Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Maps 1
The Korean map posted below is called Cheonggudo. It was made in 1834 by a Korean named Kim Jeong-ho. It is the largest of Korea’s old maps still in existence. It is 8.7 meters tall and 4.62 meters wide.
The map is made up of hundreds of individual sheets of ruled paper panels. It is twenty-two panels wide and twenty-nine panels high.
The height of each panel represents a unit measure of 100 ri, and the width represents a unit measure of seventy ri. That means that the map represents measures of about 3,000 ri from north to south and about 1,500 ri from east to west. One ri is normally quoted as being 0.4 kilometers, but there seem to be shorter measures, as well.
The scale of the map is about 1/216,000th of actual size.
Each panel has a 10-segment rule for the height and a 7-segment rule for the width. Each segment represents a distance of ten ri.
Two panels are used to represent Ulleungdo.
On the small island next to Ulleungdo are written the Chinese characters 于山 (Usan). The scale of the map shows that Usan (Usando) is about 10 ri, offshore of Ulleungdo. That would be about four kilometers. By the way, the text below Usan reads as follows:
“In the 11th year of Yeongjo (1735), Gangwon Provincial Governor Jo Choi-su reported to the king, ‘A survey of Ulleungdo has found that the land is wide and fertile, and there are signs that people have lived there. Also, to its west is Usando, which is also wide and spacious.’ The so-called “west” character is different on this map, where (Usando) is to the east.”
Koreans claim that Usan (Usando) was the old name for present-day “Dokdo” (Liancourt Rocks), but the Japanese claim that it was Jukdo, which is a small island less than four kilometers off the east coast of Ulleungdo. Since “Dokdo” is ninety-two kilometers southeast of Ulleungdo, it seems obvious that Usan (Usando) was not “Dokdo.” In fact, it looks like the Japanese claim that it was Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of Jukdo (Chukdo) is correct.
You can see Jukdo (Chukdo) off the east coast of Ulleungdo on the modern map posted above.
Since Usan (Usando) was obviously not present-day “Dokdo” (Liancourt), that means Korea has no historical maps or documents to show that she even knew about Liancourt Rocks before the Japanese incorporated them in 1905. Korean claims on Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) are based on lies and half-truths, which means Korea is illegally occupying Japanese territory.
You can find more discussion on the topic of “Dokdo or Takeshima?” here.
By the way, “Opp” provided the overlay and animation for the 7th map. You can find more of his work here and here.
Japanese Translation Provided by Kaneganese
(Gerryの投稿の日本語訳です)
下に揚げた韓国製の地図は、靑邱圖と呼ばれています。1834年に金正浩によって作成されたものです。これは現存する韓国の古地図のうち最大のものです。縦が8.7m幅が4.62mあります。
地図1：靑邱圖
この地図は沢山の罫線入りの紙製パネルで構成されていて、横22枚分、縦29枚分の大きさです。
地図2：靑邱圖〈南部拡大図〉
各パネルの高さは100里、幅は70里を表しています。つまり、この地図は南北に約3000里、東西に1500里の範囲を描いているわけです。１里は、一般的に0.4kmだと言われますが、それより短めに使われることもあるようです。
地図3：靑邱圖〈南東部拡大図〉
実際の地図の縮尺は約1/216,000です。
地図4：靑邱圖〈鬱陵島付近拡大図〉
各パネルは縦10線分、横7線分で、1線分は10里を表します。
地図5：靑邱圖〈鬱陵島拡大図〉
鬱陵島を表すのに、二つのパネルが使用されています。
地図6：靑邱圖〈于山島付近拡大図〉
鬱陵島の横の小さな島は、漢字で于山と書かれています。地図の目盛から、この于山（于山島）が鬱陵島沖、約10里の位置にあることが分かります。約4kmですね。ところで、于山の下に書かれてある文は、下記の通りです。
英宗11年（1735）、江原道の監吏、趙最壽が王に報告した。‘鬱陵島の検察を行い、その土地が広く、肥沃で、人が居住した形跡がある。西には于山島があり、その島もまた、広く開けていた。’于山島は東に描かれているので、いわゆる“西”の文字はこの地図では異なっている.
