1894 - 海軍省水路部「朝鮮水路誌」(明治二十七年)

日本海軍水路部が刊行したこの本は、英国海軍発行のChina Sea Pilot（Directory) を基本とし、独自の情報も斟酌して編集されました。この本の中で特筆すべきは、冒頭、第一編 総記において朝鮮国の東限が東経130度35分とされており、東経131度55分にある現竹島/Liancourt Rocksは明らかに同国の範囲外として明記されていることです。

総記
形勢
朝鮮国は亜細亜の東部にあり 其地勢たる狭長なる一大半島を成し 数多の島嶼 之を圍繞す
其位置は北緯三三度一五分より同四二度二五分 東経一二四度三〇分より同一三〇度三五分に至る

序文を書いているのは当時の海軍水路部長海軍大佐（Captain）肝付兼行です。彼は10年後の1904（明治三七）年も同じ水路局長の地位にあり、隠岐の中井養三郎が竹島の編入願いを提出するときに東京で相談を受け、現竹島がどの国にも属しておらず、日本の本土からの距離が朝鮮半島より近いため日本に属するのが適当と返答した人物です。本書がその総記において朝鮮国の東限を１３０度35分と明記して竹島/Liancourt Rocksを除外していた事実は、後の彼のこの言動と一致すると言えるでしょう。ちなみに、中井が東京で相談した山座円次郎 外務省政務局長、牧朴真 農商務省水産局長が、それぞれ最新韓国実業指針（1904年） と韓海通漁指針（1903年） という、同じく総記において朝鮮領土の東限を１３０度35分と明記した本の序文を書いていると言う事実も明確になっており、この三名が現竹島/Liancourt Rocksが朝鮮領土ではない事をはっきりと認識していた事を示す確たる証拠となっています。

これに対し、内藤正中氏はその著書等において、彼ら三人が序を寄せたそれぞれの本において、総記において朝鮮領土の東限を１３０度35分と竹島を朝鮮領土から除外している事実に全く触れることなく、現竹島が朝鮮東岸の日本海の岩嶼として、また江原道の項に挙げられていた事のみを挙げ、まるでこの三人が現竹島が朝鮮領である事を知りながら中井を唆して領土編入を願い出させたかのように、単なる憶測、しかも悪意さえも感じられる程の歪曲に基づいて論じており、韓国側もそうした自国に都合のよい言動を信用して大きく取り上げています。しかし当時、鬱陵島にはかなりの人数の日本人が居留(1902年時点で548名)しており、1900年代に入ってからは、隠岐より70ｋｍ程近い位置にあった鬱陵島を拠点として現竹島へ出漁する事も多く、朝鮮半島周辺を航行する船舶への安全情報に加え、こうした朝鮮へ渡る漁民や実業家などの日本国民へむけて現竹島の情報を提供する事は、当然のことであったと思われます。しかも、当時の外務省通商局編纂「通商彙纂」(1902)などをみても、鬱陵島の日本人および朝鮮半島からの季節的漁民を含んだ当時の韓国人のいずれも、現竹島を韓国領と認識していた形跡は全くありません。これら3つの本の各項目については本来その領土を規定する為に書かれた物ではなく、船舶航行上の安全、韓国でのビジネスや漁業に乗り出す日本人のためのガイドブックというそれぞれの実用目的の為に執筆されている事が明確です。

実際、本書においては第三編　朝鮮南西岸 朝鮮海峡 の最後に"西水道"、"東水道"がそれぞれ次の第四編に記される現竹島と同じ種類の項目として挙げられています。しかし、"西水道"は対馬と朝鮮国センチネール島の間の今日の朝鮮海峡ですが、"東水道"は対馬と壱岐の間の海峡であり、明らかに日本の領土内にあります。この事一つをとっても、各項目がそもそも領土を規定する為の目的で列記されたのではなく、例え日本の領土であっても当該国(朝鮮)沿岸に通漁する漁船などの船舶の安全航行の為に必要な情報を列記したものであることは明確です。さらに、第四編"リヤンコールト列岩"、"鬱陵島(一名松島)"に続いて記載されたワイオダ岩は、実際はその存在が確認されないもので1894年版の英海軍の水路誌にはその点が明記されいますが、いずれにせよ北緯４１度１４分３０秒　東経１３７度１４分 と、ロシア沿海州と北海道の間にあり、朝鮮国の領土から大きく外れているのに、全く同様に記載されている事からも、やはり本書の各項目が領土とは無関係である事は疑いの余地はありません。また、これらの項目は殆どが英国海軍発行の"China Sea Directory"からの翻訳であり、日本の海軍が朝鮮の領土として判断した上で記述していたとは考えられません。 しかも朝鮮東岸の日本海に注意すべき岩礁として列記されているに過ぎないことが、その記述から明確です。現竹島が江戸時代から鮑やアシカの好漁場として利用されてきただけでなく、江戸時代から鬱陵島への中継地点や道しるべとして、現竹島は日本の漁民や商船にとっては長らく日本海に浮かぶ大変重要な島の一つでした。

また、本書の総記において朝鮮国の東限が東経130度35分と現竹島を朝鮮領土から除外している事は先に記しました。ここで南限が北緯33度15分と、済州島から南に11km離れた所に位置する馬羅島(Mara-do)（北緯33度7分）を含んでいないことを持って、現竹嶋などの附属島嶼を本来含まない記述であるとする韓国側の反論があります。しかし、戦後竹島領有権を主張し始めた韓国政府に、理論的アドバイスをしていた歴史学者・崔南善は著書「朝鮮常識問答」(1946)で、次のように述べています 。

”問：我が国は地図上においてどの位置にあるか?”

”答：朝鮮半島自体は東経130度41分22秒から124度18分35秒、北緯34度14分16秒から43度0分36秒の間にある。大小の島を含めれば、東経130度56分23秒から124度11分00秒、北緯33度6分40秒から43度0分36秒の間にある。”“島嶼部を含むならば、最東端は慶尚北道鬱陵島竹島(竹嶼)(*訳注)、最西端は平安北道龍川郡薪島面馬鞍島、最南端は済州道大静面馬羅島、最北端は咸鏡北道穏城郡柔浦面である”

鬱陵島竹島とは、現竹島ではなく、韓国の古地図や文献において1700年代以降于山島として描かれ続けてきた鬱陵島の東2ｋｍ沖に浮かぶ竹嶼です。また、同人による「朝鮮常識」(1948)でも島嶼を含めた韓国の東端が130度56分23秒であり、鬱陵島の隣接島である竹嶼（韓国名竹島）が韓国領土の東端で、極南が北緯33度6分40秒の馬羅島であると記しています。1948年においてさえ、馬羅島は領土として明記しているものの、現竹島（東経131度52分） は韓国領土から除外しています。つまり、本書に馬羅島を含まなかったことが、現竹島を鬱陵島附属島嶼として認識していた事を証明するものではないことが分かります。

また、この朝鮮国東限が鬱陵島ではなく豆満江を基準としていると言う指摘も見受けられますが、第四編の豆満江の項では、その朝鮮領土東限としての記述はおろか、河口である東端の経度の明記もありません。従ってやはりそのような指摘は、本書に関する限り事実に基づかない推測に過ぎない事が分かります。

以上のように、本書は日本海軍、特に水路局長肝付兼行が現竹島が朝鮮領土外である事を明確に認識していたという証拠であるとともに、実際はその東限とされた130度35分より東にあり、現竹島以上に戦略的に重要で実際に海底ケーブルも望楼も設置した鬱陵島を、強制的に編入などしなかった、1905年当時の明治政府が、内藤氏の主張するような領土拡大の野望を持って竹島の島根県編入を秘密裏に行ったようなのではなく、国際法に基づいた適切な対応をしていた事を証明する貴重な資料でもあると言えるでしょう。

新羅時代から1948年に至るまで現竹島をその領土内として認識していた明らかな形跡がただの一つもないのにも関わらず、竹島だけでなく対馬、さらには波浪島と言う存在があやふやな島までその領土に編入する事を要求した上に、サンフランシスコ条約締結直前三ヶ月前に突然所謂李ラインと言う国際的ルールに基づかない国境を一方的に画定し竹島を不法占拠し、それを越える日本漁船を一方的に機関銃等で銃撃(2007年7月5日 山陰中央新報 ）（魚拓)するなどし、日本の漁民44名を死傷させるに至らしめ、約四千人を拿捕、抑留した上日韓交渉を有利に進める人質外交を行った韓国こそが、侵略的な領土拡大という国際的犯罪行為を行った張本人であることは明確です。韓国が1905年の明治政府による平和的な島根県への編入を、本来無関係である帝国主義にことさら結びつけて愛国心を煽り、自国に有利な世論に持ち込もうと必死なのは、こうした都合の悪い事実を覆い隠そうとする意図があるのでしょうか。

「朝鮮水路誌」(明治二十七年)の全文は国立国会図書館のホームページ から閲覧可能です。

Happy Takeshima Day !

Today is the 3rd Takeshima Day. I hope everyone who could attend the ceremony in Shimane enjoyed the program and more member of the National Diet will attend next year.

Today, San-in Chuo Shinpo(山陰中央新報) reported about the Korean article of 「皇城新聞」, in July 13th, 1906, which we have already talked about here. The article confirmed "Seokdo(石島)" in the Great Korean Empire's Ordinance No.41 which orderd to set the Uldo County in 1900 was not Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks at all. Prof.Shimojo of Takushoku University and Mr. Sugihara from former Takeshima Research Group confirmed this article and highly valued this finding. Mr. Sugihara told that it is a collaborating evidence to support Takeshima Research Group's conclusion.

Facts on Arrangement of Uldo County

The Resident-General sent an official letter to the Interior Ministry asking it to clarify what islands belonged to Ulleungdo, which is under the administration of Samcheok County in Gangwon Province, and the year and month the county office was established. The response was that the post of Ulleungdo Administrator was established on May 20, 1898, and then on October 25, 1900, the government decided to post a county magistrate with the county office being at Daehadong (台霞洞). It said the islands under the authority of the said county were Jukdo (竹島) and Seokdo (石島), and that it was sixty ri from east to west and forty ri from north to south for a total of 200 ri.

