The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Volume 10 | Issue 52 | Number 4 | Article ID 3876 | Dec 24, 2012

1

Japanese Colonial Cartography: Maps, Mapmaking, and theLand Survey in Colonial Korea

David A. Fedman

Mapmaking was everywhere at the heart of thecolonial enterprise. As David Fedmandocuments, Japan early on prioritized masteryof the highest international standards ofcartography in the colonies and dependenciesfrom Hokkaido and Okinawa to Taiwan, Koreaand Manchukuo. Not only did precise mapsprovide a means for heightening Japanesecontrol, but the very process of map makingestablished the Japanese colonial presencethroughout the land. Cartography also providedthe basis for establishing land ownershiprights, a process that frequently resulted in thedispossession of lands from Korean cultivatorsand the concentration of ownership rights inJapanese hands. APJ

On September 21, 1909, the delegates to thesixteenth conference of the InternationalGeodetic Association (IGA) assembled in thelecture room of the Institution of CivilEngineers in Westminster, London for a busyday of “presentations of Reports of geodeticwork of various kinds done in differentcountries” (Helmert 1909, 375). Covering abroad sweep of topics and geographical terrain,the day’s proceedings included a discussion ofthe potential linkage of the triangulationsurveys of India and Russia via the northernfrontier of the Himalayas, a presentation on“the comparative merits of Invar wires andtapes for the measurement of base-lines,” and aprogress report on the International LatitudeService, which was then hard at workconsolidating the measurements of longitudeand latitude provided by each participantnation. If the outlook of one observer, F.R.

Helmert, is representative, the mood at theconference was marked by pride and optimism.“The efforts of the International GeodeticAssociation,” he wrote, “are…crowned withsuccess in reducing to quite a small quantitythe uncertainty in the form and dimensions ofthe Earth” (1909, 377).

Though perhaps oversized, Helmert’sconfidence was not unfounded, for the geodeticsc iences—those concerned with themeasurement and mapping of the earth—werethen in the midst of a veritable boom broughtabout by a host of scientific advancements.None of these advancements inspired moreexcitement or commanded more internationalattention than the triangulation survey: amapmaking technique that, though old by thetime of the 1909 conference, offered a level ofprecision previously unimaginable whencoupled with the cutting-edge surveyinginstruments of the time. Not surprisingly, theIGA was at the vanguard of the internationaltriangulation project. Founded in 1886 for thepurpose of “forming an association throughwhich the geodetic work carried on by variousgovernments could be compared, harmonized,and rendered more efficient,” this body quicklyestablished itself as the international hothousefor scientifically rigorous cartography.

1

Although standardizing the methods ofmapmaking was not an explicit goal of the IGA,by “virtue of the active interchange of ideas,”commented one contemporary expert, the body“exert[ed] a strong influence in making themethods used in various countries more nearlyuniform and progressive” (Reinsch 1911, 68).This is especially true of the tools andtechniques of the triangulation survey, which

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

2

dominated the 1909 agenda.

If triangulation dominated the content of the1909 conference, the world’s colonial powers(namely Great Britain, France, Germany,Russia, and the United States) dominated itscomposition. This is in no small part because,as this paper will show, colonialism andcartography were deeply intertwinedundertakings. Scientifically rigorous maps,after all, were the lingua franca of internationalsovereignty, making them a sine qua non forthe acquisition of and authority over colonialterritories. Indeed, whatever the differences inthe colonial policies and ambitions of the so-called Great Powers, all of these nations sharedan awareness of the instrumental role thatcartographic knowledge played in the imperialproject. As such, these nations often dispatchedtheir brightest cartographic minds to theircolonies, where they oversaw the production ofcutting-edge maps, most of which were realizedthrough the triangulation survey. One needonly inspect the list of delegates to the 1909conference to gain a sense of the close tiesbetween the geodetic sciences and colonialism.Among those present were Colonel Sir W.Morris, chief surveyor of Great Britain’sGeodetic Survey of South Africa; Major Lenox-Conyngham, then director of the GreatTriangulation Survey of India; General Bassotof France, then president of the association andformerly a chief surveyor for the FrenchGeodetic Survey in Algeria; and many others(Helmert 1909, 375).

Lesser known among these delegates wasTerao Hisashi (1855–1923), one of Japan’spreeminent astronomers and then chairman ofits Imperial Geodetic Committee. Although hiscontributions to the conference remain obscure(his name appears sparsely in the proceedings),his presence was significant. As the firstd i rector o f the Tokyo Astronomica lObservatory, the first dean of the TokyoCollege of Science, and the chief executiveresponsible for the development of land-

surveying techniques in Japan, Terao knewbetter than anyone the credence that thegeodetic sciences lent to Japan’s status as afirst-rank nation (itto koku), one entitled to itscolonies (Nakagiri 2009). This sentiment, ofcourse, was not peculiar to Terao: the Japanesegovernment had in fact moved early andvigorously in its pursuit of scientificallyrigorous maps.

2

By 1909, on the eve of Japan’sannexation of Korea, Japan had alreadyestablished an impressive network of surveyingschools, trained a cadre of professionalsurveyors, completed a triangulation survey ofthe Japanese archipelago, and conducted a landsurvey of Taiwan (Kobayashi 2011). That Japanwas the only Asian nation present at the 1909conference bespeaks its energetic pursuit ofand contributions to the geodetic sciences. Andjust like the Great Powers that sat at the helmof the IGA, Japan was quick to dispatch itssurveyors to its colonies. Embedded withinmilitary units, engineering projects, andcolonial governments, these surveyors firmlyestabl ished themselves as v igorouscontributors to Japan’s imperial project.

