contributor
27,126
edits
Changes
no edit summary
Competition for the licenses was fierce, and the policies severely disrupted trade at Nagasaki, though only very temporarily. No Chinese ships traveled to Nagasaki in 1715-[[1716]], and no copper was exported to China; this caused the price of copper in China to rise dramatically, and though the number of ships permitted to trade was later increased to 40, the total volume of copper imported into China from Japan never recovered, causing considerable losses for Chinese copper merchants.
Competition for the licenses was fierce, and the policies severely disrupted trade at Nagasaki, though only very temporarily. No Chinese ships traveled to Nagasaki in 1715-[[1716]], and no copper was exported to China; this caused the price of copper in China to rise dramatically, and though the number of ships permitted to trade was later increased to 40, the total volume of copper imported into China from Japan never recovered, causing considerable losses for Chinese copper merchants.
A number of officials memorialized the throne complaining about the new licenses; some even asserted that acceptance of the licenses was a recognition of Japanese authority, and hence a violation of principle and a crime, and that any Chinese merchants holding such licenses should be severely punished. The [[Kangxi Emperor]], however, mistook the licenses as merely being brand marks (''jihao''<!--記號-->, such as might be added by a given merchant to mark his goods, and so thought them of little import. Kangxi's choice in this matter to not see it as an insult to Chinese pride has been identified by historians as a significant decision, allowing relatively friendly relations to continue.
{{stub}}
{{stub}}
==References==
==References==
*Schottenhammer, Angela. “Empire and Periphery? The Qing Empire’s Relations with Japan and the Ryūkyūs (1644–c. 1800), a Comparison.” ''The Medieval History Journal'' 16, no. 1 (April 1, 2013): 162.
*Schottenhammer, Angela. “Empire and Periphery? The Qing Empire’s Relations with Japan and the Ryūkyūs (1644–c. 1800), a Comparison.” ''The Medieval History Journal'' 16, no. 1 (April 1, 2013): 162-164.
[[Category:Edo Period]]
[[Category:Edo Period]]
[[Category:Economics]]
[[Category:Economics]]