← Professor Kim Mun-gil （金文吉）
Below is the second part of the translation of The 23rd column “Seeking Truth Based Solely on Facts(実事求是)” by Prof. Shimojo Masao
" Refutation against the report of South Korean Yonhap News Agency which misread the Mori Kohan（森幸安）'s "The Map of Tsushima(對馬輿地図)"
On 28th October, the Yonhap News Agency of South Korea reported, "Two old maps which shows "Tsushima as Korean territory" was open to the public for the first time. It says that one of the maps is "The Map of Tsushima(對馬輿地図)" which Mori Kohan(森幸安) depicted on 10th April, 1756, and the other is "Cheonggudo" (靑邱圖) which Kim Jeong-ho(金正浩) made in 1834.
According to the report, Tshushima is Korean territory since "The Map of Tsushima" says "釜示准朝鮮国地之例則府郷郡令之470里" (All prefecture, village and county of Tsushima are in proportion to Busan of Joseon, legally, and the distance is 470 li.), morever, "Cheonggudo" says "本隷新羅水路四百七十里在東莱府之東南海中至實聖王七年戊申倭置営於此島" (Originally, Tsushima subordinate to the territory of Silla Kingdom, and legally, it belong to Tongnaebu until the 7th year of King Silseong. It locates at the distance of 470 lis in the sea on Southeast side.)
However, there is grave mistake in the interpretation of Chinese writing by professor Kim Mun-gil of Pusan University of Foreign Studies, who is supposed to have found the old maps in question. Although the resolution of the affixed image on the electronic version of Yonhap news agency is too low to read all of them, at least it is impossible to read neither "470 lis" nor "Tsushima subordinate to the territory of Silla Kingdom, and legally, it belong to Tongnaebu" on the maps, respectively.While the resolution of the map is extremely low, the note on the "The map of Tsushima" seems to be written as below. (This part is subject to the change due to the inability of reading throughly.)
"所図、輿地図、有郡郷之界分。當對馬図者、上縣・下縣二郡耳。按彼国之□□□、□釜？。亦准朝鮮国地之例、則府郷郡□之四品歟"（The map drawn has borders between countries and there is only two countries, upper and lower countries (上縣・下縣), in Tsushima. I think that that country(Japan)'s □□□ is □釜. It may be four categories, namely prefecture(府), village(郷), county(郡) and □, if it is compared to the land of Joseon.
As is clear in the proper interpretation above, none of the sentences like "Tsushima is Korean territory" nor "the distance from Busan to Tsushima is 470 lis" is written in Mori's "The Map of Tsushima(對馬輿地図)".
Besides, ahead of making "The Map of Tsushima(對馬輿地図)", Mori made "The Atlas of Japan (日本分野図)"(1754), and it clearly says that distance from Joseon to Tsushima is described as "From this Busan Inlet of Joseon to Waninoura of Tsushima, the distance is 25 lis ( 此ノ朝鮮ノ釜山浦ヨリ對馬ノ鰐ノ浦へ二十五里)". Supposedly, Prof. Kim must have interpreted arbitrary by switching this "25 lis" to "470 lis" since there is the description of "470 lis by the sea(水路四百七十里)" in the maps such as "Cheonggudo" by 金正浩.
Yonhap News Agency reported that the maps which shows Tsushima as Korean territory, but the report is totally groundless. Because Mori depicted Tsushima as Japanese territory in both "The Atlas of Japan (日本分野図)"(1754) and "日本分土図 ””Divisional Map of Japan"（1755年）. "The Map of Tsushima" consists of those series of maps and there is no reason for him to exclude Tsushima from Japan to make it Korean territory. On what basis Professor Kim makes Tsushima Korean territory? Nobody could find any description which make Tsushima as Korean territory in "The Map of Tsushima".
This is same for his interpretation of "Cheonggudo" by Kim Jeong-ho as well. Prof. Kim read "至實聖王七年戊申倭置営於此島" as "(Tushima) belong to Tongnaebu until the 7th year of King Silseong", but there is no such description as "Tsushima belongs to Tongnaebu" at all in the original text. This sentence "至實聖王七年戊申倭置営於此島" is a second hand citation from "Samguk Sagi(三国史記)" and it only says that ”Japan made military forces stationed in Tsushima”. There is absolutely no description which says "Tushima belongs to Tongnaebu".
