Editing Sinocentrism

{{Short description|Worldview centred on or biased towards Chinese civilisation}}
{{about|the diplomatic system and state ideology|ethnocentric attitudes among ethnic Han within China|Han chauvinism|Han ethnic-related nationalism|Han nationalism}}
{{Lead too short|date=May 2022}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=February 2019}}
{{Infobox Chinese
| s = 中国中心主义
| t = 中國中心主義
| l = [[China]]-centric doctrine
| poj = Tiong-kok Tiong-sim Chú-gī
| tl = Tiong-kok Tiong-sim Tsú-gī
| j = Zung1 Gwok3 Zung1 Sam1 Zyu2 Ji6
| phfs = Chung-ke̍t Chung-sîm Chú-ngi
| p = Zhōngguó zhōngxīn zhǔyì
| w = Chung1-kuo2 chung1-hsin1 jih-yi4
| bpmf = ㄓㄨㄥ ㄍㄨㄛˊ ㄓㄨㄥ ㄒㄧㄣ ㄓㄨˇ ㄧˋ
}}

'''Sinocentrism''' refers to a worldview that [[China]] is the cultural, political, or economic center of the world.<ref name="autogenerated2007">{{cite journal |title= Beneath the Facade of China | journal = School of Contemporary Chinese Studies | volume = NG8 1BB | date = 30 May 2007}}</ref> Sinocentrism was a core concept in various [[Chinese dynasties]]. The Chinese considered themselves to be "all-under-Heaven", ruled by the emperor, known as [[Son of Heaven]]. Those that lived outside of the [[Huaxia]] were regarded as "[[Four Barbarians|barbarians]]". In addition, states outside of China, such as Vietnam, Japan or Korea, were considered to be [[Vassal state|vassals]] of China.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Tan Chung |date=September 1973 |title=On Sinocentrism: A Critique |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/000944557300900507 |journal=China Report |language=en |volume=9 |issue=5 |pages=38–50 |doi=10.1177/000944557300900507 |issn=0009-4455|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

== Overview and context ==
Depending on the historical context, Sinocentrism can refer to either the [[ethnocentrism]] of the [[Han Chinese|Han]] society and culture, or the modern concept of ''[[zhonghua minzu]]'',  popular among the Korean elites up to the final demise of the [[Qing dynasty]]. The concept came to an end in the 19th century and suffered several more blows in the 20th century, and as a result is not as widely popular among Chinese people in the present day.<ref name="autogenerated2007"/>

In pre-modern times, it often took the form of viewing China as the most advanced [[civilization]] in the world, and external ethnic groups or foreign nations as being [[Barbarian|uncivilized]] to various degrees, a distinction known in Chinese as the [[Hua–Yi distinction]].<ref>von Falkenhausen (1999), 544.</ref><ref>Shelach (1999), 222–223.</ref>

== Sinocentric system ==
[[File:Huaxiasiyi.svg|thumb|[[Zhou dynasty]] cosmography of [[Huaxia]] and the [[Four Barbarians|Siyi]]: [[Dongyi]] in the east, [[Nanman]] in the south, [[Xirong]] in the west, and [[Beidi]] in the north.]]

The Sinocentric system was a hierarchical system of international relations that prevailed in [[East Asia]] before the adoption of the [[Westphalian sovereignty|Westphalian]] system in modern times. Surrounding states such as Japan (which cut off its vassal relationship with China during the [[Asuka period]], because it regarded itself as an equal and individual culture), Korea, the [[Ryukyu Kingdom]], and Vietnam were regarded as [[vassal]]s of China. Relations between the Chinese Empire and these peoples were interpreted as [[Tributary system of China|tributary relationships]] under which these countries offered [[tribute]]s to the [[Emperor of China]].<ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last1=Lee |first1=Seokwoo |url=https://brill.com/display/book/9789004315754/B9789004315754_002.xml |title=1 Korea's Encounter with the Modern International Legal System |last2=Lee |first2=Hee Eun |date=2016-01-01 |publisher=[[Brill Nijhoff]] |isbn=978-90-04-31575-4 |language=en}}</ref> Areas not under Sinocentric influence were called ''Huawai zhi di'' ({{lang|zh-Hant|化外之地}}; "lands outside of civilization").

At the center of the system stood China, ruled by a [[Dynasties in Chinese history|dynasty]] that had gained the [[Mandate of Heaven]]. This "[[Celestial Empire|Celestial Dynasty]]", distinguished by its [[Confucianism|Confucian]] codes of morality and propriety, regarded itself as the most prominent civilization in the world; the [[Emperor of China]] was considered the only legitimate [[emperor]] of the entire world (all lands [[Tianxia|under heaven]]).

