'King of Japan Minamoto no Dōgi': Why Yoshimitsu Accepted Ming Investiture

In 1402 (Ōei 9), the Yongle Emperor of Ming issued an edict conferring on Ashikaga Yoshimitsu the title 'King of Japan Minamoto no Dōgi.

' The Chinese dynasty of the time recognized rulers of surrounding countries as equal partners in tributary trade by 'investing' them as 'king.

' Yoshimitsu accepted this title, and in return dispatched tribute ships; the Japan-Ming trade (tally trade) began in earnest.

The problem was that Japan already had an emperor. Institutionally, Japan's external representative ought to have been the emperor.

But Yoshimitsu received the title of 'King' from the Ming emperor from his own position, without the emperor's involvement.

Cases in which a warrior shōgun was recognized as king by the Chinese emperor are extremely rare in Japanese history.

It was an event that showed the peak of Yoshimitsu's political power, but was also an object of later criticism as 'having slighted the authority of the emperor.

Yoshimitsu's Ming diplomacy was not merely an ideological matter but also carried enormous economic meaning.

Through Japan-Ming tally trade, copper coins, raw silk, silk textiles, and books flowed into Japan in great quantity; from Japan, sulfur, copper, swords, folding fans, and folding screens were exported.

In particular, the inflow of Ming coin fundamentally changed the monetary economy of Japan and became the foundation for the economic development of the later Sengoku and Edo periods.

Yoshimitsu strengthened the shogunate's finances with trade revenue and consolidated the material foundation of his power.

After Yoshimitsu's sudden death in 1408, the fourth shōgun Yoshimochi rejected his father's Ming policy, returned the 'King of Japan' title, and stopped the tally trade.

Behind Yoshimochi's judgment was criticism from the kuge class that Yoshimitsu's diplomacy had slighted the authority of the emperor.

But in 1432, the sixth shōgun Yoshinori reopened the tally trade. The 'King of Japan' problem, transcending Yoshimitsu as an individual, would continue to be debated as a fundamental point of the foreign relations of Japan through the history that followed.