Haijin
The Haijin or sea ban was a series of related policies in China restricting private maritime trading during much of the Ming dynasty and early Qing dynasty. The sea ban was an anomaly in Chinese history as such restrictions were unknown during other eras;
the bans were each introduced for specific circumstances, rather than based on an age-old inward orientation.
In the first sea ban introduced in 1371 by the Ming founder Zhu Yuanzhang, Ming China's legal foreign trade was limited to tribute missions, placing international trade under a government monopoly. Initially imposed to deal with Japanese piracy amid anti-Ming insurgency, the Ming was not able to enforce the policy, and trade continued in forms such as smuggling. The sea ban was counterproductive: smuggling and piracy became endemic periodically, mostly perpetrated by Chinese who had been dispossessed by the policy. Piracy dropped to negligible levels upon the end of the policy in 1567. The policy slowed the growth of China's domestic trade, although the empire's weak enforcement of the policy opened the way for an unprecedented commercial revolution from the mid-1500s onward.
The early Qing dynasty established an anti-insurgent "Great Clearance", prohibiting all residence and activities on the coast to weaken Ming loyalists. The order also caused considerable devastating effects on communities along the coast, until the Qing seized control of Ming loyalist bases in Taiwan, then reopened coastal ports to foreign trade. Separately, strict travel restrictions were temporarily implemented during the brief trade ban between 1717 and 1727, also to prevent the growth of anti-Qing resistance. Later, the need to control trade gave birth to the Canton System of the Thirteen Factories, where trade was legalised but restricted.
Similar sea bans occurred in other East Asian countries, such as the Sakoku policy in Edo period Japan by the Tokugawa shogunate; or the isolationist policies of Joseon Korea, before they were forced to end their isolation militarily in 1853 and 1876 respectively.
Ming dynasty
Background
The 14th century was a time of chaos throughout East Asia. The second bubonic plague pandemic began in Mongolia around 1330 and may have killed the majority of the population in Hebei and Shanxi and millions elsewhere. Another epidemic raged for three years from 1351 to 1354. Existing revolts over the government salt monopoly and severe floods along the Yellow River provoked the Red Turban Rebellion. The declaration of the Ming in 1368 did not end its wars with Mongol remnants under Toghon Temür in the north and under the Prince of Liang in the south. King Gongmin of Korea had begun freeing himself from the Mongols as well, retaking his country's northern provinces, when a Red Turban invasion devastated the areas and laid waste to Pyongyang. In Japan, Emperor Daigo II's Kenmu Restoration succeeded in overthrowing the Kamakura shogunate but ultimately simply replaced them with the weaker Ashikaga. The loose control over Japan's periphery led to pirates setting up bases on the realm's outlying islands, particularly Tsushima, Iki, and the Gotōs. These wokou raided Japan as well as Korea and China. The followers of rival Chinese warlords Zhang Shicheng and Fang Guozhen, who had emerged during the collapse of the Yuan but were defeated by the ascendant Ming, also fled to sea where they cooperated with Japanese outlaws to continue resisting the new dynasty.The first Ming Emperor, Zhu Yuanzhang, regarded the Japanese piracy as an act of disrespect to his authority: his message to the Japanese that his army would "capture and exterminate your bandits, head straight for your country, and put your king in bonds" received the Ashikaga shogun's reply that "your great empire may be able to invade Japan but our small state is not short of a strategy to defend ourselves", causing the angered Ming Emperor to restrict trade further.
Initial implementation
As a rebel leader, Zhu Yuanzhang promoted foreign trade as a source of revenue. As Emperor, however, he issued the first sea ban in 1371. All foreign trade was to be conducted by official tribute missions, handled by representatives of the Ming Empire and its "vassal" states. Private foreign trade was made punishable by death, with the offender's family and neighbors exiled from their homes. A few years later, in 1384, the Maritime Trade Intendancies at Ningbo, Guangzhou, and Quanzhou were shuttered. Ships, docks, and shipyards were destroyed and ports sabotaged with rocks and pine stakes. Although the policy is now associated with imperial China generally, it was then at odds with Chinese tradition, which had pursued foreign trade as a source of revenue and become particularly important under the Tang, Song, and Yuan.The Ming's third ruler the Yongle emperor launched the treasure voyages of Zheng He, which were partly intended to monopolise overseas trade under the government. The Yongle emperor succeeded in dramatically reducing piracy after 1403 by striking an agreement with Japan's Ashikaga Yoshimitsu, restoring full tribute trade privileges and sending Ming fleets to Japan to help defeat the pirates. The initial wave of Japanese pirates were independently dealt with by Chŏng Mong-ju and Imagawa Sadayo, who returned their booty and slaves to Korea; Ashikaga Yoshimitsu delivered 20 more to China in 1405, which boiled them alive in a cauldron in Ningbo.