Under this scheme of international relations, only China could use the title of emperor whereas other states were ruled by kings.<ref>{{citation|title=Rediscovering Manchuria: Sin Ch'aeho and the Politics of Territorial History in Korea|journal=Journal of Asian Studies|volume=56|number=1|page=29|year=1997|first=Andre|last=Schmid|doi=10.2307/2646342|jstor=2646342|s2cid=162879663 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Chinese emperors were considered the [[Son of Heaven]]. The Japanese use of the term ''[[Emperor of Japan|Tennō]]'' ({{lang|ja|天皇}}; "heavenly sovereign") for the rulers of Japan was a subversion of this principle. Throughout history, Koreans have sometimes referred to their rulers as king, conforming with traditional Korean belief of the Posterity of Heaven.

Identification of the heartland and the legitimacy of dynastic succession were both essential aspects of the system. Originally the center was synonymous with the [[Zhongyuan]], an area that was expanded through invasion and conquest over many centuries. The dynastic succession was at times subject to radical changes in interpretation, such as the period of the [[Song dynasty#Southern Song, 1127–1279|Southern Song]] when the ruling dynasty lost the traditional heartland to the [[Jin dynasty (1115–1234)|northern barbarians]]. Outside the center were several concentric circles. Local ethnic minorities were not regarded as "foreign countries". However, they were governed by their native leaders called ''[[tusi]]'', subject to recognition by the Chinese court, and were exempt from the Chinese bureaucratic system.

Outside this circle were the [[List of tributary states of China|tributary states]] which offered tributes to the Chinese emperor and over which China exercised [[suzerainty]]. Under the [[Ming dynasty]], when the tribute system entered its peak, these states were classified into a number of groups. The southeastern barbarians (category one) included some of the major states of East Asia and [[Southeast Asia]], such as Korea, Japan, the Ryukyu Kingdom, Vietnam, Thailand, [[Champa]], and Java. A second group of southeastern barbarians covered countries like [[Sultanate of Sulu|Sulu]], [[Malacca Sultanate|Malacca]], and Sri Lanka.<ref>{{cite book |last=Hamashita |first=Takeshi |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XdPQRFSsqwAC&pg=PA15 |title=China, East Asia and the Global Economy: Regional and Historical Perspectives |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2013 |isbn=978-1-134-04029-2 |pages=15 |language=en |access-date=4 August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200215075555/https://books.google.com/books?id=XdPQRFSsqwAC |archive-date=15 February 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> Many of these are independent states in modern times.

The situation was complicated by the fact that some tributary states had their own tributaries. Laos was a tributary of Vietnam while the Ryukyu Kingdom paid tribute to both China and Japan. [[Tsushima Island]] was also a tributary of the [[Goryeo]] and [[Joseon]] dynasties of Korea.

Beyond the circle of tributary states were countries in a trading relationship with China. The Portuguese, for instance, were allowed to trade with China from leased territory in [[Macau]] but did not officially enter the tributary system. During the Qing dynasty's [[Taiwan under Qing rule|rule of Taiwan]], some Qing officials have used the term ''Huawai zhi di'' to refer to Taiwan (Formosa), specifically to areas in Taiwan that have yet to be fully cultivated, developed and under the control of the Qing government.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.twhistory.org.tw/20010611.htm |title=History in The Mutan Village Incident |publisher=Twhistory.org.tw |date=11 June 2001 |access-date=2011-04-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070807041327/http://www.twhistory.org.tw/20010611.htm |archive-date=7 August 2007 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>[http://www.chinataiwan.org/twrwk/twdq/xgjg/200603/t20060306_606.htm Chinataiwan history (历史) of Taiwan area] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080329234523/http://www.chinataiwan.org/twrwk/twdq/xgjg/200603/t20060306_606.htm |date=29 March 2008 }} (Chinese)</ref>

While Sinocentrism tends to be identified as a politically inspired system of international relations, in fact it possessed an important economic aspect. The Sinocentric tribute and trade system provided Northeast and Southeast Asia with a political and economic framework for international trade. Countries wishing to trade with China were required to submit to a suzerain-vassal relationship with the [[Chinese sovereign]]. After investiture ({{lang|zh-Hant|冊封}}; {{transliteration|zh|cèfēng}}) of the ruler in question, the missions were allowed to come to China to pay tribute to the Chinese emperor. In exchange, tributary missions were presented with return bestowals ({{lang|zh-Hant|回賜}}; {{transliteration|zh|huícì}}). Special licences were issued to merchants accompanying these missions to carry out trade. Trade was also permitted at land frontiers and specified ports. This Sinocentric trade zone was based on the use of silver as a currency with prices set by reference to Chinese prices.

The Sinocentric model was not seriously challenged until contact with the European powers in the 18th and 19th century, in particular after the [[First Opium War]].{{citation needed|date=October 2011}} This was partly due to the fact that sustained contact between the Chinese Empire and other empires of the pre-modern period was limited. By the mid 19th century, imperial China was well past its peak and was on the verge of collapse.

In the late 19th century, the Sinocentric tributary state system in East Asia was superseded by the Westphalian multi-state system.<ref name="kang59">Kang, David C. (2010). {{Google books|ydVymF_OrWEC|''East Asia Before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute,'' p. 160.|page=160}}</ref>

== Responses of other countries ==
{{see also|Little China (ideology)|Hua–Yi distinction#Conceptualisation of the Hua–Yi distinction in the Sinosphere}}
Within [[Asia]], the cultural and economic centrality of China was recognized, and most countries submitted to the Sinocentric model, if only to enjoy the benefits of a trading relationship. However, clear differences of nuance can be discerned in the responses of different countries.