Like railroads, telegraphs, and guns, mapswere tools of empire (Adas 1990; Bayly 2000;Headrick 1981; Mitchell 2002; D. Yang 2011).Indispensable to governance, surveillance,resource extraction, and countless otherimperial initiatives, maps formed the lifebloodof the day-to-day operations of the colonialstate. But the impetus behind colonialcartography was more than simply utilitarian,for, as a growing number of scholars haveshown, the process of surveying was asimportant as the product (Atkins 2010; Burnett2000; Edney 1990; Harley and Laxton 1998;Pratt 1992). The survey, after all, made forgood science. And science, pregnant as it waswith notions of civilization, development, andmaterial progress, sat squarely at the heart ofthe imperial project. Statistics, blueprints,ethnographies: all formed building blocks uponwhich Japan’s civilizing mission in Korea wouldbe constructed (Henry 2006; Oh 2008). Maps

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

3

were no different. Cloaked in the mantle ofscientific precision, the triangulation surveyshowcased Japan’s superior methods. Theobservations of Norbert Weber, a Benedictinemonk who traveled to Korea in 1911, testify tothis point: “At each instrument stand,” hewrote, “three to four assistants and a crowd ofwondering spectators, who gather in wonder atthe undreamed of science no less than at theinstrument with its pipes and glasses and spiritlevels. What a great pleasure it must be for thelocal Japanese surveyors to be able to put theirscience on show like this” (Uden 2003, 58). Assome of the first government-generalemployees to set foot in remote towns,moreover, land surveyors—who weresometimes accompanied by local police andofficials—became for many Koreans the face ofJapanese officialdom.

It is not hyperbole to state that the history ofJapanese colonial cartography is terra incognitafor English-language scholarship.

3

Whilescholars writing in English have becomeattentive to the ways in which Japan immerseditself in the conventions of international law(Dudden 2004), criminal procedure (Botsman2005), and other hallmarks of the modernnation-state (Ericson 1996; Frühstück 2003;Walker 2005), few have explored the ways inwhich it sought out and appropriatedinternational cartographic norms. Fewer stillhave attended to the ways in which maps andmapmakers figured into Japan’s administrationof its colonies. In the case of Korea, only thecadastral survey (of which more later) hasgarnered significant scholarly attention, andexisting studies maintain a laser-like focus onissues relating to the expropriation of Koreanland by the government-general and settlercolonialists. The geodetic aspects of Japan’sland survey of Korea, as a result, have receivedprecious little scholarly attention, despite agrowing body of literature addressingmapmaking and imperialism in other colonialcontexts (Bassett 1994; Edney 1990; B. Harley1989; Mitchell 2002; Mundy 2000; Scott 1999;

Thongchai 1994) and substantial literature onthe subject in Japanese and Korean (inJapanese, Kobayashi 2009, 2011; Miyajima1991; Takagi 1966; in Korean, Han’guk YoksaYon’guhoe 2010; Kim 1997).

Taking colonial Korea as a case study, thisarticle seeks to shed light on the methods,tools, bodies, and rhetoric employed by theJapanese state in its effort to producecartographic knowledge of its colonies. Theanalysis proceeds in four phases, beginningwith a broad overview of the planning processundertaken by the Provisional Land SurveyBureau (Rinji tochi chosa kyoku; hereafter LandSurvey Bureau) commissioned by thegovernment-general of Korea (Chosensotokufu). This overview provides a roughsketch of the triangulation survey as it fitswithin the larger cadastral survey project.Second, the article describes the methods andtools employed by the surveyors, and traces inbroad strokes the progress of the survey fromits commencement to its closing. A thirdsection explores the physical construction ofthe maps, while the concluding sectionconsiders the limitations and lacunae of thesemaps and, more generally, the relationshipbetween mapping, knowledge, and power in thecolonial context.

Planning the Land Survey

The triangulation survey initiated in 1910 wasnot the Japanese government’s first attempt tosurvey the Korean peninsula. As YamachikaKumiko (2011) and Kobayashi Shigeru (in thisvolume) have shown, by the time of Korea’sannexation in 1910 the Japanese had alreadyamassed a rich body of cartographic materialsthrough an assortment of commercial, military,and covert intelligence gathering. The greatestboon to mapmaking in Korea undoubtedly camewith the First Sino-Japanese War (1894–1895)and the Russo-Japanese War (1904–1905),which spurred the systematic production ofmaps of Korea’s interior. In contrast to the

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

4

spotty nature of the coastal hydrographicsurveys and covert travel surveys that yieldedthe earliest maps of fin-de-siècle Korea, thestrategic military maps (ryakuzu) generated bythese mil i tary campaigns provided astandardized and high-quality representation ofmuch of the peninsula—one of use not only tothe military but also to the government officialsand colonial bureaucrats who were makingtheir way to the peninsula in ever-increasingnumbers (Kobayashi 2009, 2011; Nam 1997;Takagi 1966; Unno 1997).

Japan’s establishment of a protectorate in 1905opened the door to new cartographicpossibilities. Indeed, with its political influenceon the peninsula growing and the trickle ofJapanese settler colonialists turning into aflood, the Japanese government’s mappingagenda began to change. Although a wide arrayof cartographic plans were considered duringthis period, no mapping project was moreeagerly pursued by Japanese administratorsthan the cadastral survey: a comprehensiveland survey designed to produce a standardizedset of land registers and accompanying mapsthat would ascribe ownership to every parcel ofKorea’s soil. Unlike previous surveys ofstrategic sites (e.g., conflict zones, port towns,major roadways, and so forth), this was to be atruly nationwide cadastral survey, one thatwould dispatch mapmakers and land surveyorsto every corner of the peninsula. The changingpolitical priorities of the government-general,the perceived need for tax reform, and thenumerous development projects already underway in Korea demanded a synoptic view of theKorean landscape, and the cadastral surveyprovided just that.

The staunchest advocate for the cadastralsurvey was Megata Tanetaro (1853–1926), whos e r v e d a s a s p e c i a l f i n a n c i a ladvisor—effectively auditor-in-chief—in Koreafrom 1904 to 1907. Having overseen similarsurveys in Okinawa and Taiwan, Megata wasacutely aware of the importance of a thorough

cadastral survey for the “rationalization”(gorika) of taxes and economic development. AtMegata’s behest, the planning of the cadastralsurvey began in earnest in 1907 under thepurview of the Department of Finance. In 1908,the Korean government took out an“undertaking loan” of approximately seventeenmillion yen from Europe in order to fund thesurvey, and it proffered a budget proposal thatallocated funds for the roughly seven years thatplanners estimated the survey would take.Although bureaucratic inertia and morepressing political initiatives (such as thesuppression of anti-Japanese guerilla fighters)he ld back the survey for two years ,administrators continued to hammer out thelogistics of the operation, using similar surveysconducted in India, Okinawa, and Taiwan astheir models (Gragert 1994; Kobayashi andKunimasa 2007) . During th is per iodcartographers also began to prepare the basemaps for the survey, the bulk of which were setat the scales of 1:50,000 and 1:25,000(although other ratios were produced). Thisinitial office work set out to prepare a basicskeleton of spatial information (e.g., latitudinaland longitudinal coordinates and basictoponyms) so that the surveyors could fluidlyaffix their measurements onto each originalmap sheet once the measurements startedpouring in to field offices and drafting stations(Rinji tochi chosa kyoku [hereafter RTC] 1918,454–455).

