo as Chosun land.

    Kaneganese, I'm sorry, you are dead, dead wrong on your analysis of this map.

    The positions of Jukdo (Ulleungdo) and Songdo (Dokdo) are very accurate on this map. Argonaut Island was always located around the 130 degree of longitude. You can see Argonaut here.
    Argonaut at 130
    And here from Seibold's original map.
    Argonaut at 129.5

    Hosaka's map shows Ulleungdo in its correct position and labelled as 竹島 and Dokdo is labelled as 松島. On this map Ulleungdo is around 131 degrees and Dokdo is near 132 degrees of longitude, that's about right.

    Kanganese read the document presented by Hosaka to the right of the map. It says Japanese name Takeshima, Korean name Ulleungdo. Japanese used Takeshima for Ulleungdo sometimes and Matsushima sometimes. The names were often used interchangeably.

    The point is this. Hosaka's map shows quite accurate locations with regard to the longituded of Ulleungdo and Dokdo. On top of that the map shows the islands coloured the same as the Korean peninsula. This is bad news on Takeshima Day. It's pretty clear they were saving this killer map for February 22nd.

    Congratulations on the great find Professor Hosaka. I gotta admit I'm a bit envious.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Matt@Occidentalism.org24/2/08 00:23

    Prof. Hosaka seems quite a strange Character. Initially I thought he was a zainichi Korean because sometimes Koreans call zainichi "Japanese". Anyway, I came across him a few years ago, and didn't learn much, but a search just now reveals he is more anti-Japanese activist than scholar.

    He has a book out called, 일본에게 절대 당하지 말라, which could be translated as "Don't be screwed by Japan", but "beaten" or "tricked" could be used as well (hard to tell without the book).

    http://ratedr.tistory.com/175

    He also married a Korean woman, and has two boys and a girl. After marriage he became a naturalized Korean.

    He also says 「古代に韓半島から日本に渡った百済系が先祖だ」という。("My Bekche ancestors came from the Korean peninsula to Japan in ancient times").

    http://japanese.joins.com/article/article.php?aid=96398&servcode=A00§code=A10

    Anyway, he sure knows how to throw up a map and say "look, Dokdo!". Why he should have credibility this time when the other maps he presented before turned out to be total BS is beyond me.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Matt,

    "sometimes Koreans call zainichi "Japanese". "

    I think Korean call Zainichi people "Han-choppari(half-Japanese)".

    As for Prof., there's more of his picture.

    世宗大学教授 保坂祐二(2003年韓国に帰化)

    His h.....nothing.

    Anyway, I think he's made killing from his publishing.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The reason those scholars love to bash Japan and defends Korea has huge relation of the history of "朝鮮総連" and Japanese Communist Party. After the world war II, they actually started together.

    Many Japanese pro-Korean academics including Kajimura, and Naito are actually a sympathizer of communists and 主体思想 by 金日成. 民団's almost had been swallowed by 朝鮮総連 last year, but it didn't suceed.

    Korean government sends their so-called scholars (agents) and 民団 greatly supports their activity in Japan just like 総連 helped North Korean agents to abduct many Japanese. Half-moon from 民団, who is a activist of Zainichi is a member of the Korean government's Marine Survey center where advocate Dokdo issue and spread lies on the net, books and journals. 玄大松, an associate professor of Tokyo University is also a member of the center and he is collaborating with half-moon and Prof. Naito and helping to spread their propaganda.

    Its sounds like a novel, but this is the reality we are facing daily in Japan.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If you can't read Chinese Character, you are so easily tricked by someone like Hosaka. Even if you can't, it is clearly exists on the line from 豆満江 to 小倉. It's apparently Ulleundo = Arganaut = Matsushima. Tanaka's put this on his site for quite a while and we've alrady talked about those kind of maps including this one last year Investigation of Japanese maps during Meiji period before the incorporation of Liancourt rocks It's not a newly found map at all, and there's nothing new in this news, Hosaka is spreading propaganda and making money out of it or getting famous as always, thats all.

    ReplyDelete
  9. dokdo-takeshima24/2/08 16:11

    Kanganese, et al. I really don't know much about Hosaka's personal life, I really don't care to. But the map he presented is authentic and it very valuable data in support of Korea's claim to Dokdo-Takeshima.

    I wouldn't say his position on Takeshima is any more slanted than that of Gerry Bevers whom you seem to worship. Gerry has been consistently taken views about Korean issues for over a decade and never once have I seen him support Korea. Nuff said.

