Below is a translation of The 6th column “Seeking Truth Based Solely on Facts(実事求是)” by Prof. Shimojo Masao
"Records on Observations in Oki Province (Onshu-shicho-goki : 隠州視聴合記)" and the "Complete Map of Japanese Lands and Roads(Nihon Yochi Totei Zenzu : 日本輿地路程全図)" by Nagakubo Sekisui(長久保赤水).
The Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs published a booklet called “Ten Points for Understanding the Takeshima Issue ” in February. It could be the first step toward enabling a dialogue with South Korea based on universal values, which former Korean President Roh Moo-hyun continually sought from Japan. I heartily welcome this action. I suspect that South Korea would also understand my reaction. Some in South Korea are calling for a change in course from President Roh’s political manipulation of this historical problem.
President Roh’s negative legacy for the Japan-Korean relationship still remains, however. The traveling exhibition of old maps of Ulleungdo and Dokdo, now in Suwon, is a case in point. This exhibition conducted by the Dokdo Museum contains not a single old map on which Dokdo is shown—it consists entirely of photographs. Nor do any exhibits in the Dokdo Museum have items showing that Takeshima was Korean territory. That is the reality of the Dokdo Museum, which focuses exclusively on the Takeshima (Dokdo) issue.
Another example of the negative legacy from Roh era is shown clearly on the Japanese-language website of the Dokdo Protection Squad, which distributed pamphlets during the Takeshima Day ceremony on February 22nd.
Here is their explanation of the Complete Map of Japanese Lands and Roads compiled by Nagakubo Sekisui:“In particular, the notation, 'Viewing Koryo (Korea) is the same as viewing Onshu (Oki island) from Unshu,' also appears in the Onshu-shicho-goki (1667). This reconfirms that Dokdo is Korean territory”.
The Dokdo Protection Squad believes that the Onshu-shicho-goki and the Complete Map of Japanese Lands and Roads, both of which Japan used as the basis to prove that Takeshima (Dokdo) was Japanese territory, instead are the basis to prove that Dokdo is Korean territory. The interpretation of the sentence “Viewing Koryo is just the same as viewing Onshu (Oki island) from Unshu (Izumo) [見高麗猶雲州望隠州]” makes it clear, however, to which of Japan or Korea the place where one could view Koryo belonged.
Nagakubo Sekisui made that notation next to Ulleungdo when quoting from the Onshu-shicho-goki because he believed that Ulleungdo was Japanese territory--he wasn’t reconfirming that Dokdo was Korean territory.
Indeed, Saito Hosen, the author of Onshu-shicho-goki, also wrote in the book the fact that the Oya family from Yonago of the Tottori domain frequently visited Ulleungdo. He had no doubt that Ulleungdo was Japanese territory. And when one of the Oya family’s ships drifted ashore in Korea in 1666, one year before the publication of Onshu-shicho-gouki, the Korean government graciously returned it. The Edo Shogunate grasped the meaning of that event and also recognized that Ulleungdo was Japanese territory.
The Dokdo Protection Squad interpreted another sentence from the Onshu-shichou-goki to mean that Oki Island was the northwest limit of Japanese territory, and that Ulleungdo and Takeshima were Korean territory. But their interpretation is wrong. This sentence should be read, “After a voyage of two days and one night northwest of Oki Island is Matsushima (now called Takeshima), and after a voyage of one more day is Takeshima (Ulleungdo). These two islands are uninhabited, and viewing Koryo from there is the same as viewing Oki Island from Izumo. Therefore, this island is the northwest boundary of Japan.”
The Dokdo Protection Squad’s misinterpreted the document because they swallowed whole the mistakes of Shing Yong-ha and others from the Dokdo Society. Building a practical Japanese-Korean relationship requires that we wipe the slate clean of such preposterous statements. To achieve this, both Japan and Korea should begin a dialogue for creating a future-oriented zone of shared empathy.
“実事求是 〜日韓のトゲ、竹島問題を考える〜 第６回 『隠州視聴合記』と長久保赤水の『日本輿地路程全図』 下條正男 ”
Translated by Pacifist
Edited by William Sakovich Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center
Other Column of the Series:
No.15 " South Korea's Groundless Claim of "Inherent Part of (Korean) Territory" ”
No.14 " A Reckless Courage of the professor Kimishima Kazuhiko(君島和彦) of Tokyo Gakugei University（東京学芸大学）. ”
No.13 "Sins of Asahi Shimbun and Mr. Wakamiya Yoshibumi(若宮啓文)”
No.12 " Northeast Asian History Foundation and Dokdo Research Center's Misunderstanding”
No.11 “South Korea's Misunderstanding of 'A Map of Three
Adjoining Countries (Sangoku Setsujozu 三国接壌図)' by Hayashi Shihei(林子平)”
No.10 " A Blunder of Sokdo(石島) = Dokto(独島) Theory”
No.5 "South Korea’s erroneous interpretation of the document 'Takeshima and Another Island are Unrelated to Japan'"
No.4 "Errors in Educational Video Produced by the Northeast Asian History Foundation (東北アジア歴史財団)."
Reference : "Onshu Shicho Goki" - The different translations