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

5

Figure 1. A surveying party gearing up fora day of fieldwork. Source: GGK (1911, 40).

Shortly after annexation in August 1910, thegovernment-general commenced the landsurvey. The work of the survey was handedover to the newly established Provisional LandSurvey Bureau of the government-general,which assumed all responsibility for itsoperations. The official regulations of the landsurvey were set forth in Imperial OrdinanceNo. 361, codified in September 1910, justweeks after the Treaty of Annexation wasinked. “A complete land survey of Korea,”stated a government-general report from 1910,“is of great importance in order to securejustice and equity in the levying of the land tax,and for accurately determining the cadastre ofeach region as well as protecting rights ofownership and thereby facilitating transactionsof sale, purchase or other transfers. Otherwise,the productive power of land in the Peninsulacan not be developed” (Government-General ofKorea [hereafter GGK] 1911, 40). For thegovernment-general, the land survey was thusthe key to unleashing the productive power ofKorean soil, and standardized maps—those thatfashioned order out of perceived chaos (Scott1999)—were the canvas upon which a new,rational, and productive Korea would be drawn.

No single individual contributed to the day-to-day management of the cadastral survey moreenergetical ly than Tawara Magoichi

(1869–1944), the career bureaucrat appointedvice president of the Temporary Land SurveyBureau in 1910 and later the director of itsoperations. Tawara was soon joined by a cadreof surveying experts from Japan’s Land SurveyDepartment (Rikuchi Sokuryobu), many ofwhom had cut their teeth mapping other partsof the Japanese empire. According to theofficial account, these surveyors “brought yearsof experience” (tanen shigyo no keiken o yu shi)and “progressive” surveying techniques(saishinpo seru mono) with them to thepeninsula (RTC 1918, 453). A small group ofKorean surveyors, many of whom were involvedin the ex-Korean government’s Kwangmu landsurvey (1898–1903), were also folded into thisoperat ion, as were fragments of theorganizational and operational infrastructure ofthis earlier surveying enterprise (Gragert 1994)(see figure 1).

Although secondary to the cadastral process,the triangulation survey of the peninsula wasnevertheless a vital part of the work of theLand Survey Bureau. Without maps fixed to agrid of longitudinal and latitudinal coordinates,Japan’s efforts in Korea would remain detachedfrom the geodetic grid of the internationalsystem, yielding maps not only of questionableaccuracy but also utterly unimpressive byinternational standards. If former foreignminister Aoki Shuzo’s 1890 recommendationthat “Korea should be made a part of theJapanese map” (Hastings 1988, 24) expressedan abstract political goal, the process oftriangulation provided the means to, quiteliterally, do just that. On a more practical level,the triangulation survey also provided thebroader p i c tu re f o r su rveyors andadministrators alike: the base layer of spatialmeasurements against which more specificcalculations (such as the cadastre) could bereferenced. “Based on the process oftriangulation,” stated a report on thetriangulation process, “the survey canschemat ica l ly render land form andcomposition,” making it possible for these

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

6

surveyors to enhance the cadastral process andreduce error considerably (RTC 1918, 456).Both projects, in other words, were entwined:while cadastral investigators worked their waysystematically from hamlet to hamlet andproperty to property, demarcating theboundaries and valuation of fields along theway, the geodetic survey section carried out apainstaking series of measurements to enablethe consolidation of these individual plots ontoone systematic spatial grid.

The early institutional composition of theTemporary Land Survey Bureau nicely reflectsthese twin cartographic imperatives. As of1911, the bureau was comprised of 835individuals of which 678 were engaged chieflyin land surveying: one as the chief surveyor,ten as inspectors, four as expert surveyors, and661 as assistants (Unno 1997, 66). It consistedof four primary sections: a general affairssection, which oversaw the political andadministrative work of the survey; aninvestigation section, which conductedcadastral fieldwork; a survey section, whichwas charged with the production of mapsthrough a variety of methods; and the landsurvey detached offices, which essentiallyserved as local branch offices and dataprocessing centers for the entire enterprise, A1911 government-general report describes thedivision of labor as follows: “While theinvestigation section principally deals withinvestigating matters concerning ownership,location, boundaries, and also the compilationof reports of investigations, register books, etc.,the survey section is charged with carrying outsurveys by primary triangulation, secondarytr iangulat ion, plat survey and othermeasurements of lands, and with compilingmaps of the districts surveyed” (GGK 1911, 42).The Land Survey Bureau had also by this pointestablished a small number of training schoolswhere it undertook the recruitment andtraining of Korean and Japanese surveyors whowould contribute to the survey in myriad ways,as discussed below.

The Surveyor’s Fieldwork

To monitor the planning, commencement, andimplementation of the land survey in Korea,one need only turn to its daily newspapers.Both the Japanese-language Keijo Nippo andthe Korean-language Maeil Sinbo ran a steadystream of articles on the land survey from itscommencement in 1910 through its conclusionin 1918. Although terse, these articles offered awide range of information on the survey—fromits rules and regulations to its objectives, fromthe composition of its board of directors to themovements of its surveyors (Keijo Nippo 1910,1918; Maeil Sinbo 1911, 1918). So, too, did themonthly magazine Chosen (which ran from1908 to 1912 and was later rebranded asChosen oyobi Manshu), which in its July 1910edition offered the following account:

….the first step in the sequence ofthe survey is the establishment ofsignal stations between Tsushima(Taishu) and Pusan in order toestablish baselines (honsen) thatwill connect with….signal stationsalready established in the vicinityof Keijo.… Surveyors, who numberapproximately 160, will break intotwenty smaller parties, five ofwhich will oversee the preparationand collection of land registerswhile the other fifteen, comprisedof roughly 100 members, willundertake a detailed investigation(shosai no chosa) of these landplots (Chosen 1910, 111).

The highly visible nature of the survey isexactly what administrators wanted. For theentire cadastral survey enterprise waspredicated upon the willful participation ofKoreans, making it imperative that Koreansunderstand the procedures of the survey andthe movements of its surveyors.

