竹島問題の歴史

19.9.12

2007 Mar 19 - Dokdo Museum Director Admits Usando (于山島) on Korean Maps Ulleungdo's "Jukdo, not Dokdo"

In the March 3, 2007 article below, the online version of the Korean newspaper Daegu Ilbo reported that Dokdo Museum Director Lee Seung-jin confirmed that the island labeled "Usando" (于山島 - 우산도) on three Korean antique maps appearing in this post was Ulleungdo's neighboring island of "Jukdo" (竹島 - 죽도), which is about 2 kilometers off Ulleungdo's east shore. He added that it was not "Dokdo" (獨島 - 독도), which is about 90 kilometers to the southeast of Ulleungdo. "Dokdo" is the Korean name for Liancourt Rocks, which the Japanese refer to as "Takeshima" (竹島).

The Korean name for Ulleungdo's neighboring island of "Jukdo" (竹島) and the Japanese name for Liancourt Rocks, "Takeshima" (竹島) both use the same Chinese characters, which has caused some to confuse the Korean island of Jukdo with the Japanese island of Takeshima.

However, in spite of admitting that the Usando (于山島) on the Korean maps was Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Jukdo, the Dokdo Museum Director claimed "the Japanese were trying to cover up their forced claims" by showing closeups of the island on maps instead of the full map, which would not have shown any detail in the newspaper article. He also still claimed that Usando was one of the old Korean names for Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo), though he provided no evidence to support the claim.

The map above is Ulleungdo Inspector Bak Seok-chang's 1711 inspection map of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島圖形). The two maps below, respectively, are Kim Jong-ho's 1834 map of Ulleungdo from his atlas "Cheonggudo" (靑邱圖) and a cut-out from the Gangwon Province (江原道) map from the 1789-1795 Korean atlas  "Yeojido (輿地圖). These three maps are the maps that the head of Korea's Dokdo Museum on Ulleungdo said showed Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Jukdo (2km offshore) labeled as "Usando" (于山島 - 우산도). He added it was not "Dokdo" (獨島 - 독도), which is the Korean name for Liancourt Rocks, about 90 kilometers southeast of Ulleungdo.

The reason I am reposting this article is that the link I posted to the Korean newspaper article online is, for some reason, no longer working. Fortunately, I had saved a screenshot of it.
Dokdo Museum Head: "It's just Jukdo"
Japanese Media “Discovery of Old Map Refutes Dokdo Territorial Claims”
Japan’s Kyoto News Agency and Tottori Prefecture’s “San-in Chuo Simpo” have recently reported, “Old Korean maps have been discovered that refute Korea’s territorial claims on Dokdo.” The “San-in Chuo Simpo” reported on its Web site on the 22nd of last month that American Gerry Bevers (51), who works as an English professor at a college in Seoul and studies the Dokdo problem, had contributed old maps that refuted Korea’s territorial claims on Dokdo. 
The contributed data were pictures of three old maps of Ulleungdo that are stored in Seoul National University’s “Gyujanggak” museum. When contributing the old maps, Mr. Bevers said, “Dokdo was not written on any Korean documents or maps before the Japan government incorporated Takeshima in 1905.” He added, “The Korean side claims that the old name for Dokdo on old maps and in old documents was ‘Usanguk.’” 
Takashi Tsukamoto, advisor at Japan’s National Diet Library, claimed, “This is a new discovery that only someone living in Korea can research.” He added, “Especially, the map with the writing “haejang bamboo fields” is enough proof to show that ‘Usan’ was not Dokdo.” 
Concerning this, the Northeast Asian History Foundation submitted a statement that refuted the claims item by item. 
The Northeast Asian History Foundation said, “The contents of the maps indicated are all known by both domestic and Japanese scholars, but by saying that the date of the map is unknown and by showing only part of the maps, the Japanese side is scheming to make it seem as if the maps were newly discovered. 
Dokdo Museum Director Lee Seung-jin said, “After confirming the three old maps, it is obvious to anyone that they showed Jukdo, not Dokdo; and even in our country’s academic circles, it is judged to be Jukdo. By not showing the complete map and by showing only an enlarged section, they are trying to cover up their forced claims.” 
In our country, Dokdo has been called “Usando” (于山島, 1432) – “Sambongdo” (三峰島, 1476) – “Jasando” (子山島, 1696) – “Seokdo” (石島, Korean Imperial Edict 41), and Dokdo (獨島, 1904). 
Ulleung = Reporter Lee Jae-hun ljh@idaegu.com


