You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding article in Korean. (December 2015)Click [show] for important translation instructions.
View a machine-translated version of the Korean article.
Machine translation, like DeepL or Google Translate, is a useful starting point for translations, but translators must revise errors as necessary and confirm that the translation is accurate, rather than simply copy-pasting machine-translated text into the English Wikipedia.
Do not translate text that appears unreliable or low-quality. If possible, verify the text with references provided in the foreign-language article.
You must provide copyright attribution in the edit summary accompanying your translation by providing an interlanguage link to the source of your translation. A model attribution edit summary is Content in this edit is translated from the existing Korean Wikipedia article at [[:ko:소중화사상]]; see its history for attribution.
You may also add the template {{Translated|ko|소중화사상}} to the talk page.
You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding article in Japanese. (August 2021)Click [show] for important translation instructions.
View a machine-translated version of the Japanese article.
Machine translation, like DeepL or Google Translate, is a useful starting point for translations, but translators must revise errors as necessary and confirm that the translation is accurate, rather than simply copy-pasting machine-translated text into the English Wikipedia.
Do not translate text that appears unreliable or low-quality. If possible, verify the text with references provided in the foreign-language article.
You must provide copyright attribution in the edit summary accompanying your translation by providing an interlanguage link to the source of your translation. A model attribution edit summary is Content in this edit is translated from the existing Japanese Wikipedia article at [[:ja:小中華思想]]; see its history for attribution.
You may also add the template {{Translated|ja|小中華思想}} to the talk page.
Since ancient times, the realm of "China" has not been a fixed or predetermined concept based on ethnicity or geographical location. According to the Spring and Autumn Annals, "Chinese" people who adopt the ways of the "barbarians" would be considered "barbarians", whereas "barbarians" who adopt the ways of the "Chinese" would be accepted as "Chinese".[11] Hence, the idea of "Chinese-ness" is a fluid concept and is defined through self-identification and cultural affiliation.
Having been heavily influenced by Chinese culture and political thoughts, numerous Korean, Vietnamese and Japanese regimes identified themselves with descriptive names that are traditionally associated with and used by China. At the same time, these regimes considered themselves as legitimate successors to Chinese culture and civilization.[citation needed]
Names of China adopted by Korea, Vietnam and Japan
The "Little China" ideology for Korea emerged in the background of Choson-Ming relations. The Korean Yangban, the scholar gentry of the Choson Dynasty, regarded the Ming the leader of the Tributary system of China. Bongjin Kim notes that "By entering the Ming tributary system, Choson's Confucian elites firmly believed as did their Chinese counterparts that Choson was superior among non-Chinese countries as sojunghwa".[12]
In the 17th century, when the Manchu-led Qing dynasty replaced the Han-led Ming dynasty as the ruling dynasty of China proper, the Joseon dynasty believed that the Qing dynasty was unworthy of succeeding the politico-cultural orthodoxy of "China". Instead, the Confucianist Joseon dynasty asserted itself as the legitimate heir to the Chinese civilization and termed itself "Little Central Kingdom".[1]
During the reigns of Choson kings such as Injo of Joseon and Hyojong of Joseon, many Choson officials believed that Choson should support the Southern Ming, the remnants of the Ming Dynasty, against the Qing during the Transition from Ming to Qing. These efforts were motivated by the Little China ideology. During the reign of the Yongzheng Emperor, the Qing won the loyalty of the Han Chinese gentry, which allowed them to portray the Qing as the legitimate successor of the Ming Dynasty. Despite hesitation amongst Choson literati, the incorporation of Chinese literati by the Qing allowed Choson scholars to reconceptualize the Qing Dynasty as the successor to the Ming's Confucian-led order.[13]