Reference : 「石島＝独島」説否定の記述見つかる (山陰中央新報　22/02/2008 : Japanese) Cache

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)



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)

1656 - 柳馨遠 『輿地志』 (「東国興地志」巻之七 江原道 蔚珍)

柳馨遠（1622～1673）は、朝鮮王朝、顕宗王の時の実学者で、1656年に全国地理の本である「東國輿地志」を編纂しました。（ソウル大学奎章閣サイト・韓国語 ）

韓国側は「東国文献備考・與地考」(1770)や「萬機要覧」（1808）に「輿地志に謂う、鬱陵、于山皆于山国の地。于山は即ち倭の所謂松島なり」と言う引用がある事を挙げ、安龍福の渡航や日本よりも古い文献に倭の松島（現在の竹島）が于山島だと認識していたという論拠としてきました。この本は長く遺失されたとされてきましたが、2006年に済州大学の呉相学氏によって確認された「東国興地志」には下記のように書かれており、実際は従来からの日本側の主張のように、「于山は即ち倭の所謂松島なり」と言う記述は無かったことが明らかになりました。

「于山島鬱陵島　一云武陵　一云羽陵　二島在県正東海中　三峯及業掌空南峯梢卑　風日清明則峯頭樹木　及山根沙渚　歴々可見　風便則二日可到　一説干山　鬱陵　本一島　地方百里」

ちなみにこれは「新増東国輿地勝覧」 の記録をそのまま引用していることが分かります。

「于山島鬱陵島　一云武陵　一云羽陵　二島在県正東海中　三峯及業掌空南峯梢卑　風日清明則峯頭樹木　及山根沙渚　歴々可見　風便則二日可到　一説干山　鬱陵　本一島　地方百里」

安龍福の竹島一件の後、安の証言である「于山は即ち倭の所謂松島なり」という言葉が「輿地志」に書かれてあったと言う、誤った記述が、1700年以降の「東国文献備考」や「萬機要覧」を始めとする朝鮮の書物に登場するようになり、韓国側もこれらの文献をを根拠に于山島が竹島・独島（倭の松島）であると主張します。しかし、以下のように文献を年代にそって並べると、申景濬が1756年の「疆界誌」の中で輿地志の記録の後に“所謂松島 ”と言う自説を追記していること、1770年の「東国文献備考・與地考」でそれを「輿地志」の記述であるかのように書き変えている事が明確に分かります。以降に編纂された「萬機要覧」 「増補文献備考 輿地考｣は、原著である「輿地志」からではなく、「東国文献備考・與地考」からの孫引きで引用している為、この誤記が受け継がれていったようです。

1756 - 申景濬「疆界誌」『旅菴全書』巻之七 「疆界考」十二 鬱陵島

「按 輿地志云 一説于山鬱陵本一島
而考諸圖志二島也 一則其所謂松島
而蓋二島 倶是于山國也」

1770 - 申景濬・洪啓禧　「東国文献備考・與地考」　

「輿地志云 鬱陵 于山 皆于山國地 于山則倭所謂松島也」

1808 - 「萬機要覧 軍政篇 (1937 朝鮮総督府)」

「輿地志云 鬱陵于山皆于山国地. 于山則倭所謂松島也.」

1908 - 李萬運「増補文献備考 輿地考｣

「輿地志云 鬱陵于山皆于山国地. 于山則倭所謂松島也」

このように流れを追っていくと、申景濬が「東国文献備考・與地考」を編纂する際に、自分の意見をあたかも輿地志からの引用であるかの如く改竄している事が分かります。、誤記であることが明らかな文献を根拠として領土の根拠として主張することは、愚かであると言わざるを得ないのです。

2008 Feb 7 - New Article on Gerry from "San-in Chuo Shinpo"（山陰中央新報）

Below is a translation of the new February 7, 2008 article on Gerry in the Japanese newspaper San-in Chuo Shinpo (山陰中央新報).

The excessive anti-Japan movement that took place in March 2005 in Korea has died down now. Shimane Prefecture established "Takeshima Day" that year.　Mr. Gerry Bevers, a teacher of English at a university near Seoul studies the history of Takeshima and analyzes the changes as follows.

" I think part of the reason for that is that many Koreans have turned their attention toward China and the historical disagreements that exist between China and Korea, but I also think that the Korean government has realized that talking about the history of Takeshima (Dokdo) has done more harm than good since the history supports Japan's claims on Takeshima."

He posted articles on the Internet about Korea's old documents and maps that did not support the Korean claim, which led to his being fired from a university last year.

"I now have a teaching job at another Korean university that I am very satisfied with. I enjoy living in Korea because Koreans are very friendly people, but the problem is that Koreans seem to think that anyone who disagrees with them on Dokdo (Takeshima) are anti-Korean. That is simply not true."

Lee Myung-bak will take office as new President on the 25th of next February. He will place more importance upon the relation with Japan.

"I think Lee Myung-bak is a pragmatic politician that wants to improve relations
with Japan and will, therefore, try to avoid making Takeshima (Dokdo) an issue
by continuing to pretend that there is no dispute with Japan over the islets. However, there are still anti-Japanese groups in Korea that he may sometimes have to appease in someway, so the issue may still come up."

While the anti-Japan movement has died down, Korea still seems to assert her claims on
Takeshima by doing such things as sitting up polling booths. On the other hand,
the Japanese government hasn't done anything to speak of.

"There are hardcore anti-Japan advocates in Korea. Old documents and maps clearly support Japan’s historical claims on Takeshima, so the Japanese government needs to stop being so passive about this issue and start translating and writing the books
and brochures that will prove their claims to the world because I am almost positive that Korean historians will continue to distort the facts to support their false claims. However, telling the truth about the history and settling the dispute are two different things."

Gerry has studied the history of Takeshima for 3 years after feeling there was something wrong about the anti-Japan sentiments in Korea. He is confident that there is no evidence that Takeshima was ever Korean territory.

"I have pretty much answered all the questions I had about the Takeshima-Dokdo issue, so I am not really doing any new research right now. What I want to do now is to review and organize the information I do have because I am thinking about writing a book. I think I have learned the truth about Takeshima, and I want others to know it, too."

via ZERO
Courtesy of　The San-in Chuo Shinpo(山陰中央新報)

The 4th column “Seeking Truth Based Solely on Facts(実事求是)” by Prof. Shimojo Masao

Below is a translation of The 4th column: “Seeking Truth Based Solely on Facts (実事求是),” by Prof. Shimojo Masao

"Errors in Educational Video Produced by the Northeast Asian History Foundation (東北アジア歴史財団)."

The Northeast Asian History Foundation of Korea has produced an educational video that was made public on January 18, 2008. The video deals with the Takeshima (Dokdo) issue, and includes interviews with three specialists: Hong (洪) Song-kun, Naito Seichu(内藤正中) and Kim Byeong-yeol (金柄烈). The problem with the video is that no evidence was shown to prove that Takeshima (Dokdo) was Korean territory, and their arguments include errors.

The first speaker, Hong (洪) Song-kun, mentioned a Japanese document entitled, “元禄九丙子年朝鮮舟着岸一巻之覚書 (Memorandum on the visit of a Korean ship in the 9th year of Genroku)" and claimed that it was proof that Takeshima (Dokdo) was Korean territory. He claimed it was a report on the investigation on Ahn Yong-bok and said, “It clearly said that Dokdo belonged to Gangwondo (江原道).” However, if you read the “元禄九丙子年朝鮮舟着岸一巻之覚書,” you realize that it was not a report on the investigation, but only a transcript of Ahn Yong-bok's testimony, where Ahn said, “Japan's Matsushima is Jasando (子山嶋) and is part of Ganwon Province (江原道). Japan did not admit Takeshima (Dokdo) was Korean territory. In fact, the Tottori clan did not take him seriously and deported him from Karo-nada (Sea of Karo). In the light of these facts, it is clear that Hong’s theory was wrong.

The reason Koreans today applause Ahn Yong-bok’s activities is because the testimony Ahn gave to Korean officials was recorded in the “Annals of King Sukjong (粛宗)”. However, testimony written in both the “Annals of King Sukjong (粛宗)” and in the “漂人領来謄録” is considered unreliable since the testimony Ahn gave to the Japanese and the testimony he gave to the Koreans do not match in certain parts. In other words, Ahn perjured himself.

Hong (洪) also said that Usando was clearly written as Japan’s so-called Matsushima (Dokdo) in the "Mangi Yoram 萬機要覽," which was a Korean text published in 1808; however, it seems Mr. Hong did not read the original text. The article that Mr. Hong based his claim begins with, “According to the 文献備考”, which was requotation of the “東国文献備考” (1770), and the article in the “東国文献備考” was fabricated by Sin Gyong-jun (申景濬) when he compiled the "Yojigo (輿地考)." He changed the text in the “輿地志” to “Usando is Japan’s so-called Matsushima (Dokdo),” based on his book, "Ganggyego 彊界考." Therefore, the statement that Mr. Hong said was proof that Usando was Dokdo was a requotation from a fabricated document.

The same goes for Naito Seichu, who said that making a voyage to Ulleungdo during the time of Korea’s empty island policy was like going into someone's empty house, and he called it a "thief mentality." However, the Edo Shogunate regarded Ulleungdo as Japan’s territory when the chief fishermen of the Oya family clan in Yonago, Tottori brought Ahn Yong-bok and Park O-dun (朴於屯) back to Japan. However, as the Tsushima clan negotiated with Korea on orders from the Shogunate, opinions inside the clans split into two parties. One party thought that Ulleungdo was Japan’s territory, and the other thought it was Korean. The former party made their argument based on the fact that Japan effectively controlled the island for over 80 years. In the end, it was the Tsushima clan who proposed stopping the negotiations and conceded that Ulleungdo was Korean territory because of the evidence in Korea's "Dongguk Yoji Seungram (東国輿地勝覧)." Therefore, Naito Seichu was wrong to say Japan had a "thief mentality."