地図7：靑邱圖とグーグルアースのトレース図
韓国人は于山（于山島）が今日の“独島” (Liancourt Rocks)の古称だと主張しますが、日本人はそれは竹嶼のことだといいます。竹嶼は鬱陵島の沖東に4km弱の位置にある小さな島です。“独島” は、鬱陵島南東92kmの沖にあるので、于山（于山島）が“独島” では無いことは明らかです。実際、日本人が主張するように、鬱陵島の周囲にある竹嶼である、と言うほうが正しいと思われます。
地図8:現代の鬱陵島地図
竹嶼が、上掲の現代の地図で、鬱陵島の東に竹嶼があるのが確認出来ます。
于山（于山島）は明らかに今日の“独島” (Liancourt Rocks）ではないので、韓国側には“独島” を描いた歴史的地図が無いどころか、日本がその国土に竹島を編入した1905年以前に、この島のことを知っていたことを示す記録さえ無い、ということになるのです。ゆえに、韓国の“Liancourt Rocks” (独島）に対する領有権の主張は、嘘と、半分の真実に基づいているわけで、とりもなおさず、それは韓国が日本の領土を違法に占領し続けている、ということになるのです。
この“独島か竹島か?”に関する議論がここで行われました。〈リンク〉
ところで、”Opp”さんが、7番目の地図を提供して下さいました。彼の労作は、ここでもっと見ることが出来ます。〈リンク〉
Links to More Posts on Takeshima/Dokdo (With Japanese translations)
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 1
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 2
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 3
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 4
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 4 Supplement
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 5
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 6
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 7
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 8
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 9
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 10
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Part 11
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 1
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 2
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 2 Supplement
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 3
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 4
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 5
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 6
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 7
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 8
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 9
Lies, Half-truths, and Dokdo Video, Maps 10
Gerry
Hmmm.Ggak/Gak has nothing to do with a sea lion. Hmmmm.So that professor may be wrong.
But 可支gaji means a seal and there is islet called seal point in British map.
It probably corresponds to karabunebana 唐船鼻
(間の島＝manojima=mano/shima=kan/no/shima=kan/no/tou=(probably)kwanundo as you had already noticed.)
(Anyway his point was 可支島 does not refer to Dokdo though some
Koreans claim it does, and his conclusion still holds.)
Anｄ it is interesting to speculate things, and’ll keep checking when I have a time.Thanks.
WJK
I don’t think the issue of Dokdo is not hard to understand.
Korea claims that Dokdo belongs to Korea, historically and legally.
Japan claims that Dokdo belongs to Japan, historically and legally.
So let’s examine it.
As Gerry has shown Korea’s claim that Dokdo belong to Korea has no ground.
Look at the maps. The maps are not legally so important but As Mark said on his site, the maps reflect a national’s cognizance of geography .
Korean has no map that had Dokdo/Takshima on it.
Japan has many.
It is true, as Mark stated on his site, some Japanese maps lacks takeshima/dokdo around the late 19 century because of the influence of western maps and because Japanese government was transforming from old shogunate government to a totally new Meiji government.
But that some maps lacks Dokdo is much better that no map has Dokdo on it.
Mark also points out, Japan abandoned dokdo by 1877 documents.
Japanese side has a counter argument. but okay. let’s suppose, for the sake of argument, Mark is right.
And let’s examine the issue legally.
For the territory to legally belong to a state, the state must exercise effective control.(you can check it in any text book of international law)
Around 1905 Japanese fishermen was hunting seals.
In 1905 Japanese government confirmed that Dokdo belonged to Japan.
Since then Japan had had effective control until 1945.
And these Japanese claims are very hard to refute because the reference is accurate, and there are a lot of official documents.
On the other hand Korean claim is very weak.
(1)
1900 edict is legally useless because the reference is not clear.
(It is legally invalid according to Toadface because Korea did not notify it to Japan.)
It is historically dubious that Sokto referred to Dokdo/Takeshima because it is most likely that it designated Kwanundo.
Most importantly Korea has no evidence that it had effective control over dokdo.
(2)If Korea protested effectively, 1905 Japanese inclusion is invalid
(a)But Korea did not despite the fact she protested on other matters.
(b)Suppose, for the sake of argument, Korea could not because Korea was deprived of any means to protest. In this case, the point is whether Korea had a ground for protesting. But as Gerry showed, Korea had none. It is closer to the truth that .Korea did not even recognized Dokdo;The local government official did not even know the location of Dokdo.
(c)Suppose, for the sake of argument that Korea did protest effectively, then the day it proteseted is the critical date.Then we go back to historical records until this day.