12 comments:

  1. 다케시마가 울릉도였다가 죽도였다가 오늘날 독도라고 부르는 것처럼 우산도도 죽도였다가 독도였다가 하는 것 뿐입니다. 저 지도들에서는 분명 우산도가 죽도인게 맞습니다. 그러나 세종실록지리지에 나온 우산도는 독도일겁니다. 날씨가 맑으면 그 섬이 보인다는 기록으로 보아 오늘날 죽도에 날씨 조건을 붙일 이유가 없기 때문입니다. 독도는 울릉도에서 날씨가 맑은 날에 보입니다.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 조선 지도 어디를 찾아봐도 독도는 안나올 겁니다. 당연 무인도는 지도에 안그리기 때문이죠. 지도에 안그리는 무인도는 영유의 의사가 없는 건인가가 문제가 되겠죠. 설사 그 주위에서 어로행위도 하고 폭풍이 불면 피항지로 이용되기도 해도 지도에는 유인도가 아니면 그리지 않습니다. 영유의 의사란 것이 무엇인가요? 국제법적으로 영토분쟁이 있지 않은 공연한 현재의 지배가 이루어 지고 있다고 보면 그걸 반드시 지도에다 그려야만 하는건가요? 그건 지리상의 발견이 유행하던 유럽에서 해당하는 문제이고..

    ReplyDelete
  3. No takeshima no dokdo, new documents prove liancurt rocks were discovered by Marco polo, so they belong to Italy

    ReplyDelete
  4. DOKDO in the EAST SEA/Sea Of Korea is KOREAN territory!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. (Part 1)

    Is this inaccurate old map significant enough to refute Dokdo is Korean land?


    Korea acknowledges some Korean old maps have flaws and errors in the terms of Usando. Usando≠Dokdo in some maps doesn't mean Usando is not Dokdo. Usando can be proved to be Dokdo in many ways.

    The flaws and errors in the Korean old maps resulted from Korean people's lack of knowledge on identity of Usando. It's no wonder Koreans didn't have exact perception on Dokdo when considering 400-year-old Korean empty island policy started in 1416 on Ulleongdo and the area around it. Koreans had no way to be geographically familiar with the uninhabited island Dokdo about 87km away from Ulloengdo. That's why some old maps depicted Dokdo in the inaccurate locations and some documents wrongly described Dokdo. In case of Japan, Japan was also confused about the identity of Ulleongdo and Dokdo after the Japanese were prohibited to go to those islands in 1696.

    Inspector Bak Seok-chang's 1711 map of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島圖形) is one example of Korean old maps with flaws and errors in terms of Usando. I agree with Director Lee who said Usando in this map is not today's Dokdo. Because there's no bamboo in Dokdo, the word "海長竹田" meaning the field of Hae-jang bamboo doesn't fit Dokdo. Probably Director Lee said the so-called Usando in this map is Jukdo due to the word "海長竹田". As Inspector Jang Han-sang wrote in "蔚陵島事蹟(1694)", the description "海長竹田" is suitable for Jukdo.

    But I don't agree with Director Lee's statement Usando in this map is Jukdo in spite of the word "海長竹田" because the location of the so-called Usando doesn't match real Jukdo. In this map, the so-called Usando is located at the south of Jeo-dong(佇洞). Actually Jukdo is at the north of Jeo-dong. I'm not saying Jukdo should be drawn in the accurate position. I mean the mislocation of Jukdo (if the so-called Usando is Jukdo) is too serious to ignore as a simple error. Inspector Bak couldn't make a mistake to draw Jukdo at the south of Jeo-dong because Ulleongdo is too small to be confused by direction. People can get confused by the direction and locations of real Usando(Dokdo), but they can't be confused by those of Jukdo because Jukdo is just 2.2km off Ullongdo's east shore.