The last speaker was Kim Byeong-yeol (金柄烈). He called the incorporation of Takeshima (Dokdo) into Shimane prefecture "an invasion." He also said, “You could incorporate it if it were ownerless land, but Takeshima (Dokdo) was Korean territory.” He mentioned the activity of Ahn Yong-bok as grounds of his claim and say that "Seokdo" in the 1900 "Ordinance #41" was Dokdo. However, there is no historical evidence to support Ahn Yong-bok's claims. For example, Takeshima (Dokdo) was not drawn in such Korean maps such as the "Ulleungdo Dohyeong (欝陵島図形),” the "Ulleungdo Woido (欝陵島外図)," or the Daehan Jeondo (大韓全図)." Takeshima (Dokdo) was outside Korean territory and was certainly “terra nullius." Japan incorporated ownerless land, and it was acceptable under international law, as Kim pointed out.

They put the educational video up for viewing on January 18th, the very same day that Korea invaded Takeshima (Dokdo) after drawing the “Rhee Syngman Line” on the open sea. The problem is that there was no historical grounds for Rhee Syngman to draw the line. As Mr. Naito expressed in the Northeast Asian History Foundation's educational video, Rhee's action was based on "thief mentality."

Translated by Pacifist

Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.

Other Column of the Series:

The 24th column “South Korean Government dug their own grave by publishing the English version of "The Dokdo/Takeshima Controversy" by Prof. Emeritus Naito Seichu and Mr. Park Byeong-seop.”

The 23rd column " 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)"

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 19th column “"Korea Maritime Institute(KMI : 韓国海洋水産開発院）, who lacks ability to read their own historical documents, criticized on Shimane Prefecture. "”

The 18th column “Absurd and Peculiar Theory of Prof. Hosaka, plus the "Children and textbook nationwide net 21" and others' Getting "Out of Control.””

The 17th column “The Ordinance of Prime Minister and Cabinet Office, No.24 and the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance, No.4 in 1951(昭和26年).”

The 16th column ""Dokdo Month" without any historical grounds."

The 15th column " South Korea's Groundless Claim of "Inherent Part of (Korean) Territory"

The 14th column “A reckless Courage of the Professor Kimishima Kazuhiko(君島和彦) of Tokyo Gakugei University(東京学芸大学).

The 13th column “Sins of Asahi Shimbun and Mr. Wakamiya Yoshibumi(若宮啓文).

The 12th column “Northeast Asian History Foundation and Dokdo Research Center's Misunderstanding”

The 11th column “South Korea's Misunderstanding of 'A Map of Three Adjoining Countries (Sangoku Setsujozu 三国接壌図)' by Hayashi Shihei(林子平)”

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)."

Late 18th c., "Joseon Paldo Jido," Ulleungdo & Usando

Below is a cutout of the Korean island of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島) from the late 18th century Korean map, "Joseon Paldo Jido" (朝鮮八道地圖), which is stored in Seoul National University's Gyujanggak Institute for Korean Studies. Notice that the map shows "Usando" (于山島) as a small, neighboring island off Ulleungdo's northeast shore.

Korea claims that Usando was the old Korean name for "Dokdo" (Liancourt Rocks), but this map and many others show that Usando was just a small, neighboring island of Ulleungdo, most likely Ulleungdo's present-day neighboring island of Jukdo (竹島).

"Joseon Paldo Jido," Late 18th c.; Ulleungdo (鬱陵島) & Usando (于山島)


Below is the full map:

"Joseon Paldo Jido," Late 18th c.

1877 Jpn Map Shows "Matsushima" (松島) as Japanese

Below is a link to an 1877 Japanese map that shows "Takeshima" (竹島) as Korean territory, but "Matsushima" (松島) as Japanese. However, the island the mapmaker believed to be Takeshima (Ulleungdo) seems to have been the non-existant island of Argonaut, while Matsushima seems to have been the real Ulleungdo. At the time, there was confusion in Japan about the location of Matsushima (松島), but this map is evidence that regardless of its location, Japanese associated the name Matsushima with Japanese territory.

Click on the link and then click on "1" to see the overall map, and "3" to see the closeup view of Takeshima and Matsushima.

Link to the Map

1906 July 13, "Hwangseong Shinmun" (皇城新聞) Reports Boundry for Uldo County that Excluded "Dokdo"

In a July 13, 1906 article in the Korean newspaper, "Hwangseong Shinmun" (皇城新聞), it was reported that the Japanese Resident-General asked the Korean Ministry of Interior to clarify what neighboring islands were part of of "Uldo County" (Ulleungdo County). It also asked for the date the county office was established there.

The Korean ministry replied that the county was established on October 25, 1900, and that the neighboring islands were Jukdo (竹島) and Seokdo (石島). The Korean ministry also gave the dimensions of Ulleungdo as being sixty ri from east to west and forty ri from north to south for a total of 200 ri. Since a Korean ri was 0.4 kilometers, that means Uldo County was defined as having an area of 24km x 16km.

The 200 ri figure referred to the perimeter of the county (60 + 60 + 40 + 40 = 200), which converts up to 80 kilometers.

This article is very important in the Dokdo/Takeshima debate because it is evidence that the Korean government in 1906 did not recognize "Dokdo" (Liancourt Rocks) as being part of Uldo County since Dokdo is about 90km southeast of Ulleungdo.

It is quite probable that the Japanese request for clarification of the neighboring islands of Ulleungdo was caused by recent Korean newspaper reports saying that Japan had incorporated an island named "Dokdo" (Liancourt Rocks), which the Uldo County Magistrate thought was part of his county, even though he did not know exactly where it was. Since the magistrate had been ordered by his superiors to confirm the status of Dokdo, and since the Korean government did not include Dokdo in their reply to the Japanese request months later, we can assume that the investigation revealed that Dokdo was not a part of Ulleungdo.

The article was apparently discovered by a Mr. Sugino Yomei (杉野洋明), who wrote about it in Japanese on his site HERE. Below is the article and my translation. The newspaper page the article came from can be found HERE:

Facts on Arrangement of Uldo CountyThe Resident-General sent an official letter to the Interior Ministry asking it to clarify what islands belonged to Ulleungdo, which is under the administration of Samcheok County in Gangwon Province, and the year and month the county office was established. The response was that the post of Ulleungdo Administrator was established on May 20, 1898, and then on October 25, 1900, the government decided to post a county magistrate with the county office being at Daehadong (台霞洞). It said the islands under the authority of the said county were Jukdo (竹島) and Seokdo (石島), and that it was sixty ri from east to west and forty ri from north to south for a total of 200 ri. 

 鬱島郡의 配置顛末

統監府에서 內部에 公函하되 江原道 三陟郡 管下에 所在 鬱陵島에 所属島嶼와 郡廳設始 年月을 示明하라는 故로 答函하되、光武二年五月二十日에 鬱陵島監으로 設始 하였다가 光武四年十月二十五日에 政府會議를 經由하야 郡守를 配置하니 郡廳은 台霞洞에 在하고 該郡所管島는 竹島石島오、東西가 六十里오 南北이 四十里니, 合 二百餘里라고 하였다더라.

Wikipedia Drops "History" Section from Liancourt Rocks Description

Today I noticed that Wikipedia has dropped the history section from its description of Liancourt Rocks. (See HERE.) Apparently, the online dictionary got tired of the back-and-forth debate between those claiming the rocks belong to Japan and those claiming they belong to Korea. Instead, they have included a section called "International Dispute," which says the following:

There are conflicting interpretations about the state of sovereignty over the islands in pre-modern times. A Korean claim is partly based on references to a Korean islands called Usan-do in various historical records and maps. According to the Korean view, these refer to today's Liancourt Rocks, while the Japanese side argues that they must refer to a different island, today called Jukdo, a small islet located in the immediate vicinity of the nearest larger Korean island Ulleung-do.

Japan officially incorporated the islands as part of its territory in 1905, shortly before it occupied Korea itself as a protectorate.

The present-day conflict largely stems from conflicting interpretations of whether Japan's renunciation of sovereignty over its occupied territories after the Second World War was supposed to cover the Liancourt Rocks too. A decision by the Supreme Command of the Allied occupation powers (SCAP), Instruction #677 of January 29, 1946, listed the Liancourt Rocks as part of those territories over which Japanese sovereignty was to be suspended, but the final peace treaty between Japan and the Allied powers, the Treaty of San Francisco, did not mention them.

Maybe the above was the only way for Wikipedia to deal with the problem of people always changing the history section to suit their biased views of history, but it means the dictionary has decided not to talk about the history. Unfortunately, the references it used for the article almost all point to Korean sites, which do distort the history of the islets.

Chungwanji (春官志): "Ulleungdo is called Sambongdo (三峯島)"

In 1744, King Yeongjo (英祖) commanded Lee Maeng-hyu (李孟休) to compile a book of rites, customs, and legal precedents. The result was a 3-volume set of books called the "Chungwanji" (春官志).

The third volume of the set included exchanges between Korea's emissaries to Japan and their Japanese counterparts. Among the exchanges in the book was one entitled "The Ulleungdo Boundary Dispute" (鬱陵島 爭界), which was a 14-page description of Ulleungdo and the territorial dispute over the island between Korea and Japan following the An Yong-bok (安龍福) incident in the 1690s.

I hope to translate into English all fourteen pages of "The Ulleungdo Boundary Dispute" in the near future, but now I just want to introduce a short discription of Ulleungdo from the book that I found interesting because it clearly says that another name for Ulleungdo was "Sambongdo" (三峯島), which means "Island of Three Peaks." That is interesting because Korea has claimed that Sambongdo was an old name for "Dokdo" (Liancourt Rocks), but she has no documents or maps to back up that claim. On the other hand, the three high peaks of Ulleungdo were frequently mentioned in old documents.

Here is the quote for the "Chungwanji" (春官志):

盖 是島 以其産竹也 故 謂 竹島 以有三峯也 故謂 三峯島 至於 于山 羽陵 蔚陵 武陵 礒竹 皆音 轉 訛而然 也

대개 이 섬은 대가 나는 까닭에 죽도(竹島)라 이르고 세 봉우리가 있기 때문에 삼봉도(三峰島)라 하며, 우산(于山)이니, 우릉(羽陵)이니 울릉(蔚陵)이니 무릉(武陵)이니 의죽(礒竹)이니 하는 것은 모두가 발음이 잘못 전해져 그런 것이다.

