One common trait of 'Colonial Modernization' theorists and 'Il-ppongs' (Japan-stans) is that they constantly trash the Joseon Dynasty, claiming Korea has always been a weak, pathetic state. They do this to justify the colonial narrative: 'Joseon couldn't modernize on its own, so Japan came and saved them.' They have to paint Joseon as extremely incompetent, stagnant, and barbaric. To them, Japan's invasion wasn't an assault—it was a rescue mission or an inevitability. Plus, they love cherry-picking stats like the number of railroads, factories, and schools without ever mentioning who owned them, who actually benefited, or why they were built in the first place...

Arguing with these people got me into studying Joseon, and I was honestly shocked to find that in the early Joseon era (especially late Taejong to early Sejong), Joseon was a global top-tier powerhouse. (Even if we strip away the 'gukppong' nationalistic bias.)

National power in pre-modern societies didn't have metrics like GDP. Since most countries relied on agriculture, national strength was closely tied to mobilizable troop counts. Back then, countries were stuck in a Malthusian trap, so production was proportional to population. The size of the standing army and the ability to mobilize was a crucial indicator of both population and the efficiency of a state's bureaucracy.

Based on this, if we throw all the training data into a table to see where Joseon’s military stood during the Taejong-Sejong era (used ChatGPT to help format this):

| Tier | Nation | Est. Population | Central Standing Army | Short-term Mobilization | Evaluation Summary | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | 0 | Ming Dynasty | 60M~80M | 800k~1M | 1M+ | Sole superpower. Capable of setting global order alone. | | 1 | Joseon | 6M~8M | 40k~60k | 100k~150k | Top-tier central gov efficiency/durability. Ming couldn't ignore them. | | 1 | Ottoman Empire | 10M~15M | 60k~100k | 150k~200k | Strong elite standing army. Dependent on geography/expedition terms. | | 1 | Timurid Empire | ~15M | Unclear | ~200k | Strongest short-term offense. Weak institutions/long-term sustainability. | | 2 | France | 12M~15M | 20k~40k | 100k~150k | High total capacity, but weak central control due to feudalism. | | 2 | Dai Viet (Vietnam) | 3M~4M | ~20k | 70k~100k | Strong defense/militia. Limited navy/expeditionary power. | | 2 | Vijayanagara | 10M~15M | ~50k | ~150k | High total strength, but unstable central continuity. | | 3 | Mamluk Sultanate | 4M~6M | 40k~60k | ~80k | Strong elite troops. Limits on long-term sustainability. | | 3 | England | 2.5M~3M | Almost zero standing army | 50k~100k | Low central government mobilization power. | | 3 | Muromachi Japan | 6M~8M | No central standing army | Shogunate almost unable to mobilize | Actual power split among Daimyos. |

Globally speaking, Joseon was in the tier right below the Ming. In modern terms, it was like being a UK, France, or Germany-level power under the US and China. I believe King Taejong’s political maneuvering was the key factor behind this. Just because a dynasty lasts long doesn't mean it was great, but usually, if the 1st or 2nd generation messes up the design, the country doesn't last 100 years. When Taejong took over, Joseon was: 1. Born from a coup/civil war, 2. Dealing with Goryeo nostalgia, 3. Facing serious legitimacy issues, 4. Dealing with super high-maintenance literati elites.

In this state, Taejong: 1. Cleaned up the legitimacy mess, sorted out the chaotic royal family and 'merit subjects,' and balanced the throne with the bureaucracy. 2. For political reasons, he had to take out Jeong Mong-ju, yet he had the guts to honor him as a 'loyal subject,' a high-level political move that respected Confucian order without undermining himself. 3. Most importantly, he secured the regime's long-term sustainability.

Historically, it's very common for a country to decline or even collapse after a charismatic leader like Taejong. Charismatic rule usually relies on personal authority rather than laws and institutions. Successors often face the backlash of suppressed frustrations or get labeled as 'not as good as the old man.' Look at Ramses II, Qin Shi Huang, Louis XIV, Alexander the Great, Peter the Great, or Bismarck.

But Taejong, despite holding absolute power, voluntarily stepped down to become King Emeritus (Sangwang). This was a total 'God move.' It created a political buffer, allowed for a soft landing of power, and backed the 'gentle' King Sejong with his raw authority. Without that 'Emeritus period,' Sejong would have burned all his energy trying to keep the merit subjects in check and managing the military alone. I also think Taejong’s coaching is what finalized Sejong’s quality as a 'Great King.' Looking at it this way, Taejong was just as incredible as Sejong. Thanks.