The King’s Conveyance: The Ritual Dispute of 1488 and the Unwritten Constitution of Early Modern Korean-Chinese Diplomacy

Abstract In 1488, the Korean kingdom of Chosŏn received emissaries from China announcing the accession of a new Ming emperor. The two sides engaged in a protracted dispute over what appears to be a trivial detail in an accessory ritual: whether the king would welcome the emissaries while borne on a palanquin or riding a horse. The dispute’s resolution was even more curious: rather than conceding, the two sides conducted the reception ritual twice. This article examines the process of this dispute and argues that the dispute warrants rethinking what has traditionally been understood as an uneven, bilateral diplomatic relationship in terms of an early modern Sino-Korean constitutional order. The casuistic mechanisms used by both sides to argue their points drew upon divergent interpretations of a shared, but multivalent repertoire of authority: a common imperial and classical past rooted in the sense of a Chinese translatio imperii .

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Early Modern History
Published
2025-03-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1163/15700658-bja10102
Primary Topic
Chinese history and philosophy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The King’s Conveyance: The Ritual Dispute of 1488 and the Unwritten Constitution of Early Modern Korean-Chinese Diplomacy

Sixiang Wang
Journal of Early Modern History
Chinese history and philosophy
article

The King’s Conveyance: The Ritual Dispute of 1488 and the Unwritten Constitution of Early Modern Korean-Chinese Diplomacy

Sixiang Wang
article en

Abstract

Abstract In 1488, the Korean kingdom of Chosŏn received emissaries from China announcing the accession of a new Ming emperor. The two sides engaged in a protracted dispute over what appears to be a trivial detail in an accessory ritual: whether the king would welcome the emissaries while borne on a palanquin or riding a horse. The dispute’s resolution was even more curious: rather than conceding, the two sides conducted the reception ritual twice. This article examines the process of this dispute and argues that the dispute warrants rethinking what has traditionally been understood as an uneven, bilateral diplomatic relationship in terms of an early modern Sino-Korean constitutional order. The casuistic mechanisms used by both sides to argue their points drew upon divergent interpretations of a shared, but multivalent repertoire of authority: a common imperial and classical past rooted in the sense of a Chinese translatio imperii .

Journal of Early Modern HistoryVol. 29(1-2)
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Chinese history and philosophy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.