In general, this island is called Jukdo (竹島) because bamboo (竹) grows on it. It is called Sambongdo (三峰島) because it has "three peaks" (三峰). Usan (于山), Uleung (羽陵), Ulleung (蔚陵), Muleung (武陵), and Wuijuk (礒竹) are all mispronunciations.

The above quote also appeared in the late 19th century Korean text, "Dongjeongo" (東典考), which you can see below:

以産竹故謂竹島有三峯故謂三峰島于山羽陵蔚陵武陵蟻竹皆音訛而然也[春官誌]

San-in Chuo Shimpo: "Usando (于山島) = Jukdo (竹嶼), Documented for the First Time"

The following is a translation of a January 19 article from the Japanese newspaper, "San-in Chou Shimpo":

"Usando (于山島) = Jukdo (竹嶼), Documented for the First Time"

An old Joseon Dynasty document has been found that shows that Usando was the old name for Jukdo (竹嶼 in Japanese or 竹島 in Korean), which is an island off the northeast shore of present-day Ulleungdo. South Korea has claimed that Usando was Takeshima (Dokdo in Korean), the sovereignty of which is claimed by both Korea and Japan. The Takeshima Research Center of Shimane Prefecture has used old maps to claim, "Usando was not Takeshima/Dokdo but Jukdo," but this is the first time a document has been found to prove the claim.

The document comes from the "Ilseongrok (日省錄) ", which was a Korean record of daily affairs of state from 1760 to 1910. American Gerry Bevers (52), who researches the Takeshima/Dokdo issue in South Korea, introduced the document on the Internet.

In an 1807 report in the "Ilseongrok (日省錄), a Korean government official, who surveyed Ulleungdo, described Usando as being to the north of the island and having a circumference of two to three Korean ri (里), which was 800 to 1200 meters (北有于山島周回為二三里許). Jukdo is the only island around Ulleungdo with such a large circumference.

Jukdo is off the northeast shore of Ulleungdo and reaches almost 700 meters from north to south. In contrast, Takeshima/Dokdo is located ninety-two kilomethers southeast southeast of Ulleungdo. Mr. Bevers concluded, "At any rate, this 1807 report says that Usando was a neighboring island of Ulleungdo."

Professor Masao Shimojo of Takushoku University, who served as the chairman of the Takeshima Issue Society, evaluated the document by saying, "Though old maps had already made it clear that Usando was not Takeshima/Dokdo but Jukdo, the document is meaningful because it corroborates the maps." South Korea researchers had been refuting the claims of the Takeshima Research Center of Shimane Prefecture by saying, "More value should be put on documents than maps." Professor Shimojo quoted the Korean refutation and then said, "The opinion of the Takeshima Research Center been proven to be correct."

Dong-A Ilbo: "Japanese Netizens Actively Promote 'Takeshima'"

The following is my translation of a January 28 article in the Korean newspaper, "Dong-a Ilbo":

"Japanese Netizens Actively Promote 'Takeshima'"

Japanese netizens are actively promoting "Takeshima" (called "Dokdo" in Korea).

According to the Voluntary Agency Network of Korea (VANK), on the 28th, Japanese netizens will use a site entitled "2008 Takeshima project" (sakurasakurasakura3.blog53.fc2.com/blog-entry-342.html) to achieve solidarity and systematically promote Dokdo as "Takeshima."

The site will insist to bloggers and site managers that Dokdo is "Takeshima," and will post such things as articles, pictures, and video. It will also ask that people participate in a survey on an English site that asks about the sovereignty of Dokdo. It is also proposing that people again link to Shimane (島根) Prefecture's multi-lingual information page on Takeshima (dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com).

The site presently has more than 100 bloggers and site managers participating.

The President of VANK, Bak Gi-tae, said, "Moreover, the problem is serious because this site induces anti-Korean content by linking bloggers to sites where they can purchase, "Hating the Korean Wave," which is a book written by Japanese right-wingers."

President Bak said, "If you type '2008 Takeshima' (2008年竹島) into the overseas search engine 'Google' (www.google.com), you can easily confirm that the Japanese sites participating in this movement are rapidly spreading." He added, "To deal with this, VANK will begin a serious infomation campaign by networking with friendly bloggers, domestically and overseas, and setting up a blogger hub site to promote to the world Dokdo, Goguryo, and pro-Korean-wave information.

Notice that the newspaper gave our site's address as the multi-lingual web site for Shimane Prefecture's Takeshima's information page. Not only is that information wrong, but the Korean sentences in the article seem to be poorly written.

Link to the Korean article

Link to the Japanese blog referred to in the article

Yomiuri Shimbun: "Detailed map of Takeshima completed"

The following is a link to a Yomiuri Shimbun article talking about a new topographical map of Takeshima compiled by Japan's Geographical Survey Institute. This news was talked about before, but this English article explains it in an easy-to-understand way and gives some good background information.

"Detailed map of Takehima completed"

2007 - "Takeshima in Japanese map (1)" by Funasugi Rikinobu _1

In this article, the Japanese maps are examined based on "The right of owning Dokdo for South Korea that Japanese old map proves" of the Korean professor Yuji Hosaka. Mr. Hosaka has enumerated three Japanese maps 「嘉永新増　大日本国郡輿地全図 (1849), 「校正大日本輿地全図」(latter term of Edo period), 「改正日本輿地路程全図」(1779).

１) 「嘉永新増　大日本国郡輿地全図」 (1849)

Takashiba Eisanyu (高柴英三雄) is a person in Edo Iigura(江戸飯倉) town 4, and this map is a Japanese map published by 蔦屋吉蔵 who lived in Edo South Denma town 1 in 1849. He is assumed to be a map editor since he had edited and revised various picture maps like Edo map 「嘉永改正府郷御江戸絵図」（1849）, 「芝愛宕下西ノ久保辺絵図」(1849), 「駿河台小川町図」(1849), 「日本橋北神田辺之絵図」(1850), or other maps like 「改正銅鐫安房国全図」(1879: revision), 「下野国輿地全図」,「尾張国輿地全図」 etc,.

A digital version of this drawing is open to the public on the homepage of the Tohoku University library's Kano pocket edition. The point by Mr. Hosaka, "Dokdo has come off the map though there is an Oki island when studying the map" is incorrect. Matsushima (present Takeshima) and Takeshima (present Ulleundo) are drawn on the west side of Oki islands (Figure 1). However, Takeshima is the south, Matsushima is the north, and the position is inaccurate. However, it is colored in Takeshima and Matsushima, and it is understood that Takashiba recognized both islands within Japanese territory since there is no description of Choson on those islands.

Another point by Mr. Hosaka "And, when the map, on which the entire Japan was drawn, was made at that time, such all those maps should be governmental manufactured or official licensed since the permission of Shogunate Government of Edo was necessary" is important. As a rule, the publication had received the inspection by the Shogunate though it was not able to be said that there was no pirate edition at all. In 1712 (享保６年), the Shogunate placed the order to have publishers report their publishing to the "Bugyosho" (奉行所 : magistrate place). The person who tried to publish the book first had to hand in the drafts and application to "Nengyoji"(年行事 : bakufu supervisors), then if the draft was decided to be good enough to be published, then he had to apply to the "Machidoshiyori"(町年寄 : Town Officials) next, and the applications were passed from 町年寄 to 奉行所, finally to "Gakumonsho"(学問所 : School District). If the 学問所 admitted there were no problems, one were allowed to be licenced to publish (Emori, 1955). .

Actually, the discontinuation was ordered to Hayashi Shihei (林子平)'s map 『三国通覧図説』 in 1792 (寛政４年), six years after it was published in 1786 (天明６年). In the decision sentence by the shogunate for the prohibition of the publish or sale of Hayashi's 『三国通覧図説』, the reason was clearly written that 「地理相違之絵図相添書写又は板行に致し(He had drawn the geographically inaccurate picture maps on the paper attached or the carved on the board)」. Not only Hayashi, but also publisher Suharaya Ichibee(須原屋市兵衛) and even four officers who examined his map became objects for the punishment.

In addition "Tenpo Reform"(天保の改革) strengthened restriction for the publications, and all the drafts of the books were examined at the town magistrate and it was passed to the study place "Gakumonsho"(学問所 : School District), then "Tenmonkata"(天文方 : Astronomical Institute ) and "Igakukan" (医学館 : a Medical School managed directly by the Tokugawa Government) too. It also required to submit the books after it was allowed and published. In other words, the restriction for the prior inspection system and dedication system for the published books as a key point was delivered (Fujita and Sato, 1987). According to 「市中取締類集( the compilation for the town management cases)」 in 1853 (嘉永６年), when Suzuki Hikojirou (鈴木彦次郎 or 驥園）, the retainer of Toda Tadanobu (戸田忠偲) , the "Hatamoto"(旗本 : direct retainers of the Shogun) ,applied the publication of the map 「大日本国郡輿地路程全図」, Astronomical Institute permitted on condition that the latitude and longitude line be deleted. In fact, this map has omitted the latitude and longitude line, though the graticule of latitude and longitude are omitted though the longitude is written.

(property of Tohoku University)

「日本側作製地図にみる竹島（1）（Takeshima in the Japanese map (1)」 by associate professor Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) of Shimane University.
Translated by Kaneganese.
Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.

* The abstract of the sentence to Hayashi Shihei and his book which prohibiting the publication of his inaccurate map is as follows ;
"其方儀縦令利欲に不致共一己之名聞に拘り取留も無之風聞又は推察を以て異国より日本を襲う事可有之趣奇怪 異説等取交せ著述致し、且つ右之内には御要害等之儀も認入、其外地理相違之絵図相添書写又は板行に致し室 町二丁目権八店市兵衛へ差使し候始末不憚公儀仕方不届之至に付（中略）蟄居申付並板行物板木共に召上可申 （『六無斎遺草』一八一頁所載）（-248） "

2007 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - Supplement

Supplement

Well, there were the following counter opinion about the analysis of the map recently. "Originally, maps has huge visual effect, thus it tend to be argued based on only few maps in the territorial debate, but as a matter of fact, inaccurate old maps only have hearsay evidence at most in the international adjudication arena. Especially the map which is not based on the measurement has little evidential ability in fact.(Newsletter No.127 by half moon)."