4

It was notuncommon, in fact, for land investigators to

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

7

deliver public addresses on the objectives ofthe survey and to post public bills thatdescribed the process (Miyajima 1991; Wada1967).

Official documents on the movements of thetriangulation surveyors are fragmentary, but apatchwork of government-general reports andthe research of Japanese and Korean scholarsprovides a rough sketch of their earliestactivities. As the above passage from Chosensuggests, one of the first actions of thetriangulation survey was to establish a geodeticlinkage between Korea and Japan by way ofTsushima, an island that sat squarely betweenthe peninsula and the archipelago. Stated agovernment-general report from 1910:

In order to connect the geodetictriangulation of Japan proper withthat of Korea, based upon theselection of principal points oftriangulation in Tsushima island,Japan proper, the longitude andlatitude of Zetsuyei (Chyolyong)island (near Fusan) and Kyosai(Kö-jyö) island (near Masan) in theextreme South of the Peninsula,and the distance between the twoislands were surveyed (GGK 191143).

Figure 2. Surveyors constructing a signal

pole atop a Korean peak. Source: GGK(1911 40).

Dryly technical though this statement mightsound, it is hard to overstate its importance. Asone of the first measurements taken by thesurveyors, this geodetic linkage marked acritical step in Japan’s effort to orient Koreanspace to the same spatial matrix as theJapanese homeland, and thus into alignmentwith Japan’s own cartographic conventions. Soit was that the former trading post of Tsushimabecame a cartographic linchpin of the Japaneseempire.

As was standard practice, the lion’s share ofthe surveyors’ earliest efforts were devoted totwo things: reconnaissance surveys and theconstruction of the basel ines for thetriangulation survey, the first two of whichwere determined in Ch’ungch’ong and KyonggiProvinces. Essentially imaginary lines ofmeasurement strung across a series of elevatedpoints, these baselines formed the spine (or“primary system”) of the survey to which allother measurements would refer. Theconstruction of a baseline was no easy task.Cl imbing a peak and establ ishing anunimpeded line of sight (which sometimesmeant felling trees that stood in the way)demanded tremendous patience and physicalstrength. It also demanded the assistance ofnumerous Korean porters and guides, whoseknowledge of local terrain was invaluable to thereconnaissance surveyors. Particularlypainstaking was the erection of observationstations, some of which were massive in scale,on hilltops and mountain peaks so thatsurveyors could measure, using a theodolite,the distance from signal station to signalstation, a string of which would form a baseline(see figure 2).

The baselines constructed by Japanesesurveyors ranged from two thousand to forty-six-hundred meters in length, and wereconstructed in most cases along the spine of

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

8

Korea’s many mountain ranges. Initially,surveyors divided the peninsula into fifteentriangulation nets: subdivisions of thepeninsula, determined by its naturaltopography, that parceled out the triangulationprocess into smaller, locally contained units, allof which would eventually be aligned onceenough data was collected. By the end of 1910,the surveyors had successfully constructed sixbaselines. By March of the following year theyhad established an “aggregate operative zone”of nearly seven thousand square ri in area andbrought the number of baselines up to ten,which then cut through North and SouthKyongsang, Ch’ungch’ong, South Cholla, andNorth and South P’yongan Provinces. Takentogether, these baselines amounted to 11,327meters in length (GGK 1914, 21). By 1913,primary surveys were under way in everyprovince in Korea, and by some officialestimates the primary triangulation surveywould be completed by 1914 (GGK 1915, 10).

Figure 3. A visualization of a typicaltriangulation net. Note the multiple scalesand systems of measurements. Source:Hayashi (1938, 95). Courtesy of TheNational Library of Korea Digital Archive.

Once the primary systems of triangulation hadbeen constructed, secondary or “subsidiary”observation and theodolite traverses (whichwere vital for plat surveys of cadastralholdings) became the central focus (see figure3). The changing composition of the LandSurvey Bureau’s personnel nicely reflects thisshift. In early 1911, when the bureau wasengaged chiefly in the construction of baselinesand the measurement of a few foundationaldata points, it employed 678 employees, ofwhom only a handful were skilled professionals(Unno 1997). By 1912, however, the bureauhad changed markedly. In order to cope with

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

9

the demands of theodolite traverses, secondarysurveys, and the data processing necessitatedby both, the total force of the bureau wasincreased to 2,253. Significantly, of this totalwork force, approximately 1,750 were Koreans,most of whom served as elementary surveyors,field assistants, porters, and clerks (GGK 1914,20; RTC 1918, 467). The Land Survey Bureaualso expanded its administrative structure: in1912 it opened up additional field offices,established an engineering section and aplanning section, and increased the faculty andstudents at its training schools, which werethen attached to several high schools in Keijoand a number of agricultural schools in otherprovinces.

The year 1915 marked not only the peak in thesize of the Land Survey Bureau’s operations(which capped at 4,713 employees) but also animportant transition in the triangulation survey.With primary triangulation for the most partachieved and a group of surveyors filling in thetriangulation nets with additional data (withone estimate stating that the survey hadcompleted roughly 22 percent of i tstriangulated maps), the Land Survey Bureaushifted gears to enriching its topographicalmaps (RTC 1918, 468). Indeed, whilemapmakers by this point may have received animpressive set of rigorously calculated spatialcoordinates to inscribe onto the map, they hadlitt le in the way of topographical andgeographical detail. The next major phase ofthe land survey was thus chiefly concernedwith the mapping of an array of additionalgeographical features, such that the mapsproduced could convey the physical relief of thelandscape.

Although it would be another two years beforethe triangulation survey would formally shutdown its operations, the fieldwork componentof the survey was for the most part complete.This does not mean, however, that the mapswere complete, for the surveyor’s fieldworkwas only one part of a much larger operation. It

remained for this outfit to process the data,draft the maps, and publish the finishedproduct—what many documents aptly describeas the Land Survey Bureau’s “indoor work”(naigyo) (RTC 1918, 469).

It goes without saying that the processdescribed above was heavy on computation.Indeed, whatever the sophistication of the toolsand techniques employed by the surveyors,the ir maps were only as good as thetrigonometric computations made by themapmaker, which were nothing if notvoluminous. The principal challenge lay intranslating data points into a map projection.As data poured into the processing centers (seefigure 4), a cadre of employees worked to sortout this data in a timely and fluid fashion.Although Korean employees were more oftentasked with filing the cadastral registers, theyalso contributed to the calculation componentof the triangulation project, mostly as clerks. Inthe early stages of this operation, thedraftsmen and professional cartographerswere, with a few exceptions, Japanese.