    Kanganese, as I've said. Argonaut Island is consistently drawn at around 130 degrees nearly touching the Korean peninsula. The map presented by Hosaka does not show this position. Ulleungdo (竹島) is drawn at about 131 degrees and Dokdo (松島) is a little too westerly but no bad.

    Compare the position of the islands on this map. Note 竹島 is at 130 and is outlined in dots indicating the island's existence is doubted.
    Argonaut

    Kaneganese your pattern is quite predictable. First a stage of denial and anger and then when left defenseless it turns into character assassination. Like your hysterical tirade when you wrongfully called me a "liar" a few months ago. This time you've even stooped so low as to even insulting someone's (Hosaka's) physical apperance.

    Seriously what's wrong with you?

    ReplyDelete
  10. dokdo-takeshima.com24/2/08 21:20

    Kaneganese, I see you added some maps and I don't get where you are going.

    This is a map of Korea first NOT Japan. The positions of 竹島 (Ulleungdo) is accurate. Ulleungdo island is located at about the same degree of latitude as the Northeastern tip of what is now North Korea at around 131 degrees latitude. Even your appended map below confirms this. Matsushima~Dokdo 松島 is located at about 131.5 degrees latitude.

    What you are showing is that Japan's coast is located too far East, that all. I think the cartographer simply traced the coastline of Japan onto this map for general reference. As I've said before Kaneganese, Ulleungdo and Dokdo are located quite accurately relative to the coast of Korea proving this map has nothing to do with Argonaut Island at all and 竹島 is Ulleungdo.

    Argonaut Island is located at around 129.5 degrees latitude and around 38 degrees longitude. Here is Seibold's original map.
    Argonaut's location

    Here are some examples of islands in Argonaut Island location, note the degrees of location and how close Argonaut is to the Korean mainland.
    Argonaut location1
    Argonaut location2
    Argonaut location3

    So Kaneganese, what you have is a bad map of Japan's coast, but a map showing reasonably good locations of Ulleungdo and Dokdo.

    ReplyDelete
  11. dokdo-takeshima.com24/2/08 22:17

    On one more point.
    -
    Kaneganese, you automatically assume that all maps that show 竹島 in Argonaut's position as actually being a “ghost island". This is not an academic way to study these maps, you must make determinations based on a case by case basis.
    -
    Again, the map below shows 竹島 island in Argonaut's position. Can you read what it says beside the island? it says "日本竹島-朝鮮鬱陵島“ This means Japanese name Takeshima Korean name Ulleungdo. In other words on maps 竹島 (Takeshima) can often be confirmed as Ulleungdo NOT Argonaut. Thus the 松島 to the west is not Ulleungdo but Dokdo the name Liancourt was not adopted overnight and the island wasn't simply erased when Seibold's error appeared.
    Takeshima=Ulleungdo
    -
    To Japanese mapmakers, Seibold's position an error of location not island identity. Cartographers simply traced Seibold's map and lablelled them similarly. They had no idea of the real shape or form of the islands, they were not surveyors. They were oblivious to the fact he had double mapped Ulleungdo.
    -
    Of course on some maps 竹島 can be confirmed as non-existent especially those that show the perimeter drawn in dotted lines with three islands present. However, Japanese cartographers almost exclusively followed the rule "two islands in the Sea of Japan" for over a century regardless of the appellation.
    -
    Similarly Japanese historians would study Chosun maps and documents in the late 19th Century and conclude "...Ulleungdo was Takeshima and Usando was what we call Matsushima..."
    Usando=Japanese Matsushima

    ReplyDelete
  12. The following is some background information concerning the so-called Hosaka's map, that is in reality the well-known 新撰朝鮮国全図 :)

    The so-called Hosaka's map (1894)
    (A portion of the scales, Takeshima-Matsushima region and the publisher's name are enlarged in the linked figure.)

    The map was published in 1894 by Hakubunkan (博文館) that was a publisher of magazines for schoolboys and schoolgirls. The titles of the magazines published by Hakubunkan were, for instances, "Boy's World (少年世界)", "Girl's World (少女世界)", "New Youth (新青年)", "Junior Highschooler's World (中学世界)" and "Girl's Junior Highschooler's World (女学世界)".

    That map was perhaps published for educational purpose to show kids how the neighboring country looked like. By using the square grids, parents can tell their kids where is a particular site of Korea; For example, Seoul is at the lower left of the lattice point 12-37.