This person referred the article of Mr. Araki Norio (荒木教夫), who specialises in international law, and concluded that inaccurate old maps are worthless for the international adjudication. However, if you actually read Araki's thesis, it is understood that it is mere a part of quotation.

Araki wrote that the map, which its' value has been admitted in the international adjudication, had been basically the ones which show "Mutual agreement of the country concerned", even they were attached to the border agreement. He also admit that though the official maps of the party in dispute doesn't become the conclusive proof of the dispute solution, but the maps in which the land in concern was diadvantageously drawn and voluntarily admitted it has no sovereignty over the land of concern hold important meanings in dispute. "

However, Korea has absolutely no official maps which described this debatable island favourable to their territorial claim nor sovereignty in the debatable ground. Moreover, there is even no Korean maps which actually described the island in concern (Takeshima/Dokdo) itself at all in the first place. In a word, it can be said that it was clarified that in South Korea, there is no single map that could be used as an evidence in the international adjudication to support their claim.

「朝鮮側作製の官製地図にみる竹島（Takeshima in the Korean official map）」 by associate professor Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) of Shimane University.
Translated by Kaneganese.
Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.

2007 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - (5) 『大韓全図』(1899) , 『大韓輿地図』(1900 c.a.)

５）『大韓全図』、『大韓輿地図』

Both "大韓全図" and "大韓輿地図" were published by the faculty of the editing bureau, the Ministry of Education of the Great Korean Empire. The faculty was set up within the government office to rule the school affairs administration in 1895. There were secretariat, a school affairs bureau, and an edit bureau in the faculty, and it had jurisdiction over climate observatory, 成均館(University), the teacher-training school and the junior high school etc. Therefore, it can be said that this map is a government manufactured official map again.

"大韓全図" is a publication in 1899, and the one that latitude and longitude was written for the first time in a Korean complete map. In this map, Ulleundo is recorded, as well as a current Korean map, at the west side and Usando was placed next to the Ulleundo on the east side. In "大韓地誌"published in the same year, the east limit of Korea is declared to be Ulleundo(130° east). The map and the document confirm that the east limit of Korea in 1899 was Ulleundo since present Takeshima/Dokdo locates at 131°52".

"大韓輿地図" is assumed to be publication in about 1900. Ulleundo is recorded at the west side and Usando was placed next to the Ulleundo on the east side just like the description of "大韓全図". South Korea claims that they had promoted the Ulleundo to the county, making "石島", which South Korea insists to be present Takeshima/Dokdo, within their territory at the same time by the Imperial Ordinance No.41 in October, 1900. However, neither "石島" nor the description of Dokdo are seen on the map, though the phantom island in the south of Ulleundo is recorded and Usando as neighbouring island of Ulleundo at the east side. It is thought that having recorded the island in the south of Ulleundo referred to the maps such as "朝鮮地図".

As we had seen so far, Korean official maps doesn't have recorded present Takeshima/Dokdo even immediately before Japan incorporates present Takeshima/Dokdo into Shimane, Japan (1905). Prof, Hosaka claims that Japanese official maps in Edo and Meiji era don't include Takeshima/Dokdo, but none of Korean official maps actually didn't drawn Takeshima/Dokdo at all.

*Related articles
1899 Korean Map: "Daehanjeondo" (大韓全圖) (玄采 大韓地誌)
1900 - Imperial Edict Makes Ulleungdo a County of Gangwon Province (大韓勅令第41号)
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 8 : "An Yong-bok, Usando, & Matsushima (Songdo)" 肅宗実録(1696), 鬱陵島圖形(1711), 鬱陵島事蹟(1694), 海東地圖(1750s), 輿地圖(1736-67), 朝鮮地圖(1750-1768), 地乘(1776-1800), 東國文獻備考(1770), 日省録(1793), 萬機要覽(1808), 靑邱圖(1835), 朝鮮国交際始末内探書(1869), 高宗実録(1882), 鬱陵島外圖(1882), 大韓全図(1899), 皇城新聞(1899), 大韓勅令勅令第41号(1900)
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 11 : 大韓全図（1899）, 大韓新地誌（1907）, 崔南善「朝鮮常識問答」（1946） 「朝鮮常識」（1948）

「朝鮮側作製の官製地図にみる竹島（Takeshima in the Korean official map）」 by associate professor Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) of Shimane University.
Translated by Kaneganese.
Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.

2007 -"Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - (4） 『鬱陵島外図』(1882)

4） 『鬱陵島外図』

It is a map made by 李奎遠, who was dispatched as a prosecutor to Ulleundo by Choson dynasty in 1882. It is which it uses and is sent in 1882. It is currently owned by Kyujangkak of Korean study center, Seoul National University. It can be said that this drawing is a government manufacture map, either.

The document 『鬱陵島検察使日記 (Diary of the inspector to Ulleundo)』 which was made along with this map says that "The islands like Matsu/Take/Usando etc. are all meant to be the small island (of Ulleundo) by the locals. But the neighbouring islands of Ulleundo in this map are only "島頂" and "竹島", and if you compare this map to the present map of Ulleundo, "島頂" is a Kwannundo(観音島) and "竹島" is Jukdo（竹嶼, Korean name 竹島). In a word, it is apparent that inspector 李奎遠 did not investigated present Takeshima/Dokdo at all.

The longtime empty island policy of Ulleundo was ceased by Choson dynasty, and the development of Ulleundo was started in 1882. Thus, it can be said that present Takeshima/Dokdo was not recognized geographically nor furthermore considered to be within their territory by Choson dynasty even when it arrived at time the development of Ulleundo was started in late 19th century.

*Related articles
1882 April 7 - King Kojong says Usando Neighboring Island of Ulleungdo (高宗 19卷, 19年 4月 7日 壬戌)
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 3 : 1786 Ulleungdo Inspection : 日省録(1786), 海東地圖（1750 c.a.), 鬱陵島外圖（1882）
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 5 : "The King, Lee Gyu-won & Many Names for a Neighboring Island" 高宗１９年(1882), 靑邱圖（1834）, 英海軍地図(1863), 大日本国沿海略図(1867), ｢松島開拓之議」(1877/8), 軍艦「天城」作成地図(1880)
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 6 : 海東地圖(1750's), 靑邱圖（1834）, 韓国古地図(1800's）, 鬱陵島外圖(1882), 日本古地図(1886), 鬱陵島見取図(1905), 韓国水産誌「鬱陵島全図」(1909)
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 8 : "An Yong-bok, Usando, & Matsushima (Songdo)" 肅宗実録(1696), 鬱陵島圖形(1711), 鬱陵島事蹟(1694), 海東地圖(1750s), 輿地圖(1736-67), 朝鮮地圖(1750-1768), 地乘(1776-1800), 東國文獻備考(1770), 日省録(1793), 萬機要覽(1808), 靑邱圖(1835), 朝鮮国交際始末内探書(1869), 高宗実録(1882), 鬱陵島外圖(1882), 大韓全図(1899), 皇城新聞(1899), 大韓勅令勅令第41号(1900)
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 2 : "1882 Ulleungdo, an outside view & Seal Cave" 鬱陵島外圖(1882)

「朝鮮側作製の官製地図にみる竹島（Takeshima in the Korean official map）」 by associate professor Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) of Shimane University.
Translated by Kaneganese.
Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.

2007 -"Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - (3) 「欝陵島図 in'『朝鮮地図』(1770)

3) 「欝陵島図 in 『朝鮮地図』

"朝鮮地図"is a map which describes 8 prefecture of Choson era and assumed to have been made by the order of the 21th King of Choson, 英祖 in 1770. It is currently owned by Kyujangkak of Korean study center of Seoul National University. It were drawn on ruled paper with relative scale or the graticule, and each county is drawn, and it is assumed that the distance of the location information and accuracy in the direction are expected when it was made. It is said that relative scale is lined in every 20里, and there was 備辺司 sign. Therefore, it can be said that this map is a government manufactured official map, either. The feature of this map is it is a little longer from east to west than the shape of Ulleundo which was described circle up to this, and it drawn the ridge line in the mountainous district. It has been understood that this map draw almost accurately like the port, the river, and the village, etc. as a result of the field investigation, though the island that doesn't exist in the south of the island is drawn.

This map also describes the island labelled as "Usan" about 30里 of Ulleundo on the east side, Both Mr. Bevers and Kyujangkak of Korean study center of Seoul National University admit that this island "Usan"is not a present Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks/Dokdo but the Jukdo which locates in the 2km east of Ulleundo. In a word, present Takeshima/Dokdo is not drawn in figure on this official map of 8 prefecture of Choson made by a Choson dynasty, and it is understood that "Usando" which South Korea insists to be today's Takeshima/Dokdo is actually another island.

*Related articles
1750~1768 - Joseon Jido (朝鮮地圖) - Ulleungdo
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 8 : "An Yong-bok, Usando, & Matsushima (Songdo)" 肅宗実録(1696), 鬱陵島圖形(1711), 鬱陵島事蹟(1694), 海東地圖(1750s), 輿地圖(1736-67), 朝鮮地圖(1750-1768), 地乘(1776-1800), 東國文獻備考(1770), 日省録(1793), 萬機要覽(1808), 靑邱圖(1835), 朝鮮国交際始末内探書(1869), 高宗実録(1882), 鬱陵島外圖(1882), 大韓全図(1899), 皇城新聞(1899), 大韓勅令勅令第41号(1900)
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 5 : "Muleungdo (Ullengdo) “also called ‘Usan’”　東輿備攷(1682ca.)輿地圖 (ca. 1730), 地海東地圖(Early 1750s), 朝鮮地圖(1750 - 1768), 地乘(After 1776), 廣輿圖(early 19th century), 靑邱圖(1834)

「朝鮮側作製の官製地図にみる竹島（Takeshima in the Korean official map）」 by associate professor Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) of Shimane University.
Translated by Kaneganese.
Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.

