This paper basically examines the types of travel and identification documents for official foreign envoys at the Chinese borders and the principles of the international order that the Ming dynasty (1368-1644) tried to establish in East Asia. This research further defines and illustrates the term so-called ‘inter-state system’ in East Asia between the late fourteenth and the fifteenth centuries.
After the foundation of the Ming dynasty, frequent visits of foreign delegations gradually became a political and financial burden to the Ming court. Consequently, the Chinese court decided to impose a strict sea blockade and allow only the official tributary envoys to set foot on Chinese soil. When the foreign envoys arrived at the border, they had to prove that they were officially sent by their country. There were several kinds of credentials used when they went through the entry procedure such as tally, part of official seal or documentation, called kamhap (勘合), to be matched with another part of the seal or document for authenticity (for envoys from Japan and Southeast Asia) or an imperial warrant, called kongch’ik (貢勅), issued by the Ming court (for envoys from Mongol and Jurchen tribal groups) or an official warrant, called ch’ach’a (差箚), issued by the Chosǒn court (for Korean envoys).
There were only fifteen states which received the official identification kamhap from Ming China. The rulers of these foreign states also all commonly received a Chinese investiture. That is, the Ming court guaranteed the rulers of the selected neighboring states not only political authority but also economic interests by granting exclusive rights to monopolize trade with China. On the other hand, the rulers were obligated to control and intercept illegal diplomatic and trade activities within their territory. In other words, as the Ming court could not directly intervene in all of the neighboring regions, they selected some subordinate partner states and granted them a political and economic privilege, as well as a duty to maintain stable international order.
Ming China accepted the diplomatic travel documents issued by the Chosǒn court unlike other foreign states. It was because China shared the same writing and document management systems with Korea. The Chosǒn also never pursued economic interests in their relationship with Ming China. Additionally, the Chosǒn court was strong enough to prevent any problem of diplomatic imposters (wisa, 僞使) and fabricate Chosǒn diplomatic credentials. More significantly, Chosǒn was seen as a model and ideal foreign state by Ming China based on these distinguishing points.
Ming China wanted to establish the ‘states’ ruled by kings in their surrounding regions and admitted the selected polities—only in the form of state—as their negotiation partner. With a Chinese investiture and official travel and identification documents, the Ming granted the selected neighboring states exclusive rights and imposed duties on them at the same time in their relationship with China. After all, the Ming court and the rulers of such recognized foreign states could only become the main agents of negotiation between the states in East Asia. Ultimately, this paper brings the term ‘inter-state system’ to describe the characteristics of Ming China’s foreign relationship with neighboring states, as well as the uniqueness of the Chosǒn dynasty in the ‘inter-state system’ in East Asia. These are all the central propositions to which this paper is devoted.

1 구범진, "吏文" 세창출판사 2012

2 "禮部志稿"

3 末松保和, "麗末鮮初における對明關係" 1 (1): 1967

4 이규철, "조선초기(태조대~세종대) 대외정보 수집활동의 실상과 변화" 한국역사연구회 (65) : 289-318, 2007

5 정동훈, "명초 국제질서의 재편과 고려의 위상 –홍무 연간 명의 사신 인선을 중심으로–" 한국역사연구회 (89) : 113-150, 2013

6 정동훈, "명대의 예제 질서에서 조선국왕의 위상" 한국역사연구회 (84) : 251-292, 2012

7 카와니시 유야, "고려말기 元 任命箚付 體式의 수용 - ｢金天富箚付｣의 검토 -" 한국고문서학회 35 : 105-129, 2009

8 "高麗史"

9 鄭東勳, "高麗-明 外交文書 書式의 성립과 배경" 56 : 2010

10 "萬曆大明會典"

11 "皇明外夷朝貢考"

12 "朝鮮王朝實錄"

13 檀上寬, "明朝專制支配の史的構造" 汲古書院 1995

14 "明太祖實錄"