Vietnam
Numerous Vietnamese dynasties attempted to replicate the Chinese tributary system in Southeast Asia, whilst maintaining tributary relations with Chinese dynasties.[14] Vietnamese monarchs of multiple dynasties adopted the imperial title "hoàng đế" (皇帝; "emperor") domestically, but reverted to the royal title "vương" (王; "king") when dealing with China—a policy known as "emperor at home, king abroad". On many occasions, some Vietnamese monarchs styled themselves as the "Central Kingdom" or "Central State" and referred to various Chinese dynasties as "Bắc Triều" (北朝; "northern dynasty") in relation to Vietnam, self-styled as "Nam Triều" (南朝; "southern dynasty").[15] In 1010, Lý Thái Tổ issued the Edict on the Transfer of the Capital that likened himself to Chinese monarchs who initiated the relocation of the capital, effectively positioning the Lý dynasty within the politico-cultural realm of China.[16]
The Nguyễn dynasty considered itself the legitimate heir to the Chinese civilization.[17]Gia Long Đế once used "Trung Quốc" (中國) and "Hạ" (夏) to refer to the Nguyễn and earlier Vietnamese dynasties:
Trung Quốc vis-à-vis the outer barbarians [is akin to] the [properly] governed vis-à-vis the ungoverned [...][18]
The late king governed all under Heaven [by adhering to the principle that] Hạ should not intermix with the barbarians [...][19]
In the Poems on the Way to Min, Lý Văn Phức (a descendent of Ming Chinese refugees) escorted some stranded Chinese sailors back to Fujian province. However, when he arrived there, the guesthouse where he was supposed to stay had a sign over it which indicated that it was for "barbarians." Lý Văn Phức defended his position with an essay that highlighted that Vietnam followed the ways of China without the Manchurian influences of the 17th century and therefore should be considered "Hoa" (華):
In terms of governance and law, [Vietnam] follows [the ways of] the Two Emperors and Three Kings [of Ancient China]; in terms of [Confucian] orthodoxy, [Vietnam] adheres to [the teachings of] the Six Classics and Four Books, and subscribes to the schools of thought of Confucius, Mencius, Cheng Hao, Cheng Yi and Zhu Xi. In terms of knowledge, [Vietnam] consults The Commentary of Zuo, Discourses of the States and [the works of] Ban Gu and Sima Qian; in terms of writings, [Vietnamese] poetries and rhapsodies imitate [the styles of] the Selections of Refined Literature and that of Li Bai and Du Fu; in terms of calligraphies and paintings, [Vietnamese works] emulate [the styles of] the Rites of Zhou and the Six Methods and that of Zhong Yao and Wang Xizhi. [The procedures of] selecting the virtuous for government positions [in Vietnam have their roots in] the Han and Tang dynasties; the belts and headwear [of Vietnam originate from] the clothing [styles] of the Song and Ming dynasties. Since [Vietnam] follows the ways [of China], yet if [China considers the Vietnamese] as barbarians; how, then, do you define the meaning of Hoa?[20]
Japan
After the Qing dynasty had replaced the Ming dynasty in China proper, Japanese scholars declared that the Qing dynasty did not have the legitimacy to represent the politico-cultural realm of "China" whilst simultaneously explicitly identifying Japan as "China". In Kai Hentai by Hayashi Gahō and Hayashi Hōkō, it was argued that Japan had replaced the Qing dynasty as the center of Chinese civilization.[21] In Chūchō Jijitsu by Yamaga Sokō, "Chūchō" (中朝; used in a similar sense as "Middle Kingdom"), "Chūka" (中華) and "Chūgoku" (中國) were adopted as alternative names for Japan, while "Gaichō" (外朝; "outer dynasty") was used to refer to the Qing dynasty.[22]
[There is a] need to urgently rectify the nominal relations between the monarch and the officials, to make clear the distinctions between Ka and the barbarians and between the inner and outer domains, so as to uphold the cardinal principles of all under Heaven.[23]
↑ "Discourses on the Barbarians". Poems on the Way to Min. 以言乎治法，則本之二帝三王；以言乎道統，則本之六經四子，家孔孟而戶朱程也。其學也，源左國而溯班馬；其文也，詩賦則昭明文選而以李杜為歸依；字畫則周禮六書而以鍾王為楷式。賓賢取士，漢唐之科目也；博帶峩冠，宋明之衣服也。推而舉之，其大也如是。而謂之夷，則正不知其何如為華也。
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