This description in "Samguk Sagi" attracted attention in 1419, the year Joseon invaded Tsushima, 卞季良 wrote "對馬為島、隷於慶尚道之鶏林。本是我国之境。載在文籍" (Tsushima islands subordinate to Gyerim(鶏林= Silla) of Gyeongsang Province(慶尚道). Originally this is our territory. It is recorded in the document.) in his book "諭対馬州書". He did wrote "it is recorded in the document."
However, Lee Jong-mu, who led Joseon army, went for eastern conquest only to be defeated and Joseon feared Ming, their suzerain, would get to know that they moved military forces without Ming's permission. Moreover, Joseon army had to withdraw by the counteroffensive of Japan. It was far from "the Tsushima Subjugation (対馬征伐)" ( Gihae Eastern Expedition（己亥東征）) as they call. Although Masan City of South Korea, opposing against "Takeshima Day" which Shimane Prefecture enacted, declared Ordinance "Daema Island Day" on 19th June, the day Lee with his army sailed from Masan in 1419, it's only to conceal the fact of retreat.
On the contrary, 仇里安, a Japanese messenger of Soh Sadamori(宗貞盛), the Lord of Tsushima, brought forth an counterargument "Tsushima island is frontier territory of Japan. If (Joseon) give battle to Tsushima, it means (you are) attacking Japan itself. ( 對馬島, 日本邊境。 攻對馬島, 是攻本國也) ", when he was cross examined by Joseon side as " ((Tsushima) subordinate to Joseon's 慶尚. It is clear in Historical document(本島之隷於慶尚, 古籍昭然。))."This story was recorded, following the Pyun Kye-ryang(卞季良)'s "諭対馬州書", that " Originaly, it had been subjected to Silla Kingdom. It is unknown when Japanese lives (舊隷我鶏林。未知何時、為倭人所據)" in "The Dongguk Yeoji Seungram（東国輿地勝覧）"（1481), and it made Korean misconstrue that "Tsushima is Silla's territory", as a fait accompli, without any documented basis. However, the article in March of the first year of King Silseon Isageum(實聖尼師今)(402) of the same "the Silla Version of the Samguk-sagi (三国史記)" record that 未斯欣, prince of King Naemul Maripgan(奈勿), was made a hostage in 倭(Japan). Moreover, the article in April of Summer of the same year recorded that Japanese soldiers came to attack the castle(明活城). In addition to that, the article in March of Spring of the 6th year, it says that Japanese invaded eastern vicinity. In June Summer, they invaded the southern vicinity again. Silla Kingdom had been exposed to the offensive of Japan before Japan's setting up the barracks for soldiers in Tsushima island in August of the 7th year of the King Silseon Isageum.
Yet, Professor Kim Mun-gil misinterpreted "實聖王七年戊申倭置営於此島" as "it belong to Tongnaebu until the 7th year of King Silseong". But that kind of misreading is merely a composition written by Professor himself who ignored their own history. Afterall, Yonhap News Agency in South Korea delivered his groundless, arbitrary interpretation without any criticism.
“実事求是 〜日韓のトゲ、竹島問題を考える〜 第２３回 森幸安の「對馬輿地図」を誤読した韓国聯合通信の報道について 下條正男”
Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.
The 22th column “ Refutation against "The Meiji Government's recognition of Takeshima=Dokdo" by Mr. Park Byeong-seop(朴炳渉)””, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
The 21st column " Refutation against "Analysis of Shimojo Masao's Editorials" by Mr. Park Byeong-seop(朴炳渉)”
The 20th column “Act of Folly by "Northeast Asian History Foundation"”
The 16th column ""Dokdo Month" without any historical grounds."
The 15th column " South Korea's Groundless Claim of "Inherent Part of (Korean) Territory"
The 12th column “Northeast Asian History Foundation and Dokdo Research Center's Misunderstanding”
The 10th column " A Blunder of Sokdo(石島) = Dokto(独島) Theory”
The 9th column "Criticism on Dokdo Research Center”
The 8th column “The Historical Facts" The 6th column “Onshu-shicho-goki (隠州視聴合記)" and the "Nihon Yochi Totei Zenzu (日本輿地路程全図)" by Nagakubo Sekisui(長久保赤水)"The 5th column “South Korea’s erroneous interpretation of the document 'Takeshima and Another Island are Unrelated to Japan"
The 4th column “Errors in Educational Video Produced by the Northeast Asian History Foundation (東北アジア歴史財団)."
Reference :
I added the caption of the first photo. He's Prof. Kim, not Prof. Shimojo.
ReplyDelete