(ⅰ）Japan has historical clear histrical records about dokdo,though some are disputed by Toadface and Mark.
(ⅱ）Korea has none..
(3)Besides, Korea has documents that clearly locates Dokdo outside of Korean territory.
Sensing that Korea has no hope if we focus on the period before 1945, Toadface once claimed, probably out of desperation, that Dokdo was up for the grab, it was not owned by any state, (which incidentally meant he admitted that Korea had not owned Dokdo either,) when Japan was occupied by Allies. But I think you have seen this argument has failed.
These are my reasoning about Dokdo and why I think Japan’sclaim is stronger than Korea’s.
Gerry,
The portion of the 1867 map simply seems to be a translation of a British Navy map made in 1863.
The southern point is labeled セール崎 (Seal point) and the northwest point is labeled ボウソルロック (Boussole Rock); the katakana expression indicating that the two names are foreign words. To the west is the name of the island, 松島 (Matsushima). The others are all numbers, which are, clockwise from top, 三百六十 360, 四百 400, 三百三十 330, and 六十 60 (distances to land, maybe?).
And Matt and ponta are right about 間ノ島. It can’t be read gangchi. In fact, I haven’t been able to find any word that could correpsond to “ganchi” that means seal in Japan. Ashika （海鹿）, todo (トド）, umiuso (海獺), and michi (海驢) mean seals in Japan, and “ashika” was mostly likely used during the time.
Gerry
I agree with Two cents.
1867 map is difficult to read, but I could decipher 崎
And
this is 1870 map. It says セユル-崎(seeru-saki/seyuru-saki) which seems to be a translation of seal point.
誰か翻訳頼み。
1828年に編纂された「竹嶋考」に享保9年(1724年）に幕府の命令で、漁師たちが竹嶋・松島の図を差し出したとの記録あり。また、竹嶋考には幕府に差し出した図を簡略化した地図を掲載している。その概略図が、この地図である。→click
また、鳥取藩の藩主であった池田家に竹嶋・松島の地図が残っており、ゲリーが提示したこの地図はその一枚。他に「享保9年に江戸に差し出した書類の写し」と明記された地図と、より詳細な情報が記載された地図が池田家文書に残っている。
その詳細な地図には、アワビやアシカの漁場を詳しく書き入れたものがある（私も画像は未見）。この詳細図と同系統の地図として個人が所蔵していた地図がある。この個人の所蔵していた地図の画像には、「鮑抱場（アワビの漁場）」が明記されており、ゲリーの言う「Gangchi Place」はこのことではないかと思う。
アシカの漁場も書かれているはずだが、字を崩している上に不鮮明でよくわからない。
Opp,
Great map. I cannot read anything on it, but it looks like a great map. How do you find this stuff?
Do you know the date of the map on the third link? Did you mention it in your comments?
What are the names of the two neighboring islands?
I hope someone can translate the third map for me. It’s great.
Opp,
有名なオッペケペーさんの文章を、不肖ながら私が訳させて頂きます。
In the Views on Takeshima (Takeshima-ko, 竹嶋考) compiled in 1828, there is a record that some fishermen submitted a drawing of Takeshima and Matsushima in 1724 (2nd year of Kyoho享保) by orders by the Tokugawa Shogunate. In the Takeshima-ko, the government included a simplified version of this map. The following is the schematic diagram. (click)
Furthermore, copies of the Takeshima and Matsushima maps submitted by the fishermen also have been kept by the House of Ikeda, who were the lords of the Tottori-han at the time. The map presented by Gerry (click) is one of them. Besides this, there are also a map on which it is clearly written, “This is a copy of the papers submitted to the Edo government in the 2nd year of Kyoho (1724),” and another map with more detailed information preserved by the Libraries of the House of Ikeda.
The elaborated map contains one which shows detailed information on the fishing grounds of abalone and seals (I have not yet seen this image.) A map similar to the elaborated map has been kept privately by an individual. The latter map (click) clearly shows the location of “abalone fishing grounds (鮑抱場),” which I believe might correspond to the “Gangchi Place” in Gerry’s comment.
The map should also show the hunting grounds for seals, but it cannot be deciphered since the kanji characters have been abbreviated and are also smudged.
