Little China (ideology)

Little China refers to a politico-cultural ideology and phenomenon in which various Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese regimes identified themselves as the "Central State" and regarded themselves to be legitimate successors to the Chinese civilization. Informed by the traditional Chinese concepts of Sinocentrism and Sino–barbarian dichotomy, this belief became more apparent after the Manchu-led Qing dynasty had superseded the Han-led Ming dynasty in China proper, as Tokugawa Japan, Joseon Korea and Nguyễn Vietnam, among others, perceived that "barbarians" had ruined the center of world civilization.

Little China ideology in the Sinosphere

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". 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.

Traditional name of China	Rendition in Korean	Rendition in Vietnamese	Rendition in Japanese
Mandarin: Zhōngguó 中國 MC: Ʈɨuŋkwək̚	Jungguk 中國 중국	Trung Quốc Trung Quốc	Chūgoku 中國ちゅうごく
Mandarin: Zhōnghuá 中華 MC: Ʈɨuŋɦˠua	Junghwa 中華 중화	Trung Hoa Trung Hoa	Chūka 中華ちゅうか
Mandarin: Huáxià 華夏 MC: Ɦˠuaɦˠa^X	Hwaha 華夏 화하	Hoa Hạ Hoa Hạ	Kaka 華夏かか
Mandarin: Zhōngxià 中夏 MC: Ʈɨuŋɦˠa^X	Jungha 中夏 중하	Trung Hạ Trung Hạ	Chūka 中夏ちゅうか
Mandarin: Zhōngcháo 中朝 MC: Ʈɨuŋʈˠiᴇu	Jungjo 中朝 중조	Trung Triều Trung Triều	Chūchō 中朝ちゅうちょう
Mandarin: Shénzhōu 神州 MC: ʑiɪnt͡ɕɨu	Sinju 神州 신주	Thần Châu Thần Châu	Shinshū 神州しんしゅう
Mandarin: Huá 華 MC: Ɦˠua	Hwa 華 화	Hoa Hoa	Ka 華か
Mandarin: Xià 夏 MC: Ɦˠa^X	Ha 夏 하	Hạ Hạ	Ka 夏か

Korea

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".
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".
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.

Vietnam

Numerous Vietnamese dynasties attempted to replicate the Chinese tributary system in Southeast Asia, whilst maintaining tributary relations with Chinese dynasties. Vietnamese monarchs of multiple dynasties adopted the imperial title "hoàng đế" domestically, but reverted to the royal title "vương" 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" in relation to Vietnam, self-styled as "Nam Triều". 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.
The Nguyễn dynasty considered itself the legitimate heir to the Chinese civilization. Gia Long Đế once used "Trung Quốc" and "Hạ" to refer to the Nguyễn and earlier Vietnamese dynasties:
In the Poems on the Way to Min, Lý Văn Phức 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" :

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. In Chūchō Jijitsu by Yamaga Sokō, "Chūchō", "Chūka" and "Chūgoku" were adopted as alternative names for Japan, while "Gaichō" was used to refer to the Qing dynasty.
During the Meiji Restoration, the Emperor Meiji once issued an edict that referred to Japan as "Ka" :