However, Emperor Yingzong of Ming's capture at the Battle of Tumu in 1449 greatly increased Mongol boldness in frontier attacks, while the still-growing private overseas trade caused price competition for the Ming government's import purchases, such as warhorses for the northern frontier. Hence, while Chinese trade within Asia continued after the treasure voyages, the Ming shifted their resources away from maritime affairs to deal with the Mongol threat. As the Ming became increasingly focused on their north, the court also neglected tributary trade missions arriving at the maritime frontier; after 1500, maritime tribute missions mostly stopped and those few that continued were treated as purely commercial transactions in the port cities, without visiting the capital. The court thus failed to notice the ensuing rapid changes in global trade. Private, including unauthorised, Chinese trade in Southeast Asia expanded rapidly in the second half of the Ming dynasty. When the Portuguese arrived in Malacca and the Moluccas in the early 1500s, trade patterns shifted as armed European ships started to bypass Muslim merchant networks and engage with private Chinese and Japanese merchants. This rise in private merchants coupled with the court prioritizing the northern frontier led to the collapse of the tribute trade system and its replacement by widespread smuggling.
Under the Jiajing Emperor, after two Japanese factions clashed over the right to conduct the tribute trade mission in 1523, the emperor restricted trade further, causing sea raiders to overrun the entire southeastern coast.
Nonetheless, because the sea ban was added by the Hongwu Emperor to his Ancestral Injunctions, it continued to be broadly kept through most of the rest of his dynasty. For the next two centuries, the rich farmland of the south and the military theaters of the north were linked almost solely by the Jinghang Canal.
Rationale
Although the policy has generally been ascribed to national defense against the pirates, it was so obviously counterproductive and yet carried on for so long that other explanations have been offered. The initial conception seems to have been to use the Japanese need for Chinese goods to force them to terms. The Hongwu emperor seemed to indicate that the policy was designed to prevent foreign nations from collaborating with his subjects to challenge his rule; for instance, Srivijaya was banned from trading as the emperor suspected them of spying. It may have been the case that the Hongwu Emperor prioritized protecting his state against the Northern Yuan remnants, giving little attention to the maritime frontier defences. In the absence of a comprehensive frontier policy, the emperor attempted to use trade restrictions to manipulate foreign states like Japan and the former followers of rival Chinese warlords such as Zhang Shicheng and Fang Guozhen into submission. The emperor's mention of the restrictions in his Ancestral Injunctions may have been responsible for their continuation.The usage of trade was also a powerful tool to entice foreign governments to abide by the tributary system and pressure uncooperative leaders. The Ming state hence had a vested interest in maintaining the sea ban to protect the government trade monopoly and its associated benefits in diplomacy. This interest, while powerful, may not have been enough on its own to motivate Chinese leaders to maintain the bans. The tribute system created undue stress according to the Ming Shilu. In an entry from May 1390, it is detailed that: "...the transport was difficult and it caused hardship for the people." Entries like these reflect the strain that a centralized, tribute-based trade system may have placed on the Chinese public. It is also possible that the bans were counteractive to China's economic growth. Tribute missions were so demanding that the government often placed restrictions on how often foreign traders could come to court.
Parallels with Song and Yuan measures restricting outflows of bullion have led some to argue that it was intended to support the Hongwu Emperor's printing of fiat currency, whose use was continued by his successors as late as 1450.
Kangying Li asserts that the sea ban was a side effect of Zhu Yuanzhang's desire to elevate Confucian humaneness and eliminate greed from the realm's foreign relations. In Li's view, the sea ban could be linked to other early Ming policies such as sumptuary laws and land redistribution which attempted to curb luxury and wealth inequality, and hence shore up the legitimacy of the Ming regime. For the emperor, wealthy merchants living decadent lifestyles and buying up huge tracts of land were a threat to the smallholding peasantry which he saw as the foundation of Ming power. Others suggest that the sea ban was a ploy to weaken the realm's southern subjects to the benefit of the central government.