Did you know Joseon kings stayed poor on purpose? Discover how royal austerity served the people in a pre-industrial zero-sum economy.👇
1. Intentional Poverty: Joseon’s Fiscal Philosophy
The Joseon Dynasty’s royal family was poor—not by accident, but by design. The government operated under a strict austerity policy for over 500 years to preserve the *minbon* principle, or “people-first governance.” Unlike other monarchies that prioritized royal grandeur, Joseon deliberately kept the royal household financially constrained to benefit its citizens.
1.1. Why the Royal Budget Was Always Tight
The state intentionally limited the financial power of the throne and its officials. This was not due to incompetence or lack of resources but stemmed from a collective effort within the bureaucracy to avoid over-taxing the population. Every department resisted imposing or expanding taxes, and this mutual constraint effectively kept the entire administrative system lean.
This culture of restraint arose from Joseon’s ideological foundation: the government existed to serve the people, not to enrich the ruling elite.
1.2. The Elephant Incident Under King Taejong
A striking example of royal austerity occurred during King Taejong’s reign. An elephant, originally a gift from Siam (modern-day Thailand) to Japan, was eventually presented to the Joseon court.
However, the court was in no position to feed such an animal. Even sustaining one elephant would have required increasing taxes—unthinkable in a system designed to protect the people’s welfare. Eventually, after the elephant trampled a person to death, the court exiled it to Ganghwa Island, where it later died, likely from depression.
This episode highlights the extreme limits of royal expenditure and stands in stark contrast to Thailand’s royal family, who at the time owned hundreds of elephants for personal use.
1.3. The Zero-Sum Nature of Pre-Industrial Economics
Before the second industrial revolution, wealth came primarily from limited agricultural output. In this context, state revenue, military maintenance, bureaucratic wages, and royal expenditures all competed for the same finite resource: crops.
This created a true zero-sum economy. If the royal household became wealthier, the common people necessarily became poorer. Thus, the royal family's poverty was a policy choice—by staying poor, the monarchy allowed more resources to flow to ordinary citizens.
Compared to the preceding Goryeo dynasty, the Joseon court was dramatically poorer, but this came with a tangible rise in quality of life for its people.
1.4. Comparing Joseon’s System with Ming China and Feudal Japan
Joseon’s fiscal policy differed sharply from other East Asian powers of the time. In Ming China, while official tax rates may have been similar, local landlords (*tuhao*) exploited the peasantry with little interference from the central government.
In feudal Japan during the Sengoku (Warring States) period, life was even harsher. Competing warlords amassed firearms and ammunition—expensive, consumable resources—by squeezing their subjects. Victorious warlords became *daimyo*, consolidating power through brutal extraction of resources.
During the Edo period, the situation worsened. Peasants were taxed twice: first by local *daimyo*, then by the Tokugawa shogunate. This dual exploitation caused severe hardship, reducing average physical stature due to chronic malnutrition. Joseon, despite its problems, avoided such an exploitative structure thanks to its ideological framework.
2. Why This Matters Today
Understanding Joseon’s economic philosophy offers insight into Korea’s longstanding emphasis on public welfare. While modern Korea operates under capitalist and democratic systems, the historical memory of people-first governance still influences public expectations of government transparency, fairness, and service.
Far from being a sign of weakness, the Joseon monarchy’s financial restraint represented one of its most powerful tools for social stability. In a time when resources were scarce, prioritizing the people meant sacrificing royal luxury—and that’s exactly what Joseon did.
3. Conclusion: Austerity as Policy, Not Misfortune
The Joseon Dynasty offers a compelling case of ideological austerity. Rather than emulating the wealth and excesses of neighboring powers, Joseon chose to limit itself so the people could thrive. The elephant story is more than a quirky historical anecdote—it’s a symbol of a government that knew its role and respected its responsibilities. In a pre-industrial world defined by scarcity, intentional poverty at the top meant survival and dignity for those at the bottom.