Gerry,
The map enlarged in the upper right reads, from left to right:
Matsushima 松島
Mooring wharf 船着き場 (not sure about the middle letters)
Sanmatsu-cho, O-shima, Matsushima 松島大島三松町
(Three-Pine town, Big Island, Matsushima).
I can so far decipher only one word in the bottom-left map, which is the shorter word on the left written vertically at the bottom, next to the small island. It says とうせんくら in hiragana, which probably corresponds to 唐船倉 (Chinese chip warehouse). Thus, it appears that 唐船 in my previous comment is not read as “karabune” but “tousen.”
I have to correct my previous post.
The word on the right in the top map is 松島大廻り三拾町 (I may be wrong about the 廻り), in which case it means that the distance around Matsushima is 30 cho, or about 3.3 km.
I realized my mistake when I found a similar expression in the bottom map, at the center of the island. It says ?竹島 大廻り七里半, meaning that the distance around Takeshima is 7.5 ri, or about 30 km.I can’t figure out what the letter in front of 竹 is.
opp a great map!
Two cents a great translation!
My guess is that it is 磯[iso/a (rocky) beach; a (sea) shore]
Gerry
As for Gajido/可支島（seal island), maybe your first guess is correct: seal point is 可支島.
I am not sure about Ggaksae, but in case of short-tailed Albatross, many people say that people hit the birds to catch them.
(The bird was stupid to be caught with a club, so it is called a stupid- bird/ahou-dori in Japanese)
At the same time since in old times, seals was living around Ulleungdo according to 古今釋林, I think it is highly probable that they were also living at Kwanundo.
Two Cents,
Thanks for the translation. You seem to be pretty good at that.
Ponta, Two Cents, & Oop,
Congratulate me.
I think I have found 可支島 (Gajido) on the west coast of Ulleungdo. These days it is called “Saja Bawui” (사자바위), which means “Lion Rock.” In Korean, a sea lion is called either gangchi (강치) or bada saja (바다 사자). Bada saja literally means “sea lion,” which is probably why the rock is called “Lion Rock.”
It looks like Lee Gyu-won mapped 可支島 in 1882. The following is a link to a portion of Lee Gyu-won’s “Ulleungdo Oido” (鬱陵島外圖) map. The map shows what looks like three caves. I know it is hard to see, but I am pretty sure 可支島 is written in front of the middle cave.
Lee Gyu-won’s 1882 Map of Ulleungdo (可支島)
This may be a better map.
I think this proves that “Gajido” (可支島) was not a reference to “Dokdo” (Liancourt Rocks), as Koreans claims.
My question is this. If I can find Gajido on my poor copy of Lee Gyu-won’s 1882 map, why can’t Korean historians find it on, what I am sure is, their much better copy?
Correction
After looking at Lee Gyu-won’s 1882 map more closely, it looks like the characters are 可支窟, which means “Seal Cave.” However, Korean documents talking about “Gajido” (可支島) said that there were two caves that the seals came out of, so I am almost possible now that 可支窟 was a referrence to 可支島.
Gerry
Congradulations.!!! That is great.this
surely looks 可支窟,seal cave.(it can be 可之窟,but according to the Taiwanes professor I mentioned ,they are the same)
BTW how do you pronouce 窟 in Korean? (In Japanese 可支ー窟 would be pronouced as kasi-kutsu)
Thanks, Ponta,
In Korean, 窟 is pronounced as “gul.”
By the way, on this map, I am almost positive that the rock in front of the three caves is Saja Baui (사자 바위), which means “Lion Rock.” Here is a picture of “Lion Rock.”
Do you notice the similarity between the picture of “Lion Rock” and the drawing of the rock on the map?
I cannot read the Chinese characters written below the rock on the map. Can anyone else read them?
Gerry,
The shape of the rock looks like an exact match. From the characters I have seen so far in the comments of this post, my guess would be 鼠島.
I think I may have found the way to read 間ノ島 as “gan-ji.” The “no(ノ)” in Manoshima may be written as の, ノ、and 之. Now, when Manoshi is written as 間之 in Japanese, it will be pronounced in Korean as “gan-ji (간지),” which I think is phonetically very close to ganchi. The person may also have mis-deciphered 嶋 (island) for 場 (place), which resemble each other in abbreviated form, causing him to mistakenly translate 間之嶋 (Middle Island) as Ganchi Place (Seal Place).
I’ve spent some time with the third map, and I’ve been able to decipher some more.