Figure 4. Employees of the Land SurveyBureau hard at work. Source: GGK (1915,11).

Once sufficient data had been acquired foreach map sheet, draftsmen moved forward with

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

10

a multistep process that involved theconstruction of a projection, the plotting ofdata points onto the map grid, the sketching ofcontour lines to convey topography, thedemarcation of geographical points of interestthrough the representational code establishedin the map legend, and, perhaps most vexing ofall, the inscription of toponyms, rendered withJapanese glosses (RTC 1918, 459–465). Afternumerous rev is ions , some o f whichnecessitated further surveying and new datapoints, the map was near completion. Once adraft was approved it was printed and,depending on its security classification, sent toadministrators and military officials whoquickly put it to work (RTC 1918, 469). Thefirst round of seventy-nine map sheets (such asfigure 5) was printed in 1915; an additional157, 261, and 242 sheets were printed in 1916,1917, and 1918 respectively (RTC 1918, 469).

Conclusion

Figure 5. A 1:50,000-scale map of Kwakchi.Drafted in 1916; printed in 1918. Courtesyof Branner Earth Sciences Library,Stanford University.

From a technical standpoint, the surveyprocess adumbrated above not only met the

cartographic standards and expectations of theinternational community, but surpassed them.

5

Indeed, despite Japan’s late arrival to the studyof geodetic triangulation, it swiftly and firmlyestablished itself as a key international playerin the geodetic sciences. The followingexchange between U.S. Secretary of CommerceWilliam Redfield and William Bowie, then chiefof geodesy in the United States, at a 1917hearing of the House Congress ionalAppropriations Committee regarding America’sown triangulation survey plans, throws thispoint into sharp relief:

Mr. Bowie: It will take about$36,000 for the triangulation and$140,000 for the precise leveling[of the United States]. I shouldhope that we may be able to getthis work done very much morequickly than that, and this is whatwe feel is absolutely necessary.Now, I can show you by way ofcomparison some maps of Europeand of India.

Secretary Redfield: This mapshows Japan?

Bowie: Yes; that is Japan, which ison the same scale as the UnitedStates.

Redfield: Is Japan more advancedthan we are in that regard?

Bowie: Yes, sir; you can see thatthe areas in which they have noprecise leveling are very muchsmaller than ours; in fact, we havesome areas quite as large as Japanwithout a single precise levelbench mark in it.

Redfield: Are we equal to othernations in this work or behindthem?

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

11

Bowie: In accuracy we are theequal of the other nations.… As tothe amount of work done we arevery far behind.… Japan started itsgeodetic work later than we did,but they saw the economicadvantage of it and pushed it to arapid completion; that is, theframework. I would call it thebackbone. It corresponds to thesteelwork of a skyscraper and youhave to put up your steelwork firstin building a skyscraper. (UnitedStates Congress House Committeeo n A p p r o p r i a t i o n s 1 9 1 7 ,1100–1101)

Bowie’s words not only attest to the keeninterest the international community had inJapan’s cartographic endeavors but also to thevital importance these surveys held for statistdevelopment. A “backbone” for economicplanning, these surveys provided the blueprintswith which the state would draw up itsmodernizing agenda. It is unsurprising that thegovernment-general in Korea hastened toproduce a set of such maps. In addition toclarifying capital assets, landholding patterns,and administrative jurisdictions, these surveysfacilitated a wide range of state-led planningprojects that were central to Japan’s vision forreforms and progress. Although planners andadministrators also employed their own sets ofspec ia l i zed maps , the coherent andcomprehensive spatial system provided by thetriangulation survey doubtless served toexpedite the planning and implementation ofmany such projects. In the years following thesurvey, state planners, bureaucrats, militaryofficials, and police repeatedly turned theirgaze to the maps and registers produced by thesurvey as they confronted the challenges ofday-to-day governance and state-drivenenterprise. In this way, the map, like the host ofother ethnographic surveys conducted by thegovernment-general (Henry 2006), informed a

wide range of decisions about the application ofresources, governance, and the exercise ofstate power.

One of the most striking features of theJapanese triangulation survey in Korea—andsurely one of the most salient features forstudents of Japanese co lonia l ism ingeneral—was the way in which new surveyingtechn iques and techno log ies wereexperimented with in the colonial contextbefore being fully embraced in the metropole.The Bamberg surveying technique, aerialphotography, photogrammetry: these and othermapmaking techniques were put to the test inthe colonial laboratories of Taiwan, Korea, andManchuria before firmly establishingthemselves as mainstays of internationalcartography (Kobayashi 2011). Colonialcartography is indeed just one example of thenumerous ways in which “the metropolitandog” was “wagged by its colonial tail” (Uchida2011, 44): agricultural practices, forestrytechniques, and engineering methods alsounderwent s ign i f i can t and l a s t ingtransformations in the colonial context.

Two readily identifiable factors contributed tocartographic innovations in the Korean colonialcontext. The first is the perceived need byJapanese administrators for an overhaul ofextant cartographic knowledge. In the eyes ofthe government-general, Korean cartographywas, with only a few exceptions, insufficient tomeet the needs of proper governance. Indeed,although the Japanese had long advised theKorean government to pursue a land survey ofits own, the limited body of cartographicknowledge produced by these efforts waspassed over by the Japanese upon annexation.Instead, the Land Survey Bureau was given afree hand to draw up maps of the peninsula onits own terms, which doubtless facilitatedexperimentation. The second is the fact that, asone of the most pressing cartographic projectsin the Japanese empire at the time, the Koreanland survey was placed under the oversight of

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

12

some of Japan’s most capable cartographers,many of whom were tenacious in their pursuitof accuracy and innovation. As Taiwan wasbefore it, Korea became a priority project forJapan’s mapmaking institutions and a breedingground for young, promising cartographers.