2007 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - (2)「欝陵島図形」(1711)

2) 「欝陵島図形」 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修)

This map describes the entire Ulleundo and is currently owned by Kyujangkak of Korean study center, Seoul National University. It was made by 朴錫昌, who was the official inspector to Ulleundo in 1711. The stone monument that 朴錫昌 built in 1711 still remains, and has been exhibited in the hometown material pavilion of Ulleundo. It is said that there was a sign of "備辺司" on this map. "備辺司" was the organization that had jurisdiction over the border security at a Choson dynasty, and later, its function was expanded, and strengthened back, and it conferred all the domestic general administration like politics, economy, diplomacy, and the culture, etc. to say nothing of military affairs to be decided. Thus, since this map was made by Choson official commander who were dispatched to clear the illegal squatters from the island, based on his actual survey on Ulleundo, with a official sign of "備辺司" which was the decision making organization at a Choson dynasty, it is safe to say that this map is a official map for Choson dynasty.

Although it is not a modern ordnance map, it has been understood that it is a map where the port, the river, and the village, etc. were drawn almost accurately when you compare the result of the actual field investigation. The most noticeable fact on this map is that there is an island next to Ulleundo on the east side. According to the analysis of Mr. Gerry Bevers, an American resident in Korea, there was a description with "So-called Usando and the field of 海長 bamboo"on this small island. He assumed that "海長 bamboo" was Japanese "女竹", and concluded that this small island (Usando) was Jukdo which locate to the 2km east to Ulleundo, not present Takeshima/Dokdo on which it is impossible to grow the bamboo in any rate. Present Takeshima is located in the southeast from about 90km of Ulleundo.

Therefore, in a so-called official government manufactured map of the Choson dynasty, it is clear that "Usando" is not the present Takeshima/Dokdo on which South Korea insists to be it is.

By the way, there was an counterargument that since there are about hundreds of maps on which Usando was drawn and it is too exaggerated to conclude that it is not Dokdo from only several maps among all. (Takeshima / Dokdo Net News No.6). I wrote an objection to this opinion in the closeout report, saying that "If you insist that there are about hundreds of maps on which Usando was drawn, you have certain obligation to present which maps draw Usando as the today's Takeshima/Dokdo." However, no clear rebuttal is presented by South Korean side yet.

*Related articles ;
1711 - Bak Chang-seok's (朴昌錫) Map of Ulleungdo （「鬱陵島圖形」）
1711 - Ulleungdo Inspector Bak Chang-seok's (朴昌錫) 1711 Inscription
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 7 : 鬱陵島圖形(ca. 1711)

「朝鮮側作製の官製地図にみる竹島（Takeshima in the Korean official map）」 by associate professor Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) of Shimane University.
Translated by Kaneganese.
Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.

2007 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) - (1) 「八道総図」 in 『新増東国輿地勝覧』(1530)

Sadly, Japanese Government expends only about 10 million yen (90,000-100,000 U.S. dollar) a year though the South Korea government put a huge budget to the Takeshima/Dokdo issue every year. Although Japanese government should be the one who are responsible for the territorial issue essentially, in reality, Shimane Prefecture, which is only one local government with very few budgets is forced to tackle this problem almost alone in Japan. I believe it is more necessary to inform international society of the excellent academic works done by Japanese researchers on this issue in order to let good Korean citizens realize that their governments' and academics' illogical claims over Dokdo/Takeshima cannot be accepted by international society and it is the best way to solve this issue peacefully at the court of ICJ.

The Web Takeshima Research Center, which had succeeded the research activity from Takeshima Research Group of Shimane last year, has lots of interesting articles on their site, which Japanese researchers from many specialized field studied and intensively wrote from many perspective. Luckily, we had a permission to translate and post them on this site recently. Though it is impossible for us to translate all of their fantastic reports, we are honoured to be going to choose some of them and post one by one.

As for the starters, I picked the article 「朝鮮側作製の官製地図にみる竹島（Takeshima in the Korean official map）」 by associate professor Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) of Shimane University. In the final report by Takeshima Research Group submitted last year, 　he studied many Korean old maps. But in this article, he selected 5-6 official Choson maps or maps made by Korean officials as a counterargument against the false claim that Japanese official maps in Edo era and Meiji era didn't include Takeshima/Dokdo, leaving false impression as Korea had any maps which include Takeshima/Dokdo in their official maps, by Prof. Hosaka Yuuji of Korean 世宗大学.

1) 「八道総図」 in 『新増東国輿地勝覧』 - "Takeshima in the Korean official map" by Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修)

The map is assumed to be published in 1530 in the appointment by the government map. Especially, it is often used in the research of South Korea. Two islands (from left to right : Usando and Ulleundo) are drawn, but Usando is drawn to the west and Ulleundo is drawn on the east side. South Korea insists that by this map, it is understood that a Choson dynasty recognized present Takeshima/Dokdo as their territory, since importantly it shows two islands in the Sea of Japan though from immaturity of map making technique, it wrongfully shows Usando which Korean insist as today's Takeshima/Dokdo to the west of Ulleundo. However, this analysis is not accurate.

This is not the map based on the actual measurement or survey, but it is merely the main name of a place or roads were recorded. If you look at the text in 『新増東国輿地勝覧』 itself, the description of Ulleundo is under the Uljin Prefecture, and it clearly says that "Usando, Ulleundo. It is called 武陵 and also called 羽陵. Two islands are in the due East of the Sea of Uljin 縣. ... When it is a fine day, the trees on the mountain and the roots of mountains and seashore can be seen."

According to the analysis by Prof. Shimojou in 2005, this sentence means that two islands should locate in the order of Usando first and Ulleundo next from Korean peninsula and those two islands should be seen from Uljin which locate at mainland of Choson, because there was a "rule" that becomes an edit policy in the compilation of topography document in Choson dynasty, and there also was a principle that describes the distance from the land, clearly in case of the description of islands. The island (Usando) seen from Uljin seems to indicate Ulleundo because there is actually no island between and Ulleundo. Therefore, it is understood that the description of this map was not the one based on an actual field investigation but the one based on the description in the topography documents.

Thus, from this map, it can be said that geographic recognition around Ulleundo by Choson dynasty was not accurate at that time. It is thought that this empty island policy by which Choson dynasty prohibited their people from entering and the residence to Ulleundo after 1417 is related. The investigation to the island was done by a Choson dynasty at intervals of several years. In Choson dynasty's authentic record (朝鮮王朝実録), we can find the descriptions of the islands such as 于山島、武陵島, which is thought to be present Ulleundo from the content of the description. Therefore, it can be said that this map doesn't show that it recognized that there were two island in the Sea of Japan, but only shows that their recognition of the Ulleundo itself were confused.

*Related articles
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 1 : Propaganda video, 朝鮮王朝実録, 八道総図 (1530)

「朝鮮側作製の官製地図にみる竹島（Takeshima in the Korean official map）」 by associate professor Funasugi Rikinobu (舩杉力修) of Shimane University.
Translated by Kaneganese.
Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.

Web竹島問題研究所の記事を翻訳する許可を得ました

韓国政府は独島関連事業に巨額の予算を投入していますが、日本政府は竹島関連予算として年間一千万円程度しか支出していません。しかも最近、インターネットで活発な活動をしている在日韓国人の半月城こと朴炳渉氏と東大准教授の玄大松氏が韓国の政府機関である韓国海洋水産開発院独島研究センターの海外諮問委員である事実が判明するなど 、韓国政府の主導による日本国内での工作活動が大変活発に行われているようです。特に朴氏の事実を歪曲した解釈とそれに対する反論に真摯に答えることの全く無い態度には怒りを通り越して呆れるばかりです。また、本来学者として事実に即した研究活動を行うべき玄氏も朴氏の誤りの多いその著作を、その内容の歴史的検証をないがしろにして無批判に採り上げ、あたかもそこに書かれていることが既成事実であるかのように、日本国民の税金を使って国立大学におけるシンポジウムなどで紹介しており、このままでは、日本人が在日韓国人全体はおろか、玄氏を含めた韓国人そのものに対する悪印象を持つ事は必至であると思われ、大変憂慮すべき事態であると思われます。

日韓相互理解に基づく竹島問題の平和的解決のためには、まずは事実に基づいた研究への真摯な取り組みと、なにより日本国民のこの問題に対する関心を呼び起こすことが不可欠だと思われますが、本来国が主体的に取り組むべき領土問題を、実際は大変少ない予算の中で一地方自治体である島根県が取り組まざるを得ないのが実情です。

そうした中、竹島問題研究会とその事業を引き継いだWeb竹島研究所の報告書や記事の中に、各専門分野の研究者達が発表する大変興味深いものが多く、是非紹介したいと思っておりましたところ、最近記事の翻訳許可を得ました。そこで、適宜選んで翻訳し、順次投稿していきたいと思っています。

韓国では竹島に関する日本側の、正当な主張はおろか学術的研究でさえも、一般の国民に知らされることは殆ど無いようです。当ブログは主に研究主体の英文ブログである為か、韓国からのアクセスが大変多く、ここで日本側の学術的な記事や論文を韓国人を始め世界の人々に紹介する機会を持つ事は、相互の理解にとって有効であると考えます。

（追記）　これをご覧になった方で、もし翻訳作業にご協力を下さる方がおられましたら、是非こちらへコメントをお寄せ下さい。

2月22日は竹島の日です。
takeshima dokdo dokto tokdo tokto　

1807年5月12日 - 李泰根が鬱陵島を検察する

Gerryの投稿の日本語訳です。原文はこちら↓(English)　原文画像あり
1807 - May 12 - Lee Tae-gun (李泰根) Inspects Ulleungdo

次の文章は、越松の将軍である李泰根が1807年5月12日に鬱陵島を視察した時の記録で、1760年から1910年に渡って朝鮮王朝での出来事が記録された「日省録」に収録されているものです。

この記録では、鬱陵島への密航者が紫香、竹、そしてアシカを採集していた事を記録しています。また、于山島が天底仇味の北にあると言っています。ただし、これは何かの間違いのようで、というのは天底仇味は鬱陵島の北にあり、そこから于山島は東にあるはずだからです（韓国の古地図は于山島を鬱陵島の北東沖に描いている。）。 しかし、どう解釈しても、この1807年の検察記録は于山島が鬱陵島の隣接島であるとしか読めません。つまり、これは于山島が"独島（竹島/Liancourt Rocks）"の古名であると言う韓国側の主張を崩す更なる証拠の一つと言えるでしょう。竹島/Liancourt Rocksは、鬱陵島の東南92ｋｍに有る島なのですから。

