Description

The map consists of 22 separate, foldable booklets, each covering approximately (north-south) by (east–west). Combined, they form a map of Korea that is wide and long. The scale of the map is 1:162,000. The map was printed from 70 basswood woodblocks, engraved on both sides. The techniques to create the map have been described as a hybrid of Korean and Western methods.

The map is praised for precise delineations of mountain ridges, waterways, and transportation routes. It also has markings for settlements, including villages, as well as notable administrative and cultural areas and sites, such as past and present government offices and military sites, public warehouses, government horse ranches, beacon fire mounds, and royal tombs.

Several versions of the map exist, with some variations (such as the number of booklets, either 21 or 22). The map was accompanied by a preface explaining the methodology, and a legend, as well as additional statistics, and a separate map for the Korean capital of Seoul.

In 1898, the Japanese Army secretly hired 1,200 Japanese survey engineers and two to three hundred Koreans to secretly survey the geography of Joseon to create 300 copies of a 50,000th map by surveying the country. After learning about the existence of Daedongyeojido, they were surprised to learn that the map was not much different from the map they had worked hard on.

100,000-won banknote controversy

In 2008 the map was considered as an image for one of the 100,000-won banknotes, which would have been the highest-denomination South Korean banknote to date. However, the map of Daedongyeojido did not portray the internationally disputed Liancourt Rocks (known as Dokdo islands in Korea), and the ensuing public debate in Korea over whether the map on a banknote should be changed to include them made the image too controversial for such a high-visibility placement. Eventually, the 100,000-won banknote was cancelled due to the controversy stirred by the issue.

內容

地圖上有山脈、河川、島嶼、港口、航路以及行政地區界線、交通網、通信、歷史遺跡等萬餘個標識。就其規模和描述手法來說，在當時是領先於世的。

爭議

部分韓國人如李基白等認為現在的延邊及長白山屬於韓國所有。但大東輿地圖中既未包括延邊，也說明了長白山天池在中國境內。因此其被認為是勘定邊界的一個有力證據。