While this paper has done little to explicate theclose-knit network of individuals andinstitutions engaged in geodetic surveying, it ishard to overstate the importance theseindividuals played in the triangulation survey ofKorea. The prevailing standards, conventions,and wisdom about surveying flowed swiftlythrough the institutional circuitry of the LandSurvey Bureau, government-general, Japanesemilitary, and many universities engaged ingeodetic research. This network not onlychanneled ideas and information, but also wasinstrumental in determining the flow of humancapital, the many surveyors and administratorswho were dispatched across the empire wherethey contributed to the production ofcartographic knowledge in a wide range ofcapacities—from fieldwork to data input toacademic research and teaching. This networkexpanded well beyond Korea. In a sense, itexpanded in tandem with the reaches of theempire itself: as Japan acquired new territories,mapmakers were dispatched to ever moredistant regions of Asia, where they would notonly produce map sheets but also train localsurveyors and conduct their own research. By1945, a vast web of mapmakers, mappingstations, schools, and collaborating institutionsstretched across Japan’s empire, then spanningthe Asia-Pacific.

In other words, the history of the triangulationsurvey of Korea is also a human story—onereplete with the complexities, frustrations, andsetbacks that come with any task as intricateand taxing as a triangulation survey. In Korea,the remote, mountainous regions of thenortheast proved resistant to easy mapping andmany regions necessitated multiple surveys andrevisions. These difficulties were compounded

by the challenges of translation, human error,resistance, and weather—all of which conspiredto tax the patience, resolve, and resources ofthese mapmakers. Yet the veneer of scientificprecision and objectivity projected by thesemaps obscures the challenges and complexitiesinherent to this process. It is thereforeimperative that we also consider the rhetoricalqualities of these maps—the ways in whichthese maps signal the values, assumptions, andworldviews of their creators. For no matterhow thoroughgoing or precise Japanesesurveyors thought their mapmaking enterprise,the surveying process was in its very essencean exerc i se in reduc t i on . Far f romcomprehensive, objective, or neutral, thesemaps convey abstractions of reality, informedby the sort of “propositional logic” describedhere by Denis Wood (2010, 41):

Mapmakers are not cognitiveagents parachuted into a pre-givenworld with a chain and theodolite,to measure and record what theyf ind there . Rather they ’ reextraordinarily selective creatorsof a world—not the world, but aworld—whose features they bringinto being with a map.

Following Wood, many critical cartographershave challenged the notion of the scientific mapa s a n e u t r a l , b e n i g n , o r o b j e c t i v erepresentation, suggesting alternatively thatwe shou ld t rea t i t a s a va lue - l adenconstruction, one valuable not only for itsconveyance of spatial information but also forits rhetorical and ideological strategies (Edney1990; B. Harley 1989; Monmonier 1993).Perhaps the most striking rhetorical feature ofthese maps is the aesthetic finish of science:the premium placed on the precise, rigorous,and empirical representation of space. Strippedof artistry and embellishments, these mapsevince nothing but cold, hard fact: arepresentational strategy that occludes the

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

13

limitations and lacunae of these maps. Thespiritual and geomantic topographies ofKoreans’ everyday life are one such lacuna, butmany others exist.

6

Perhaps the greatest lacuna of all, however, isreserved for historiography: the absence ofcritical analyses of Japanese colonialmapmaking as a process. As this paper hasshown, Japanese colonial cartographicmaterials were born of an intricate process.These maps did not emerge from a vacuum;rather, they were constructed in a colonialcontext animated by the same aspirations,emotions, and power relations that ran latentthroughout Korean society under Japanese rule.To take these maps as natural or neutral—toexamine their content solely for what they tellus about spatial arrangements—is to overlookthe ways in which the surveying processmarked (and was marked by) social relations,power dynamics, and the popular imagination.This short paper has striven to lay thegroundwork for a critical interpretation ofthese maps as both a product and a process,but much work remains.

This article is an abridged and edited version ofa paper originally published (in print and on-line) in Cross-Currents: East Asia History andCulture Review, a joint enterprise of theResearch Institute of Korean Studies(RIKS)atKorea University and the Institute of East AsianStudies(IEAS)at the University of California,Berkeley. More information about this newp u b l i c a t i o n c a n b e f o u n d h e r e(http://cross-currents.berkeley.edu/about-cross-currents). This research was published as partof a special volume, guest edited by KärenWigen, on Japanese colonial cartography. Itwas first presented at an internationalsymposium hosted by Stanford University inOctober, 2011 entitled “Japanese ImperialMaps as Sources for East Asian History: ASymposium on the History and Future of theGaihozu.” The entire volume is available onlineh e r e

(http://cross-currents.berkeley.edu/e-journal/issue-2).

David Fedman is a Ph.D. Candidate in Japaneseand Korean history at Stanford University. Heis the author of "Mounting Modernization:Itakura Katsunobu, the Hokkaido UniversityAlpine Club and Mountaineering in Pre-WarHokkaido," The Asia-Pacific Journal, 42-1-09,October 19, 2009.

Recommended citation: David Fedman,'Japanese Colonial Cartography: Maps,Mapmaking, and the Land Survey in ColonialKorea,' The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol 10, Issue52, No. 4, December 24, 2012.

Notes

1 Present at the conference were delegatesfrom Austria, Belgium, Chile, Denmark, France,Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Portugal,Hungary, Romania Holland, Italy, Japan,Mexico, Norway, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland,the United States, and Great Britain. Themember nations also discussed a proposal tobring China and Brazil into the organization(Nature 1909, 351).

2 While the rise of the geodetic sciences inJapan lies outside the scope of this paper,suffice it to note that geodesy as a field ofscientific inquiry in Japan well predates theadvent of the triangulation survey. Manyaccounts of its rise begin with the studies of theDutch Learning School (rangakusha) and itskeen interest in astronomical observations. Thefirst astronomical observatory was built by theShogunate in 1807 and a series of nation-widemap-making projects followed, including, mostnotably, those by Ino Tadataka. It was not untilafter the Meiji restoration in 1886, however,that the geodetic sciences became aninstitutionally backed, systematically studiedfield of scientific inquiry. The establishment in1881 of the General Staff Headquarters SurveyBureau ushered forth the most concerted effortby the Japanese government to train experts in

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

14

the geodetic sciences and to producescientifically rigorous triangulated maps. Foran overview of the development of the geodeticsciences in Japan see Kuroda, Berry andSugimoto (2001), Treiber (2004), and Wigen(2010).

3 To date, the most extensive treatments of thistopic in English are Nam (1997) and Treiber(2004). Brett Walker and David Howell, amongothers, have done much to illuminate Japan’sdomestic surveying of its peripheriesanimportant pre-cursor to these formal colonialsurveys.

