Measuring 115 cm by 123 cm, one map was produced by the Japanese Army in 1877 and depicts the country's sovereign territory in detail, but does not contain Dokdo. In 1889, Japanese surveyors created the country's first-ever map on a 200,000:1 scale compiled from all of the maps that had been produced until that time, but even that makes no reference to Dokdo, Hosaka said.
.jpg)
Of course as anyone who has watched this ongoing dispute can attest, pro-Takeshima forces can point to their own array of maps to back their claims as well (an example from 1846 is below)
+Takeshima+included.jpg){kind=spacer}
This is not the place to determine which side is "correct." But I do wonder whether either side has ever articulated a standard by which maps can be used and evaluated to adjudicate such a claim. Does it take a simple 51% majority of maps for one side to carry the day? A super-majority (60%? 75%)? An overwhelming preponderance (90%)? Does it matter what kind of maps are used, or who produced them? Or are maps just an apparently objective and scientific source that in reality cannot ever lead us to a definitive conclusion?
But I do wonder whether either side has ever articulated a standard by which maps can be used and evaluated to adjudicate such a claim.
ReplyDeleteI think authorship is probably the most critical factor: insofar as the map reflects the most official source, it's more important. Intent also: some maps are clearly intended to be complete, and some more practically limited. In this case, the Japanese military is a good source, because their mandate is territorial control.
That said, as you note, the multiplicity of sources is just not going to produce clear answers.