Conventionally, the Ming dynasty (1368–1644) has been analyzed as part of late imperial China, emphasizing its continuity with the Qing (1644–1911) in social structure, cultural patterns, and technology. However, this panel highlights Ming as a distinct cultural symbol across East Asia beyond its dynastic period by examining how knowledge produced in Ming China was received and reinterpreted within transnational Asian history. The circulation of intellectual products associated with Ming also influenced the information order of East Asia and vice versa. By liberating Ming from the framework of “late imperial China,” this panel restores the dynasty to an East Asian world in which multiple political and cultural entities shaped their own identities through intensive interactions.

Rui Ding investigates the circulation of cattle-related knowledge as a critical agricultural tool among the Ming Chinese, Chosŏn Korean, and Jurchen-Qing peoples and states from the 14th to the 17th centuries. Examining cattle farming information, including ranching geography, pricing, taxation in trade and border markets, and agriculture technology, it argues that the sources of information, along with the motivations and processes of knowledge production and circulation, reflect the accelerated transformation of the agrarian landscape in the Chinese-Korean-Jurchen borderlands, accompanied by tensions surrounding agricultural resource acquisition and maintenance.

Cheng-wei Wu scrutinizes Ming loyalty in late Chosŏn Korea, tracing its evolution across generations after the Ming dynasty’s fall in 1644. Chosŏn cultural elites, well-versed in Ming history, commemorated the dynasty, even under Qing rule. However, by the 18th century, a growing national identity led figures like Yi Man-un and Ŏm Suk to prioritize Chosŏn history, critiquing the overemphasis on the Ming. Analyzing historical writings through a generational lens reveals varying motivations and perspectives on Ming loyalty, illuminating the interplay of historical knowledge, cultural identity, and political legitimacy.

Zhaoshen Wang critically reassesses the conventional narrative of Qing-era secret societies and their overseas counterparts in Southeast Asian and North American Chinese diasporas as inherently anti-Qing subversive forces. By examining the historical consciousness of secret society members, Qing officials, and colonial administrators, his study investigates how Ming historical memory was preserved, reinterpreted, and imbued with divergent symbolic meanings, particularly analyzing why and through what mechanisms the concept of “Ming” acquired distinct political and cultural significance for various historical actors.

Hu Hsu underscores Japan’s role in reinventing Wang Yangming’s (1472-1529) Neo-Confucianism—the defining philosophy of Ming intellectual landscape—from the mid-nineteenth to the mid-twentieth century. Hu argues that it was not until the mid-nineteenth century that Japanese activists transformed Wang’s Neo-Confucianism into a philosophy of action for political purposes. Inspired by their Japanese counterparts, Chinese cultural elites assimilated the Japanese interpretation of Wang’s Neo-Confucianism by claiming “the unity of knowledge and action (zhixing heyi)” as the core of his teachings in the twentieth century.

This panel demonstrates how Ming knowledge and symbols continued to shape East Asia’s intellectual and political landscape long after the dynasty’s fall, challenging conventional periodization and highlighting the entanglements of transnational Asian history.