4 According to Edwin Gragert, the author of themost authoritative English-language work onthe history of the Japanese cadastral survey inKorea, “within a village, survey officialsannounced that individuals claiming ownershipto land in the village should report such claimswithin a fixed period of time, usually 20 days.Forms were distributed for this purpose,requesting the following information: full nameof owner, location of each plot owned, type ofland (paddy upland, residential etc...), itsregistration number its boundaries, its gradeand its productivity. While each plot was beingphysically surveyed, these reports werecompiled and compared to yang’an records”(1994, 24).

5 It is noteworthy that by geodetic standardsthese maps are astoundingly accurate. Indeed,with but a few exceptions these maps hold upto the highest of cartographic standards: oneneed only overlay one such map over a GIS-based map to see why. More recent GPS-drivenmapping has in fact used the originaltriangulation points as control points for newGIS-based survey efforts. As Yang Chul-Soo hasshown, the original set of coordinates andbaselines constructed during the triangulationsurvey have been “updated” by Koreanmapmakers for GPS observation. Interestingly,according to Yang, “80% of these triangulationpoints and original records were lost during the

3-year Korean War.” See Yang (2005, 2).

6 A few words are in order about the ways inwhich Japanese colonial cartography left animprint on Korea’s own cartographic traditions.Alternative cartographies undoubtedlypersisted, however quietly, into the colonialperiod. The deep-rooted tradition of geomanticmapmaking, in particular, carried on into thecolonial period and, according to Hong-KeyYoon, sometimes served to orient Japanesesurveyors in their earliest engagements on thepeninsula (2006). Distinguished by theiremphasis on mountains, waterways, and burialsites, Korean maps were impressive in theirscope, volume, and quality. Indeed, despite a“lively curiosity about Western observation andcartographic sciences,” pre-colonial Koreanmaps, writes Gari Ledyard, “continued todevelop on their own as if nothing hadhappened” (1995, 344). No single individualembodies this tradition more than Kim Chong-ho (1804-1866?), a cartographer and itinerantexplorer who produced one of the mostimpressive sets of maps covering the entirepeninsula. It is, of course, impossible todetermine how, exactly, Korea’s map-makingtradition was re-shaped by the colonial state,but it is a question that merits furtherconsideration. Although the geomanticallypropitious sites of Korea might appear asgeographical features on Japanese maps, theserepresentations do little to reveal the spiritualtopographies that continue to orient life formany in Korea into the present.

References

Adas, Michael. 1990. Machines as the Measureof Men: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of

Western Dominance. Ithaca, NY: CornellUniversity Press.

Atkins, E. Taylor. 2010. Primitive Selves:Koreana in the Japanese Colonial Gaze.Berkeley:

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

15

University of California Press.

Bassett, Thomas J. 1994. “Cartography andEmpire Building in Nineteenth-Century West

Africa.” Geographical Review 84 (3): 316-335.

Bayly, C.A. 2000. Empire Information andSocial Communication in India, 1780-1870.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Botsman, Daniel V. 2005. Punishment andPower in the Making of Modern Japan.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Burnett, D.G. 2000. Masters of All theySurveyed: Exploration, Geography and a BritishEl

Dorado. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cary, Edward Richard. 1916. GeodeticSurveying. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Chosen. July, 1910, 29: 111. “Kankoku tochichosa junjo.”

Dudden, Alexis. 2004. Japan’s Colonization ofKorea: Discourse and Power. Honolulu:University of Hawaii Press.

Edney, Matthew. 1990. Mapping an Empire:The Geographical Construction of British India,

1765-1843. Chicago and London: University ofChicago Press.

Ericson, Steven. 1996. The Sound of theWhistle: Railroads and the State in Meiji Japan.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University AsiaCenter.

Frühstück, Sabine. 2003. Colonizing Sex:Sexology and Social Control in Modern Japan.

Berkeley: University of California Press.

Government-General of Korea [GGK]. 1911.

Annual Report of Progress and Reforms inKorea,

1910-1911. Seoul: Government-General ofChosen.

. 1914. Annual Report of Progress and Reformsin Korea, 1912-13. Seoul: Government- Generalof Chosen.

. 1915. Annual Report of Progress and Reformsin Korea, 1913-14. Seoul: Government- Generalof Chosen

.1918. Annual Report of Progress and Reformsin Korea, 1916-17. Seoul: Government- Generalof Chosen.

Gragert, Edwin. 1994. Landownership UnderColonial Rule: Korea’s Japanese Experience,

1900-1935. Honolulu: University of HawaiiPress.

Hagino, Toshio. 1965. Chosen, Manshu, Taiwanno ringyo hattatsu shiron. Tokyo: Rin’ya

Kosaikai.

Han'guk Yoksa Yon'guhoe T'oji TaejangYon'guban p'yon. 2010. Taehan Cheguk ui t'oji

chedo wa kundae. Seoul: Hyean.

Harley, Brian. 1989. “Deconstructing the map.”Cartographica 26:1-20.

Harley, B. and P. Laxton (Ed). 2001. The NewNature of Maps: Essays in the History of

Cartography. Baltimore, MD: Johns HopkinsUniversity Press.

Hastings, Max. 1988. The Korean War. NewYork: Simon and Schuster.

Hayashi, Ichigen, 1936. Sokuryo. Keijo:Maruzen kabushiki kaisha.

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

16

. 1938. Sokuryo tsuron. Keijo: Publisherunknown.

Headrick, Daniel. 1981. The Tools of Empire:Technology and European Imperialism in the

Nineteenth Century. Oxford, UK: OxfordUniversity Press.

Helmert, F. R. 1909. “Meeting of theInternational Geodetic Association.” TheObservatory

32:375-378.

Henry, Todd. 2006. Keijo: Japanese and KoreanConstructions of Colonial Seoul and the

History of its Lived Spaces, 1910-1937. PhDdiss., University of California, Los

Angeles.

Keijo Nippo. March 2, 1910. “Tochi chosa totokan.”

. January 5, 1918. “Tochi chosa.”

Kim, Hong-sik. 1997. Choson t?oji chosa saopui yon'gu. Seoul: Minumsa.

Kobayashi, Shigeru. 2009. Kindai nihon nochizu sakusei to Ajia taiheiyo chiiki gaihozu eno

apurochi. Suita: Osaka Daigaku Shuppankai.