    The location of Jukdo and Jeo-dong in modern map of Ulleongdo
    The location of the so-called Usando and Jeo-dong in Inspector Bak's Ulleongdo map


    Looking at the Inspector Bak's whole map is important in interpreting this map. The flaws in this map such as mislocation of the so-called island, the identity of the unknown mysterious 5 islands at the south and so on undermine the credibility on this map to conclude whether the so-called island in this map is Jukdo or not. The pro-Japanese people simply connect the description "海長竹田" to Jukdo and conclude the so-called island in this map is Jukdo. That's why Director Lee said "the Japanese were trying to cover up their forced claims by showing closeups of the island(the so-called island) on the map instead of the complete map".

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sloww,

    Your explanation is silly and illogical.

    First, you cannot say, "Some old (Korean) maps depicted Dokdo in the inaccurate locations" because "Dokdo" is not depicted on any old Korean map. For Dokdo to be in an "inaccurate" location, it must first be on Korea's old maps.

    Second, you write that the neighboring island labeled as as Usando and having "fields of haejang bamboo" on the 1711 map is suitable for being Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Jukdo since Jukdo had been described as having haejang bamboo on it in a 1694 inspection report, but then you try to argue that it is not Jukdo based on its location relative its position to Jeodong. However, Jeodong is not labeled on the map, so how can you argue the island is not Jukdo based on his relative position to Jeodong?

    Third, if it is not Jukdo, then what neighboring island is it?

    Finally, the Head of the Dokdo Museum and Korean and Japanese scholars all agree that the Usando on the 1711 map is Jukdo, so why can't you?

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Gerry Bevers,

    My explanation was based on the facts.

    Regarding your first comment:

    Do you want to see the old Korean old maps depicted Dokdo? I linked them below. There are no term "海長竹田". Instead, the peaks which Jukdo doesn't have were drawn.

    海左全圖1 2
    大朝鮮國全圖-東輿圖 1 2
    江原道 地圖
    地圖-江原道-鬱陵島
    朝鮮地圖-江原道-鬱陵島


    Regarding your second question:

    Isn't it absurd to claim the so-called island is Jukdo because of the term "海長竹田" in spite of its seriously wrong location? You set strict criteria on the location of Usando and deny Usando as Dokdo. How come you are so generous with the inaccurate location of the so-called Usando in this map and claim it's Jukdo in spite of the very wrong location? Jukdo to the north and south of Jeodong can't be treated same.

    Jeodong is not labeled on the map.
    -->
    Jeodong is not labeled, but "船泊所謂佇田洞民人可居處" on the map is the description of Jeodong. It can be translated like "which roughly means "boat landing, the so-called Jeojeon-dong the place for living" Jeojeon-dong is today's Jeodong. I think you already know about this.

    Jukdo to the north of Jeodong in Inspector Lee's map(1882)


    Regarding your third question:

    Bak's inspection occurred after the Ahn Yong-bok incident. It's highly likely he tried to find out what the Ahn's Usando was, but couldn't find it and ended up with drawing the so-called Usando at the due east of Ulleongdo. Inspector Bak wrote "所謂" in front of 于山島(Usando) meaning "the so-called" in English. In Korean, "所謂" has the meaning "I'm not sure, I don't know exactly or I don't agree, but what other people say". It's highly likely Inspector Bak wasn't sure the island he was depicting was Usando by drawing it at the strange location and adding the word "所謂".


    Regarding final question:

    I already explained why I can't. I don't think all Korean scholars consider the so-called Usando in this map is Jukdo. But it's not the issue here. The problem is the pro-Japanese people including you conclude Usando is Jukdo, not Dokdo based on this inaccurate map. People can interpret this inaccurate map as they believe, which suggests this map is not a proper one for being used as the evidence Usando is Jukdo. You can wrongly interpret the so-called Usando in this map as Jukdo as you like, but you can't say Usando isn't Dokdo based on this inaccurate map.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sloww,

    Where did you get the third map of Ulleungdo that you labeled as 江原道地圖? Where is that map stored? What is the date of the map?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Gerry Bevers,

    The exact year is not known, but it's assumed to be made in the late 18 century. It's stored in Haejeong(혜정) Museum.

    The image of the full map is here

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thanks, Sloww. I remember that map, but I was never able to get a closeup of Ulleungdo. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete