竹島問題の歴史

13.6.08

1894 (1897) German map of Japan and Korea


(double click to enlarge)
Here is a map titled "JAPAN UND KOREA", which was published in Leipzig, Germany. I have two versions of the same map, I was told by a mapseller that one was published in 1897 while I was told the other was published in 1894. It seems that it is reasonable to think that the map was first published in 1894 and then it may have been reprinted in later years again, because it didn't include Taiwan (Formosa island) which Japan acquired in 1895 after the Sino-Japanese War.

Anyway, the territories are shown in colour; Japan in red, Korea in yellow, China in orange. Please take a look at the islands in the Sea of Japan (Japanishches Meer) - Ulleungdo is drawn as "Matsu-shima (Dagelet I.)" and Liancourt Rocks as "Liancourt In. (Hornet In.)". These are painted in red - the colour which indicates Japan's territory. Oki island is drawn as "Oki-shima". This map is another circumstantial evidence that Seokdo in the 1900 Ordinance #41 can't be Dokdo (Liancourt Rocks).

12 comments:

  1. You're welcome, Pacifist.

    By the way, when you do not have much text in the post, it is better to use the image option to the far left when posting pictures, which does not attach pictures to text. If you use the image option to attach pictures to the right of text, it will not look very good because it leaves a lot of space between the paragraphs, such as has happened in your 1897 map.

    I tried to fix it, but it seems I am not able to repost your pictures under a new option. Maybe, you should delete your 1897 maps and repost them using the no attachment option.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Gerry, I will try.

    ReplyDelete
  3. dokdo-takeshima.com14/6/08 00:50

    Pacifist, what you done once again is simply post bad maps.

    These maps show Ulleungdo as Japanese territory. Europeans had long known Ulleungdo (Matsushima-Dagelet) was Korean land for centuries.

    Those familiar with the region knew about these errors such as seen in Oppert's book printed around 1870.

    Please read this.
    MatsushimaKorean

    Maybe some foreign map who were confused showed Liancourt Rocks as Japanese territory. However, Japanese maps showed them as Korean.

    TrespassMap

    DokdoKorean

    ReplyDelete
  4. Steve,

    We are showing that the western countries believed that Liancourt rocks to be Japanese territory, not Korean territory, in the late 19th century. I observed various western maps which were made in the late 19th century as I posted previously, almost all of which show that Liancourt rocks to be Japanese territory.

    I simply show the truth about the environment just before the 1900 Ordinance #41. If Liancourt rocks were internationally recognised as Japan's territory, at least not recognised as Korean territory, how Korea could announce the rocks to be theirs? It's almost impossible. Evidences indicate that Seokdo in the Ordinance didn't mean Dokdo.

    I will show some of the antique maps one by one which I recently got from European and American map-sellers. Kidariseyo Steve.

    ReplyDelete
  5. dokdo-takeshima.com14/6/08 01:45

    Pacifist, keep fishing.

    Japanese maps either show Liancourt Rocks as Korean land or not Japanese.

    These incorrect foreign maps aren't worth the salt in your tears.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 1719 Henri Chatelain: Carte du Japon.
    There are a islands north of Vogi(Oki islet) as territory of Japan.
    http://www.library.osaka-u.ac.jp/tenji/maps/img0024.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks gtomr,

    It is an interesting map. It seems that there are two small islets which resemble Liancourt rocks.
    When was this document published?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Steve,

    Japan has never ever admitted that Laincourt rocks to be Korean territory.

    You can't claim so laying emphasis on a small map that was not made by Japanese government - even you can paint it yourself in colour you want to paint, so that such a map can't be a proof of your insistency, Steve.

    In the late 19th century, the most developed superpower countries in the world were UK, France, Germany, Russia and USA. So the geographical information from these countries are important to judge the circumstances around the islands between Japan and Korea.

    Steve, we have proved the following:

    (1) Usando was not Liancourt Rocks. (Usando was sometimes Ulleungdo, sometimes an imaginary island which located west of Ulleungdo, and sometimes Jukdo of Ulleungdo, but not Liancourt rocks.)

    (2) Sambon-do (三峰島) was not Liancourt rocks. (It was Ulleungdo.)

    (3) Seokdo in the 1900 Ordinance was not Liancourt rocks. (Korean eastern limit was Ulleungdo or Jukdo of Ullengdo according to various geographical books in the late 19th century and early 20th century. The western maps in the late 19th century indicate that Liancourt Rocks were not thought to be Korean territory in the world, as you can see now.)

    Historically, there is no evidence that Liancourt Rocks belonged to Korea. So USA repeatedly warned Korea after Rhee Syngmann occupied Liancourt Rocks illegally in the 1950's. Steve, han-bon-man sengakke.

    ReplyDelete
  9. dokdo-takeshima.com14/6/08 22:16

    Pacifist, all you've shown is that Europeans cartographers thought Ulleungdo was Japanese land. We know this was wrong.

    Usando wasn't Liancourt Rocks. It depends on which documents you cite Pacifist you are foolishly trying to make blanket statements on a plethora of historical records. What a shame Anyongbok said Dokdo was 50ri from Ulleungdo.

    Sambongdo wasn't Dokdo?....maybe..

    Seokdo wasn't Liancourt Rocks? I haven't seen any concrete proof of that on this forum at all.

    Pacifist, you are out of gas. Now you have resorted to posting ass-backward inaccurate Europeand maps showing three islands and wrong color codes as evidence of Japanese sovereignty over Liancourt Rocks. Your goose is cooked.

    Sushi no mushi to you too, Pacifist.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Steve,

    I can't understand Sushi no Mushi (insects in Sushi?)...

    As I repeatedly wrote, I showed here how the world - several western developed countries were almost the world itself in those days - recognised the situation around the islands in the Sea of Japan just before the 1900 Ordinance #41.

    All the geographical books and these western maps deny that Liancourt Rocks to be Korean territory. How could Korea declare that Liancourt Rocks to be theirs?

    They couldn't - if they did, it was as same as they declared that Hawaii was theirs. No country wouldn't take it seriously.

    So Seokdo was almost certainly NOT Dokdo (Liancourt Rocks), considering the circumstantial evidences.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hi!
    In early 1900s, Choson Dynasty(Korea) did not trade alot with the western POWERS. So their maps could be wrong. (cf. America was thought as India.)
    JAPANESE or KOREAN maps should be bases of this.

    ReplyDelete
  12. misol221,

    Western maps are far more correct than traditional asian maps because they had the newest technology in geography. They also had modern ships and modern devices to measure lands.

    Although they (UK) made a mistake in measuring the location of Ulleungdo (Argonaut island), as a whole, their technology was far superior to asian one.

    And most importantly, their knowledges are neutral, their maps were not made from the viewpoint of Japanese or Korean side. So these maps are very important sources to know the circunstancial evidence from the neutral viewpoint.

    Japan had been closed its doors to foreign countries as well as Korea. But the western countries were interested in far east countries like Japan and Korea, so they gathered information about this area and thier information may be projected to these maps.

    ReplyDelete