The words in the top-right insert are
松島 Matsushima
船之場 Funenoba (mooring wharf)
松島大廻り三拾町 (30 cho around Matsushima [1 cho is approximately 110 m.])
The words in the bottom-left insert that I have been able to decipher are, counterclockwise from the small island on the bottom (excluding the two in between Isotakeshima and Matsushima):
北浦[?]柳浦[??]里 (? ri from Kita-ura to Yanagi-ura)
1) とうせんばな or とうせんぐら (唐船鼻tousenbana or唐船倉tousengura)
2) 浜田浦[?]大坂浦[??]里 (? ri from Hamada-ura to Osaka-ura [1 ri = approx.. 4 km])
3) 大坂浦[?]鮑浦[??]里半 (? and a half ri from Osaka-ura to Awabi-ura)
4) 鮑抱場 (abalone fishing grounds)
5) まの嶋 (Manoshima)
6) 鮑浦[?]北浦[??]里 (? ri from Awabi-ura to Kita-ura)
7) 鮑抱場 (abalone fishing grounds)
9) 鮑抱場 (abalone fishing grounds)
10) Unclear: it seems to start off with 磯竹嶋[?]かうらい, so I assume the sentence explains the distance between Isotakeshima and Kourai (Korea).
11) 鮑抱場 (abalone fishing grounds)
12) 柳浦[?]北国浦[??]里半 (? and a half ri from Yanagi-ura to Kitaguni-ura)
13) 鮑抱場 (abalone fishing grounds)
14) 北国浦[?]竹之浦[??]里 (? ri from Kitaguni-ura to Takeno-ura)
15) 竹之浦[?]浜田[??]里 (? ri from Takeno-ura to Hamada-ura)
16) 西 (west)
At the center of the island is the word 磯竹嶋 大廻り七里半 (7-and-a-half ri around Isotakeshima), deciphered with the help from ponta!
The symbols of hut seem to indicate the positions of the ura (cove or small landing). The鮑抱場 above in 4, 7, 9, 11, and 13 may also be 御抱場, the former means reserved grounds for abalone fishing, and the latter simply reserved grounds, both are logical since Takeshima had been exclusively leased to the Otani and Murakawa families, but it seems awkward to me that the word 抱 is not preceded by 御, and also, from the map, the first character does not seem to share that final stroke of the brush stretching out to the right. I hope someone more knowledgably than I on reading old Japanese scripts can help out.
I figured out the names above based on the shape of the letters in the map, pronunciation provided in hangul by Gerry, and a description of An Yong-bok’s arrest in Masao Shimojo’s book.
浜田浦 병저포 byeong-jeo-po
大坂浦 대판포 dae-pan-po
北浦 북포 buk-po
柳浦 유포 yu-po
北国浦 북국포 buk-kkuk-po
竹之島 죽지포 juk-jji-po
Wow, you are great. The first letter sure looks 鼠.
As for the second letter, I would say 窟,or 巌 is also possible.
But it is really difficult to decipher.
And this is also interesting analysis.
I am thinking the possibility of the following.
seal island=gajido=可支島＝可之島→間之島(kannojima)＝間ノ島→観音島
(kwannundo)
But on the other hand,
….I am confused…..
、
Two Cents & Ponta,
On Lee Gyu-won’s 1882 map, I think the characters beneath the rock (modern-day “Lion Rock”) are 風巖 (풍암), which means “wind rock.” The characters look a little more clear in my book than it does on the scan.
Two Cents,
I do not know how you did it, but it looks like it took a lot of effort. Great job. I do not really have time to look at it right now because I am working on a translation, but I will definitely want to look at that map again.
Ponta,
Yes, that passage is confusing, but I am working on something right now that I hope will clear up the confusion a little bit. I hope to post something in the next day or two.
BTW, in my last comment, [?] indicates that there was a character in between that I could not decipher, and [??] indicates that there seems to be two or more letters in between that I could not figure out.
Here are some good, old maps of Ulleungdo:
Old Maps of Ulleungdo
If you click on the map you will get a larger image.
The last map is the map that Lee Gyu-won made in 1882. I have almost all of the map labeled except for four things or places. Here are the places I do not have marked yet.
1) The cave beside the Seal Cave (可支窟).
2) The little rock immediately south of Jukdo (竹島). It looks like “老 ? 巖”.