江原監司の金履喬が、順天等三村の守令が鬱陵島への密航船に警告しなかった罪を諭した事を報告
四月初七日に本島に到着し宿泊しました。島の形状をあまねく調査したところ、左に黄土窟右に屏風石があり、黄土仇味より中峯まで三十里位でした。そして山々がそびえ立ち清らかで冷たい泉の水のある所に人家の跡と田や畑として耕作可能な土地があり四十余りの石落となっていました(石落、意味不明)。傍らには香木亭があり香木が削って置いてあり、又捕らえたアシカの皮も置いてありましたがこれは密航船のしわざでした。北に向かって十里余りの海中に中央に舟の通れる穴のある石が聳え立っていて其の名をを孔巖といいます。そして錐山巖に向かっていきました。この巖はきりが立っているような形をしていました。南には天底仇味があり、谷の入り口は奥深く十里余りありました。北には于山島があり一周二三里（800ｍ～1200m）ほどの大きさでした。南に行き着いた所に都庄仇味があり谷の入り口から奥のほうまで立ち入ってみると竹林がありましたが密航船によって乱雑に叩き切られていました。（現代語訳：yabutarou）

以下は密航者についての報告ですが、省略しています。

（以下訳注）この検察記録では、于山島の位置について方位が違うようですが、重要なことは、于山島が、検察官が実際に探索した記録の中において鬱陵島の周囲にある島であり、92km離れた島ではないといことがが明確に記録されていることです。天底仇味と都庄仇味の間にあることと、島の周囲が2,3里とあり、二島からなる現在の竹島の記述としては不適切で、この于山島が現在の竹嶼であることは、ほぼ間違いないでしょう。このように、朝鮮王朝から派遣された検察官が、于山島が鬱陵島に隣接する竹嶼である事を明確に記録していることは、彼等が朝鮮王に献上した地図三枚の「鬱陵島圖形」中、1699年と1702年の"大于（干）島"、そして1711年の"所謂于山島"が現在の竹嶼の位置に描かれていることと一致するものです。

1699 - Today's Kwannundo(観音島) and Small Udo(小于島) in 「欝陵島図形」 by Choson Official Inspector, the Identical Figures. （1699年の「鬱陵島図形」）
Went to Samcheok Museum today, and.... （1702年の「鬱陵島図形」）
「石島は独島」説否定　最古の鬱陵島絵図２枚確認 (山陰中央新報 : 1699年と1702年の「鬱陵島図形」） )
1711年 - 朴昌錫「鬱陵島圖形」

Korea to add "Dokdo" to image of old map.

The Korean government has decided to use an image of Kim Jeong-ho's 1861 Korean map, "Daedong Yeojido," on their new 100,000 won bank notes, but instead of using a true image of the famous map, the government will be adding the island of "Dokdo" (Liancourt Rocks), which did not appear on the original map or on any old Korean map. This seems to be yet another example of the Korean government's use of deceit to try to convince Koreans and others that Dokdo was Korean territory.

Here is a quote from and link to a Donga Ilbo article that mentions the Korean government plan:

The Dokdo Islet is not present in the original Daedongyeojido that Kim Jeong-ho drew in the Joseon Dynasty, but the 100,000 won note includes Dokdo Islet.

LINK

If Korea had had any old map that showed "Dokdo," they would have almost certainly put that map on the bank note instead of one that does not show it. The fact that they had to add "Dokdo" to the map should tell you that they did not have even one old map showing Dokdo.

2007 - Index of Posts on Dokdo-or-Takeshima?

Happy New Year !
新年明けましておめでとうございます。

I just came back from countdown event at 増上寺(Zojoji Temple) and local 神社(Jinja : shrine), and received a bottle of お神酒(Omiki : sacred sake) and 破魔矢(Hamaya : An arrow to break Evils) as always. A typical Japanese new year day.

In hindsight, we had done intensive study of numerous maps and documents of Korea, Japan and other western countries since May. So far, we couldn't find any concrete evidence that Korean had sovereignty over the island before Japanese as they claim, while all the evidences we had discussed showed Korean so-called Usando cannot be "Dokdo/Takeshima". As far as we had been studied for the last 8 months, it is clear that Japan is the right owner of the 竹島/Liancourt Rocks because they had owned the island since around the middle of 17th Century.

Although none of us is a professional historian, we did a pretty good job, at least far more than I thought. For example, now we found many evidences that back up Gerry's theory, ""石島(Seokto)" was just a catchall name for the rocky islets around Ulleundo". Secondly, with a great help of GTOMR and Yabutarou, we found new evidences that show Korean official inspector to Ulleundo 300 years ago actually recognized 観音島(Kwannundo) as an island, not a cape, and drew it on the map of official report as 小于(干)島.

We have so many things coming up this year, so I post the list of what we had posted on this site in the year of 2007 so that we can always look back and check all the documents and maps we had studied as a database. (I will update the Index on this URL later on.)

Dokdo-or-Takeshima? Posts (English)

1412 - Koreans on Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Jukdo

1618 - Permission Given to the Oya and Murakawa Families (幕府 鳥取藩主 村川家 大屋家 竹島（欝陵島）渡航許可書)

1662 - Cheokjuji (陟州誌) - Ulleungdo (鬱陵島)

1667 Onshu Shicho Goki (隠州視聴合記)

1692-1693 - The 1692 and 1693 incidents: Ahn Yong-bok's(安龍福) first visit to Japan

1693-1696 - The Takeshima incident: the 1st dispute between Japan and Korea

1694 - Jang Han-sang (張漢相) Finds Sambongdo (三峯島)

1696 - Ordinance Prohibiting Voyages to Takeshima (幕府 渡航禁制令)

1696 - Ahn Yong-bok's(安龍福) second visit to Japan: Part I

1696 - Ahn Yong-bok's (安龍福) second visit to Japan: Part II

1699 - Today's Kwannundo(観音島) and Small Udo(小于島) in 「欝陵島図形」 by Choson Official Inspector, the Identical Figures.

1711 - Bak Chang-seok's (朴昌錫) Map of Ulleungdo （「鬱陵島圖形」）

1711 - Ulleungdo Inspector Bak Chang-seok's (朴昌錫) 1711 Inscription

1724 - Oki's Matsushima in the 18th century （「竹島図説」1751-63）

1736 ~ 1767 - Yeojido (輿地圖) - Ulleung/Usan (鬱陵于山兩島)

1737 ~ 1776: "Gwang Yeodo" (廣輿圖) - Gangwondo & Ulleungdo

Mid 1700s - "Paldo Yeojido" (八道輿地圖) - Ulleungdo Map (鬱陵島圖)

Early 1750s - "Haedong Jido" (海東地圖) - Ulleungdo

1750~1768 - Joseon Jido (朝鮮地圖) - Ulleungdo

1777 ~ 1787 - Haedong Yeojido (海東輿地圖) - Ulleungdo

1786 - June 4 - Kim Chang-yun (金昌胤) Inspects Ulleungdo

1790 - Late 18th & 19th Century Japanese Maps Showed Ulleungdo & Liancourt Rocks as Japanese (華夷一覧図)

1793 - Korean Record: "Songdo another name for Ulleungdo" (日省録)

1794 - June 3 - Han Chang-guk (韓昌國) Inspects Ulleungdo

1795-1800: Dong Yeodo (東輿圖) - Ulleungdo (鬱陵島)

18th/19th? Century Map of Ulleungdo & Usando

1807 - May 12 - Lee Tae-gun (李泰根) Inspects Ulleungdo

1827 - May 19 - Ha Si-myeong (河始明) Inspects Ulleungdo

1831 - May 14 - Lee Gyeong-jeong (李慶鼎) Inspects Ulleungdo

1834 - Korean Map: "Cheonggudo" (靑邱圖) 金正浩

1834 - Cheonggudo (靑邱圖) 1834 Map by Kim Jong-ho 金正浩

1835 - Late 18th & 19th Century Japanese Maps Showed Ulleungdo & Liancourt Rocks as Japanese ( 長久保赤水 唐土歴代州郡沿革地図 亜細亜小東洋圖)

1836 - Japanese Man Executed for Sailing to Ulleungdo （会津屋八右衛門 竹島事件）

1840-1860 c. Matsushima of Oki County (文鳳堂a.k.a 山城屋忠兵衛「文鳳堂雑纂」)

1842 - Okajima Masayoshi Wrote of Ahn Yong-bok's Flag and Claims (岡島正義 因府歴年大雑集)

1855 - Mid-19th c. Map of Samcheok District & Ulleungdo (地圖 江原道 咸鏡道)

What does this 1855 Jpn map of Oki say?

1858 - British Publication "China Pilot," 2nd Edition (1858)

1860 - 1870? - Japanese map of Korea (朝鮮國全図)

1861 - Daedong Yeojido (大東輿地圖) - Ulleungdo Map (韓国国立中央図書館)

1861 & 1864 - Daedong Yeojido (大東輿地圖) - Ulleungdo （筆写本:奎章閣 , 改訂版筆写本:国立国会図書館）

1861 - British Publication "China Pilot," 3rd Edition (1861)

1861 - Late 18th & 19th Century Japanese Maps Showed Ulleungdo & Liancourt Rocks as Japanese (新刊輿地全図)

1863 - Description of Ulleungdo from Kim Jeong-ho's "Daedongjiji" (大東地志)

1864 - Japanese Map shows 2 similar islands (増訂大日本輿地全図)

1864 - British Publication "China Pilot," 4th Edition, 1864

1870 - "How Takeshima & Matsushima Became Part of Joseon"

1873 - British Publication "China Sea Directory," 1st Edition, Vol. 4 (1873)

1873 - Western Map Shows Takeshima & Matsushima as Japanese (Carte de l'empire du Japon publiee par la Commision Imperiale Exposition Universelle de VIENNE 1873 by Japanese Meiji Government)

1876 - "Argument for the Development of Matsushima" (武藤平学 松島開拓之議)

1876 - Shimane prefecture explains the history of Takeshima in 1876 (Part 1/2)

1876 - Shimane prefecture explains the history of Takeshima in 1876　(Part 2/2)

1877 - Argument about "another island": details of the compiled official documents (公文禄) of the Ministry of the Interior (太政官指令)

1877 - Different Japanese Views on Matsushima (田辺太一 「松島巡視要否ノ議」)

1877/8 - Unfinished Translation of an 1878? Document (渡辺洪基 「松島之儀」)

1878 - Watanabe Says Liancourt Rocks are Japanese (竹島考証)

1881 - Oki & Matsushima Same Color on 1881 Japanese Map (大日本府県分轄図)

1881 - Western Map Shows Takeshima & Matsushima as Japanese (大日本全図)

1882 April 7 - King Kojong says Usando Neighboring Island of Ulleungdo (高宗 19卷, 19年 4月 7日 壬戌)

1883 - Japanese "Seaways Magazine" (日本水路誌)

1883 - Japanese Map of Ulleungdo (朝鮮国蔚陵島出張桧垣内務省書記官復命ノ件)

1884 - British Publication "China Sea Directory," 2nd Edition, Vol. 4 (1884)

1886 Dec. - 寰瀛水路誌 第二巻第二版 韓露沿岸

1894 - Any Info on this Japanese Map (實測朝鮮全圖, 1894, 宗孟寬)?