15 동북아역사재단, "明史" 동북아역사재단 2011

16 檀上寬, "明初の海禁と朝貢-明朝專制支配の理解に寄せて-, In 明淸時代史の基本問題" 汲古書院 1997

17 남의현, "明代遼東支配政策硏究" 강원대학교출판부 2008

18 河內良弘, "明代女眞史の硏究" 同朋舍出版 1992

19 杜長風, "明代烏思藏朝貢述略" 3 : 1990

20 江嶋壽雄, "明代淸初の女直史硏究" 中國書店 1999

21 晁中辰, "明代海禁與海外貿易" 人民出版社 2005

22 吳緝華, "明代海禁與對外封鎖政策的連環性 - 海禁政策的成因新探 -" 大立出版社 1984

23 李金明, "明代海外貿易史" 中國社會科學出版社 1990

24 李慶新, "明代海外貿易制度" 社會科學文獻出版社 2007

25 大隅晶子, "明代洪武帝の海禁政策と海外貿易, In 山根行夫敎授退休記念明代史論叢" 汲古書院 1994

26 檀上寬, "明代朝貢體制下の冊封の意味" 68 : 2011

27 黃才庚, "明代文書行移勘合制度" 3 : 1981

28 岩井茂樹, "明代中國の禮制覇權主義と東アジア秩序" 85 : 2005

29 金九鎭, "明代 女眞社會의 貢勅과 書契 - 馬市와 貿易所의 女眞商人團의 形成 背景 -, In 宋甲鎬敎授停年紀念論文集" 1993

30 木村可奈子, "明の対外政策と冊封国暹羅―萬曆朝鮮役における借暹羅兵論を手掛かりに" 92 (92): 2010

31 鄭樑生, "明․日關係史の硏究" 雄山閣出版 1984

32 中村榮孝, "日鮮關係史の硏究 上" 吉川弘文館 1966

33 佐久間重男, "日明關係史の硏究" 吉川弘文館 1991

34 朱亞非, "從中日勘合貿易看明朝對外政策" 4 : 1989

35 黃枝連, "天朝禮治體系硏究(中)-東亞的禮義世界-中國封建王朝與朝鮮半島關係形態論" 中國人民大學出版社 1994

36 田中健夫, "勘合符․勘合印․勘合貿易, In 對外關係と文化交流" 思文閣出版 1982

37 羅冬陽, "勘合制度與明代中央集權" 1 : 1997

38 黨寶海, "元朝赤乘驛牌符與文書" 崑崙出版社 2006

39 箭內亘, "元朝牌符考, In 蒙古史硏究" 刀江書院 1930

40 田中健夫, "倭寇と勘合貿易" 至文堂 1961

41 萬明, "中國融入世界的步履 - 明與淸前期海外定策比較硏究" 中國社會科學出版社 2000

42 C. P. FitzGerald, "The Southern Expansion of the Chinese People" Australian National University Press 1972

43 Morris Rossabi, "The Ming and Inner Asia" 8 : 1998

44 Henry Serruys, "Sino-Mongol Relations During The Ming Ⅱ - The Tribute System and Diplomatic Missions(1400-1600)" Institut Belge Des Hautes Etudes Chinoises 1967

45 Henry Serruys, "Sino-J̌ürčed Relations During the Yung-lo Period(1403-1424)" Otto Harrassowitz 1955

46 Mark Mancall, "China at the Center : 300 Years of Foreign Policy" The Free Press 1984

47 Joseph F. Fletcher, "China and Central Asia, 1368-1884, In Chinese World Order: Traditional China's Foreign Relations" Harvard University Press 1968

48 Weirong Shen, "Accommodating Barbarians From Afar : Political and Cultural Interactions Between Ming China and Tibet" 56 (56): 2007

49 구도영, "16세기 對明 私貿易의 정책 방향과 굴레 - 中宗代 明의 ‘조선사행단 출입제한 조치’를 중심으로 -" 조선시대사학회 (62) : 211-249, 2012

50 河內良弘, "14世紀~17世紀女眞の外交文書について" 한국알타이학회 13 (13): 1-14, 2003