3) In the middle of the map, there are three ponds. One is large (大澤), and two are small (小池). Below the large pond are its dimensions. The length is sevety-five paces (長七十五步), and the width is fifty paces ( ? 五十步). My problem is that I do not recognize the character for “width.”
4) On the shore just in of Jukdo (竹島), there is a rock with a reddish spot on it. Just below that rock are three or four Chinese characters that are very small. The first character, writing from right to left, is “seok” (石), which means “rock.” As some here might guess, that “seok” character has gotten me very curious.
If someone could help me figure out what the above characters are, I would appreciate it. By the way, I plan on sharing my labeled map with you on this blog.
Gerry
Wow, this is really tough to read. On first look, I see one Chinese letter, on second look, I see another. It could be anything.
So I decided to give you my first impression.
I hope other people will join.
（１）（狭）（沙）（岬）（尾）
（２）（池・七・老）（報・韻）（巌）
（３）（点・戻・尺）（五）（十）（歩）
（４）（岩・石）（若・蒼・馨）（黒）（之 ）
Well, I see no Sok-do/Takeshima on any of the maps for sure…
I hate it when people lie.
Two Cents
翻訳ありがとう。
みんな、こちらに行ってるよ。
I’ve already finished translations for Maps2&3 but they need more proof checking, so I post this first.
(Japanese translation for Gerry’s post)
(Gerryの投稿の日本語訳です)
下に揚げた韓国製の地図は、靑邱圖と呼ばれています。1834年に金正浩によって作成されたものです。これは現存する韓国の古地図のうち最大のものです。縦が8.7m幅が4.62mあります。
地図1：靑邱圖
この地図は沢山の罫線入りの紙製パネルで構成されていて、横22枚分、縦29枚分の大きさです。
地図2：靑邱圖〈南部拡大図〉
各パネルの高さは100里、幅は70里を表しています。つまり、この地図は南北に約3000里、東西に1500里の範囲を描いているわけです。１里は、一般的に0.4kmだと言われますが、それより短めに使われることもあるようです。
地図3：靑邱圖〈南東部拡大図〉
実際の地図の縮尺は約1/216,000です。
地図4：靑邱圖〈鬱陵島付近拡大図〉
各パネルは縦10線分、横7線分で、1線分は10里を表します。
地図5：靑邱圖〈鬱陵島拡大図〉
鬱陵島を表すのに、二つのパネルが使用されています。
地図6：靑邱圖〈于山島付近拡大図〉
鬱陵島の横の小さな島は、漢字で于山と書かれています。地図の目盛から、この于山（于山島）が鬱陵島沖、約10里の位置にあることが分かります。約4kmですね。ところで、于山の下に書かれてある文は、下記の通りです。
“英宗11年（1735）、江原道の監吏、趙最壽が王に報告した。‘鬱陵島の検察を行い、その土地が広く、肥沃で、人が居住した形跡がある。西には于山島があり、その島もまた、広く開けていた。’于山島は東に描かれているので、いわゆる“西”の文字はこの地図では異なっている。”
地図7：靑邱圖とグーグルアースのトレース図
韓国人は于山（于山島）が今日の“独島” (Liancourt Rocks)の古称だと主張しますが、日本人はそれは竹嶼のことだといいます。竹嶼は鬱陵島の沖東に4km弱の位置にある小さな島です。“独島” は、鬱陵島南東92kmの沖にあるので、于山（于山島）が“独島” では無いことは明らかです。実際、日本人が主張するように、鬱陵島の周囲にある竹嶼である、と言うほうが正しいと思われます。
地図8:現代の鬱陵島地図
竹嶼が、上掲の現代の地図で、鬱陵島の東に竹嶼があるのが確認出来ます。
于山（于山島）は明らかに今日の“独島” (Liancourt Rocks）ではないので、韓国側には“独島” を描いた歴史的地図が無いどころか、日本がその国土に竹島を編入した1905年以前に、この島のことを知っていたことを示す記録さえ無い、ということになるのです。ゆえに、韓国の“Liancourt Rocks” (独島）に対する領有権の主張は、嘘と、半分の真実に基づいているわけで、とりもなおさず、それは韓国が日本の領土を違法に占領し続けている、ということになるのです。
この“独島か竹島か?”に関する議論がここで行われました。〈リンク〉
ところで、”Opp”さんが、7番目の地図を提供して下さいました。彼の労作は、ここでもっと見ることが出来ます。〈リンク〉