1894 - British Publication "China Sea Directory," 3rd Edition, Vol 4 (1894)

1894 Jan 14 - New Japanese Boat Visits Ulleungdo (漁船改良丸の好果)

1894 February 18 - Article on an Ulleungdo Inspection (朝鮮竹島探檢 (松江佐_狂水生投))

1894-1897 - From "Korea and Her Neighbors" by Isabella Lucy Bird.

1898 - Korean Map of Gangwondo & Ulleungdo （朝鮮地圖 江原道)

1899 Korean Map: "Daehanjeondo" (大韓全圖) (玄采 大韓地誌)

1899 - Did the 1899 "Joseon Seaways Directory" Mention "Dokdo"?

1900 - Imperial Edict Makes Ulleungdo a County of Gangwon Province (大韓勅令第41号)

1901 - "Daehanjiji" (大韓地誌) Map of Korea's Gangwon Province (玄采)

1902 - Japanese Document Describing Ulleungdo (外務省通商局編纂 通商彙纂)

1903 The Fishery Guide of Sea around Korea (黒龍会　韓海通漁指針)

1904 - February 20th Japanese map of Korea and Manchuria(満韓新図 日露戦争実記)

1904 - British Publication "Sailing Directions" (1904)

1904 - September 29 - Petition to Incorporate Ryanko-to (Liancourt Rocks) (中井養三郎 リャンコ島領土編入並二貸下願 )

1904 - Sep 25 - First Record of "Dokdo" for Liancourt Rocks (軍艦新高行動日誌)

1905 - "Trade Documents" by MOFA (外務省通商局編纂 通商彙纂)

1905 - January 28th: the dicision by a Cabinet meeting （閣議決定）

1905 - Feb 24 - Takeshima Incorporated into Shimane Prefecture (隠岐の新島)

1905 - June - Japanese Cruiser Surveys Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks)

1905 Jul 3 - "Postcards to Commemorate Naval Battle" (海戦記念絵葉書)

1905 Aug 6 - Japanese Officials to Visit Takeshima (竹島渡航)

1905 Aug 22 - "Governor Matsunaga Inspects Takeshima" (松永知事の竹島視察)

1905 - Aug 22 - "Sea Pigs" Near Takeshima (県庁内に海豚放養)

1906 - Mar 11 - "Voyage to Takeshima Decided" (竹島行決定)

1906 - Apr 1 - Japanese Tell Koreans of Takeshima Incorporation (竹島土産)

1906 - Apr 8 - "Diary of My Trip to Takeshima" # 3 (竹嶋渡海日記)

1907 - Daehan Shinjiji Attached Maps (大韓新地志附地圖)

1907 - Japan's "Joseon Seaways Directory" (朝鮮水路誌)

1909 - Japan's "Korean Fisheries Guide" (韓海漁業指針　鬱陵島全図)

1917 & 1918 - Maps of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島図　朝鮮総督府)

1918 - Japanese Map of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島図　朝鮮総督府)

1922 - "Map of Daehanminguk" (대한민국 디도) (大韓民国図)

1923 - Shimane Prefecture Journal (島根県誌)

1950's - Japan & Korea Argue Their Claims in 1950s Letters

1950 - USA answers to Australian government

1953 Jul 22 - US Doc. Reconfirms Dean Rusk Letter

1954 - Report of Van Fleet mission to the Far East

Korean Nationalism and so-called "Dokdo"

Geographical Survey Institute of Japan(国土地理院) first displays Takeshima's details in the topographical map.

Korea's NE Asian History Foundation Advertisement

Donggyeong San Cheon (東京山川) - Paldo Jido (八道地圖)

Some "Netizens" Upset New Banknote Has No Dokdo

1894-1948 Korean territory (Revised version)

Good Video of Ulleungdo's Northern Shore

Went to Samcheok Museum today, and....

Can you see "Dokdo" (獨島) from Ulleungdo?

Korean Scholar Says "Usando" Was Ulleungdo's "Jukdo"

Article on "Dokdo Islands" in "Vladivostok News"

"Onshu Shicho Goki" - The different translations

Oh, no, Dokdo. Here we go, again.

한국의 친구 서, 부디 검토해 주십시오

KBS Documentary on "Jukdo," the Real Usando

Daum Urges Koreans to Come Here and Vote "Dokdo"

Inspector's Map of Ulleungdo Shows Jasando (子山嶋)?

Some help with this map, please?

Why did Western Maps Show Ulleungdo as Japanese?

Symposium on "The Life of Dokdo Guardian An Yong-bok"

Where have all the Usandos gone?

Nice picture of Ulleungdo's Jukdo (Usando)

Today's Update September 02, 2007

What do イガ島, まの島 and マノ島, have in common?

Most Popular Article on Sanin-chou Shimpo site?

"Dokdo Must Have Trees to be Internationally Legal Island"

Yonhap News says Dokdo was annexed in 1910

ALERT: Dokdo Under Attack!

Investigation of Japanese maps during Meiji period before the incorporation of Liancourt rocks

General Comments for Suggestions for June 2007

Japanese Articles on Dokdo/Takeshima

Japanese Name Glossary

Japanese Document and Map Links

English/Western Document and Map Links

Korean Document and Map Links

Wikipedia Switches from "Dokdo" to "Liancourt Rocks"

Dokdo Residents Talk about the Islets

"Shimane Prefecture Research Committee Report 'Takeshima is Japanese Land'"

Searching for Solutions or Cheerleaders?

Welcome Message

Korean Articles on Dokdo/Takeshima

Chinese Name Glossary

Japanese Map of Ulleungdo, Date Unknown

General Comments and Suggestions Archive

Links to Western Articles on Dokdo/Takeshima

Indexes/Glossaries

Docs/Maps/Articles

Issues/Events

Timeline

Korean Historical Timeline of Dokdo/Takeshima (English)

History of Dokdo/Takeshima

The Japanese History of Dokdo/Takeshima (English)

Japanese History Timeline (English)

English Word Index

General Comments or Suggestions for May 2007

Dokdo-or-Takeshima? Posts (日本語 : Japanese)

竹島問題の歴史

鬱陵島検察使のこの地図は、子山嶋をあらわしているか?

安龍福の言う倭の松島＝子山島（于山島）はやはり竹嶼だった

イガ島、まの島、マノ島に共通するものは?

18世紀の隠岐ノ松島 「竹島図説」

明治期の欝陵島～竹島／独島関連の日本製地図

1894-1948 朝鮮領土の境界

1618年 - 幕府の「渡航許可書」

1696年　－幕府の「渡航禁制令」

1711年 - 朴昌錫「鬱陵島圖形」

1711年 - 鬱稜島に派遣された検察官朴昌錫の残した碑文

1736 ~ 1767年 - 「輿地圖」 - 鬱陵于山両島

1737～1776年 - 廣輿圖 - 江原道と鬱陵島

1700年中期 - 「八道輿地圖」 - 鬱陵島

1793年 - 韓国の記録「日省録」に記された"松島"

1800年代以前（推定） - 東京山川 八道地圖

1836年 - 会津屋八右衛門による竹嶋一件と「竹嶋渡海一件記　全」 （竹島事件 会津屋八右衛門）

1840～1860年頃 - 隠岐国松島 (文鳳堂a.k.a 山城屋忠兵衛「文鳳堂雑纂」)

1861年 - 金正浩「大東輿地圖」 (韓国国立中央図書館)

1861, 1864年 - 金正浩「大東輿地圖」 （筆写本:奎章閣 , 改訂版筆写本:国立国会図書館）

1864年 - 日本の地図に現れる竹島と松島は瓜ふたつ

1876年 - 島根県の報告「渡海禁制のいきさつ」

1876年 - 島根県の報告「（竹島の）由来の概略」

1877年 - "松島"に関する様々な意見：「松島巡視要否ノ議」 外務省公信局長 田邊太一

1878年 - 「松島の儀」外務省記録局長 渡邊洪基

1882年 - 4月7日　高宗が于山島は鬱陵島の隣接島であると述べたこと

1901年 - 大韓帝国地理書「大韓地誌」玄采著附属江原道地図

1902年 - 外務省通商局編纂「通商彙纂」

1903年 - 韓海通漁指針

1904年 - リャンコ島領土編入並二貸下願 (中井養三郎)

1904年2月20日 - 「満韓新図」

1904年9月25日 - 韓国名"独島"が竹島/Liancourt Rocksを示すのに使われた始めての記録

1905年1月28日 - 閣議決定資料

1905年 - 軍艦橋立の竹島調査

1905年 - 外務省通商局編纂「通商彙纂」 第50号

1907年 - （明治四十年）「朝鮮水路誌」

1950年代の竹島をめぐる論争における日韓それぞれの主張

1950年 - オーストラリア政府の質問に対する米国の回答

1954年 - ヴァン・フリート使節団報告書

( Index of Related Posts on Occidentalism )