    The publisher Hakubunkan became bankrupt after the WWII. After that, the publication business was succeeded by New Hakubunkan that is now known as a publisher for diaries and pocket notebooks.

    The Hosaka's map looks to be too old-fashioned considering that the publication date was as late as 1894. Notice the bizarre shape of Cheju island in the map. The map was apparently drawn by tracing the Suzuki keisaku's 朝鮮国全図 published in 1882. It seems the editor of the map was an easy-going person who did not try to incorporate contemporary information in his map. Anyway, it wasn't a problem for the map, since the purpose of the map was just for telling kids and their parents how the neighboring country looked like. It's a bit funny that a map for Japanese schoolers in the 19th century that was out-of-date even at the time is still useful for Korean sholars in educating Korean people in their way.

    ReplyDelete
  13. dokdo-takeshima.com2/3/08 20:54

    Aki, all Japanese maps of the 19th Century had some flaws and I think it's unreasonable to judge these maps by today's standards.

    The map Hosaka has posted is what I would say a typical map of this era. That is showing 2 islands in the sea of Japan one of which was Takeshima (Ulleungdo) and the other Matsushima (Dokdo) Cartographers of the 19th Century either Japanese or European usually copied others works. Also, maps of Ulleungdo and Dokdo the islands were rarely drawn in correct shape or form.

    Japanese Takeshima lobbyists are wrongfully trying to say all maps of the East Sea show Takeshima as fictitious Argonaut Island. However there are many maps showing Argonaut Island's position, yet clearly label the island as Ulleungdo.

    Uchida's 1872 map showed Takeshima with Sato Hosen's "見高麗如雲州望-州" Thus, this map again shows Takeshima-Ulleungdo in Argonaut's location but still the identity of the island can be verified.
    Argonaut=Ulleungdo

    Kashihara's map in 1876 showed Takeshima as Ulleungdo as well. Again note the positon is very close to Korea again in Argonaut's location.
    Argonaut=Ulleung0

    For example So Mokan's map in 1895. Takeshima-Ulleungdo is in Argonaut's position.
    Argonaut=Ulleung1

    This is also true for a similarly dated map of Korea. Again Takeshima-Ulleungdo is in Argonaut's position. Matsushima (Dokdo) is traced similar to Ulleungdo in shape.
    Argonaut=Ulleung2

    Knowing the above, it can be concluded maps like Mori Kinseki's are pretty solid evidence Japan considered Ulleungdo~Dokdo as Korean land.
    Kinseki

    It can also be understood in 1870 the Report on Chosun considered Ulleungdo and Dokdo as Chosun territory.
    Chosun Dokdo

    On the other hand, Aki there is no evidence at all to support Japanese Takeshima lobbyists assertions they omitted Dokdo (Matsushima) on 99.9% of their national maps after 1870. This is a totally unsubstantiated yet convenient theory.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thank you for the useful information, Aki.

    This map had been well-known to everyone since it 's on Tanaka's site for quite a while and pacifist had already mentioned about this map last year, though we didn't know the background of 博文館. All we knew was the mapmaker is just a civilian. So, the company was like 学習研究社 in today? If you consider this like a "学研の付録" for a kids, it is very understandable why this map was so disfigured.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous15/7/08 22:10

    Dokdo is a proper island of Korea. But shameless Japan insists that Dokdo is Japan's without historical evidence. Some Koreans already have been living in Dokdo and the marines of Korea always keep Dokdo which is located in the east of Korea. Japan is dreaming imperialism I think. What does Japan want? Does Japan long for the last colonial period for 36 years? or Are Japanes afraid of Korea growing in the various field? Examine yourselves and apologize to Korea sincerely. I'm getting enraged. I can't stand this!!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous,

    Thank you for your comment.

    But unfortunately to you, there is no historical grounds for Korea to claim Dokdo, while Japan had a history from the 17th century and after the confusion years in the 19th century, she officially incorporated it into Shimane prefecture of Japan in 1905.

    Please check the articles in this blog - please use the index which Kaneganese made.

    Usando was not Dokdo, Sambongdo was not Dokdo, and Seokdo was not Dokdo. Korea didn't know about Dokdo until early 20th century.

    I hope you will read and understand the historical facts in this blog. If you have some questions or doubts, please feel free to write. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Kaneganese wrote :

    "It only shows that Japanese are still confused of the two islands(Argonaut=Takeshima, Daglet=Matsushima=Ulleundo), and also that Japanese excluded today's Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo from this map of Whole Choson."