. 2011. Gaihozu: Teikoku nihon no ajia chizu.Tokyo: Chuo Koron Shinsha.

. 2012. "Japanese Mapping of Asia-Pacific Area,1873-1945: An Overview." Cross-Currents: EastAsian History and Culture Review 2, March.( L i n k(http://cross-currents.berkeley.edu/e-journal/issue-2))

Kobayashi, S. and Kunitada N. 2007. “Okinawa-ken ni okeru tochi seiri jigyo no junbi katei.”

Machikaneyama ronso. 41:1-24.

Kuroda, Hideo, Mary Elizabeth Berry, SugimotoFumiko, eds. 2001. Chizu to ezu no seiji

bunkashi Mapping and Politics in Premodern Japan]. Tokyo: University of

Tokyo Press.

Ledyard, Gari. 1995. “Cartography in Korea,”In The History of Cartography, Cartography in

the Traditional East and Southeast AsianSocieties, edited by J. B. Harley and DavidWoodward, 235-346. Chicago: University ofChicago Press.

Maeil Sinbo. August 15, 1911. “Choson samgakch‘ungnyang.”

. November 2, 1918. “Ch‘ungnyang chedo.”

McCune, Shannon. 1946. “Maps of Korea.” TheFar Eastern Quarterly 5 (3): 326-329.

Mitchell, Timothy. 2002. Rule of Experts:Egypt, Techno-politics, Modernity. Berkeley:

University of California Press.

Miyajima, Hiroshi. 1991. Chosen tochi chosajigyoshi no kenkyu. Tokyo: Kyuko Shoin.

Monmonier, Mark. 1993. Mapping it Out:Expository Cartography for the Humanities and

Social Sciences. Chicago: The University ofChicago Press.

Mundy, Barbara. 2000. The Mapping of NewSpain: Indigenous Cartography and the Maps of

Relaciones Geograficas. Chicago: University ofChicago Press.

Nakagiri, Masao. 2009. “Tokyo Tenmondaishodai dancho Terao Hisashi no kakeizu onyutei.”

Kokuritsu tenmondai tenmon joho sentaa,Tenmon Geppo 102 (5): 332-342.

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

17

Nam, Young-Woo. 1997. “Japanese MilitarySurveys of Korean Peninsula in the Meiji Era.”In

New Directions in the Study of Meiji Japan,edited by H. Hardacre and A. Kern, 335-342.

Leiden: Brill.

. 2006. “Kankoku ni okeru gaihozu no igi togakujyutsu teki kachi.” Gaihozu Kenkyu Grupu,Gaihozu Kenkyu Nyuzuretaa 4:27-31.

Nature. 1909. “Notes.” 2081 (81): 351.

Oh, Se-Mi. 2008. Consuming the Modern: Theeveryday in colonial Seoul. PhD diss.,

Columbia University.

Pratt, Mary Louise. 1992. Imperial Eyes: TravelWriting and Transculturation. London:

Routledge.

Reinsch, Paul. 1911. Public InternationalUnions: Their Work and Organization. Bostonand London: Ginn and Company.

Rinji tochi chosa kyoku. 1918. Chosen tochichosa jigyo hokokusho. Seoul: Chosen sotokufu

rinji tochi chosa kyoku.

Scott, James. 1999. Seeing Like a State: HowCertain Schemes to Improve the HumanCondition

Have Failed. New Haven, CT: Yale UniversityPress.

Takagi, Kikusaburo. 1966. Nihon ni okeru chizusokuryo no hattatsu ni kan suru kenkyu. Tokyo:

Kazama Shobo.

Thongchai Winichakul, 1994. Siam Mapped:The History of a Geo-body of a Nation ,Honolulu:

University of Hawaii Press.

Treiber, John. 2004. Mapping Manchuria: TheJapanese Production of Knowledge in

Manchuria-Manchukuo to 1945. PhD diss.,University of Hawaii.

Uchida, Jun. 2011. Brokers of Empire: JapaneseSettler Colonialism in Korea, 1876-1945.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University AsiaCenter.

Uden, Martin. 2003. Times Past in Korea: anIllustrated Collection of Encounters, Events,

Customs and Daily Life Recorded by ForeignVisitors. London: Routledge/Curzon.

United States Congress House Committee onAppropriations. 1917. “Sundry Civil Bill, Part2.”

Washington DC: Government Printing Office.

Unno, Fukuju. 1997. “Chosen sokuzu jigyo tochosen minshu.” Meiji Daigaku, SundaiHistorical

Review, Kenkyu Noto, 49-72.

Wada, Ichiro. 1967. Chosen tochi chizei seidochosa hokokusho. Tokyo: Soko Shobo.

Walker, Brett. 2005. The Lost Wolves of Japan.Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Wigen, Kären. 2010. A Malleable Map:Geographies of Restoration in Central Japan,1600-

1912. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Wood, Denis. 2010. Re-Thinking the Power ofMaps. New York: Guildford Press.

Yamachika, Kumiko. 2011. "Japanese ImperialMaps of the Meiji Era in the Library of

APJ | JF 10 | 52 | 4

18

Congress Collection: An Analysis of theExplanatory Notes and Legends." Unpublishedpaper presented at "Japanese Imperial Maps asSources for East Asian History: A Symposiumon the History and Future of the Gaihozu ,"Stanford University, October 8th.

Yang, Chul-Soo. 2005. “Updating and Re-establishment of Cadastral Control Points inKorea by

Using GPS Observations,” Working paper,available online.

Yang, Daqing. 2011. Technology of Empire:Telecommunications and Japanese Expansion in

Asia, 1883-1945. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Asia Center.

Yi, Ki-bong. 2011. Choson ui chido ch’onjaedul.Seoul: Saemunsa.

Yi, Kyong-sik. 1986.Choson chon'gi t?oji chedoyon'gu: t?oji pun'gupche wa nongmin chibae.

Seoul: Ilchogak.

Yokoyama, Yoshinori. 2001. “19 seiki nihonkinkai sokuyro ni tsuite.” In Chizu to ezu noseiji

bunkashi, edited by Kuroda Hideo, M.E. Berry,and Fumiko Sugimoto, 269-344. Tokyo: TokyoDaigaku Shuppankai.

Yoon, Hong-Key, 2006. The Culture of Feng-Shui in Korea: an Exploration of East Asian

Geomancy. Lanham, UK: Lexington Books.