    The Japanese civilian cartographers in the 19th century weren't confused by Japanese traditional names of Takeshima and Matsushima for two islands in the East Sea(Sea of Japan) between mainland Koran and Oki Island at all. Did they think the island they labeled as Takeshima is non-existent? The answer is "No". If they understood Takeshima was the name for non-existent island, why did they consistently draw and label it in their maps? Takeshima and Matsushima were the Japanese traditional names indicating Korean Ulleongdo and Dokdo which Japan used for at least more than 100 years. If they excluded today's Dokdo in their maps, please give me just one reason why they did so.


    Kaneganese also wrote:

    "It is well-known that Japanese in Meiji called Ulleundo as Matsushima which they used to call Takeshima/Dokdo and Takeshima as well. It explains why Meiji Government used the expression "other island" in Dajoukan order in 1877 which excluded "Takeshima and other island" which has no name on it. This "other island" is apparently this Matsushima (Ulleundo) or Jukdo which was labelled as "Mano-shima" on the map attached to the order, which has no record in Japanese documents."

    The pro-Japanese people's desperate attempt to lie about "another island(次ニ一島)" in Dajokan Order(太政官指令文, 1877) proves this Japanese document is a fatal demage to Japan's claim on Dokdo.

    "Another island" in Dajokan Order has the name and it's neither Ulleongdo nor Jukdo. It indicates Dokdo. This is so obvious fact, but the pro-Japanese people foolishly distort it.

    The reason "another island" is Dokdo is as follows:

    1. In the document attached to Dajokan Order, there is a description on "another island". In this description, another island is explained as Matsushima(松島) which is completely different island from Takeshima. Doubtlessly, Matsushima indicate Korea Dokdo. Following is the description on Takeshima and another island(Matsushima):

    "…磯竹島 has another name, 竹島 (Takeshima). It is north-west of Oki province and the distance from Oki is about 120 Ri(里). The circumference is 10Ri.

    Next, there is “another island” called 松島 (Matsushima). The circumference is about 30町(3.3km), It is on the same sea route as 竹島. The distance from Oki is about 80里(149km). Trees and a bamboos are rare. It produces fishes and sea animals, too. (次に一島あり。松島と呼ぶ。周囲30町である。竹島と同じ船路にある。隠岐をへだてる80里ばかりである。樹木や竹は稀である。)"

    Details about Dajokan Order is here.

    2. The reason "another island" isn't Jukdo can be found both in the attached document and map.
    In the attached document, another island is described as "Trees and a bamboos are rare." which isn't suitable for Jukdo. Jukdo abounds with bamboos. Kaneganese didn't show the attached map and stated, instead, "This "other island" is ---or Jukdo which was labeled as "Mano-shima(マノ島)" on the map attached to the order." In the attached map "磯竹島略図", both Mano-shima(the Japanese name for Jukdo) and Matsushima(=Dokdo) were drawn. In other words, Matsushima can't never be Jukdo. It's so clear, isn't it?

    Map of Ulleongdo(磯竹島略図) attached to Dajokan Order

    Dajokan clearly ordered the Japanese to remember Japan has nothing to do with another island and another island is Dokdo.

    ReplyDelete

  18. The map Prof. Hosaka introduced is one of the Japanese maps of 19th century depicting Matsushima(Japanese old name for Dokdo) as Korean land.

    The reason is here.

    If Matsushima(松島) in this map isn't Dokdo because of its inaccurate longitudinal position, show us any 19th century Japanese map, if any, depicting only two islands labeled as Takeshima(竹島) and Matsushima(松島) at the accurate longitudinal position.

    Except a few maps depicting three islands (Takeshima, Matsushima and Liancourt Rocks(or Hornet Rocks)), most 19th century Japanese maps depicted Takeshima and Matsushima at the inaccurate longitudes, but they are Ulleongdo and Dokdo respectively. It's nonsense to insist the Japanese omitted Dokdo in their maps and depicted non-existent island instead.


    The pro-Japanese people insist Takeshima(竹島) is Argonaut, Matsushima(松島) is Ulleongdo and Dokdo was not drawn. Thus, they can say there's no 19th century Japanese map depicted Dokdo as Korean land. It's one of their way of justifying Japanese illegal incorporation of Dokdo.

    The 19th century Japanese maps depicted Matsushima(松島) as Korean land

    ReplyDelete