=== Korea ===
Until the era of the [[Three Kingdoms of Korea]], Southern Korean states had been protected from Chinese invasions by militarily powerful Northern Korean states such as [[Goguryeo]] which ruled the northern region of Korean peninsula and [[Manchuria]]. Goguryeo considered itself as an equally supreme state as China and adopted its own centric system to adjacent countries. Refusing to pay any tributes and continuing to conquer eastern territories of China altogether incurred a series of massive Chinese invasions of Goguryeo from 598 to 614, which ended disastrously, and they mainly contributed to the fall of Chinese [[Sui dynasty]] in 618. Such numerous defeats of the Chinese raised the sense of ethnic superiority in Goguryeo and further expansions into the Chinese territories continued.{{citation needed|date=January 2013}}

After Goguryeo was collapsed by the allied forces of [[Silla]], one of the Three Kingdoms of Korea, and the [[Tang dynasty]] in 668, Silla, now being the sole ruler of Korean peninsula, more readily started the tribute system between Silla and Tang. However, such ties between two countries were weakened after Silla's submission to [[Goryeo]] who claimed to succeed Goguryeo.{{citation needed|date=January 2013}}

In the mid-Goryeo period, Korea idealized the Song dynasty and actively sought cultural assimilation into the [[Sinosphere]].<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last=Kwon Hee Young |date=2010 |title=From Sinocentrism to Civilization Discourse |url=https://rks.accesson.kr/assets/pdf/7701/journal-13-3-13.pdf |url-status=live |journal=The Review of Korean Studies |volume=13 |issue=3 |publication-place=[[Academy of Korean Studies]] |pages=13–30 |doi=10.25024/review.2010.13.3.001 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221120143735/https://rks.accesson.kr/assets/pdf/7701/journal-13-3-13.pdf |archive-date=2022-11-20 |via=[[Korea Citation Index]]}}</ref> The relationship continued until the [[Mongol invasions of Korea]] and the [[Mongol conquest of the Song Dynasty|Mongol conquest of the Song dynasty]] where the two kingdoms fell, leading to the rise of the [[Yuan dynasty]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=[[Smithsonian Institution]] |date=April 23, 2021 |title=Yuan dynasty (1279–1368), an introduction |url=https://smarthistory.org/yuan-dynasty-intro/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220524180948/https://smarthistory.org/yuan-dynasty-intro/ |archive-date=May 24, 2022 |website=[[Smarthistory]]}}</ref> After 30 years of fierce resistance, both Goryeo and Mongols finally sued for peace and Goryeo became a dependency of the [[Yuan dynasty]]. Soon after the weakening of Yuan dynasty, Goryeo retook their lost territories from the Yuan dynasty by military campaigns and regained her sovereign rights.{{citation needed|date=January 2013}}

The [[Joseon]] dynasty (1392–1910) encouraged the entrenchment of [[Korean Confucian]] ideals and doctrines in Korean society and again willingly entered into the Sinocentric system. After the Ming dynasty, which regarded itself as huá (華), cultured civilization was considered to have collapsed under the invasion of the [[Qing]], where the dominant [[Manchus]] were considered barbarian (夷) by Koreans.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Daniel Sun |date=February 1997 |title=Road to East Asia |url=https://www.yorku.ca/iwai/two/daniel.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190801143307/http://www.yorku.ca/iwai/two/daniel.htm |archive-date=2019-08-01 |website=[[York University]]}}</ref> The Ming was thought of as the last true Sino culture (中華).<ref>{{citation|first=Young-woo|last=Han|year=1992|title=The Establishment and Development of Nationalist History|journal=Seoul Journal of Korean Studies|volume=5|pages=62–64}}</ref>

Sinocentrism waned further after Britain militarily defeated Qing China in the [[Second Opium War]], creating an influx of Western culture with the decline of the Qing dynasty. Some Koreans especially those who studied abroad saw a need for reforms and associated Western civilization with modernization.<ref name=":2" />

=== Vietnam ===
[[File:Ngoại Quốc Đồ - 外國図 - Map of Foreign Countries, Lê dynasty, Vietnam.jpg|thumb|The ''Painting of Foreign Countries'' (外國圖) in the 18th century with [[Later Lê dynasty|Revival Lê dynasty]] as "middle state" (中國).]]
[[Vietnam]] ([[Đại Việt]]) had an intimate but not always peaceful relationship with [[China]]. Vietnam, originally independent, was part of various Chinese dynasties and kingdoms for approximately 900 years before gaining independence in the 10th century. In subsequent centuries the Vietnamese drove out Chinese invaders on a number of occasions, to the extent that conflict with China may be seen as one of the main themes of [[Vietnamese history]].

However, Vietnam was also heavily [[Sinification|Sinicized]], adopting most aspects of [[Chinese culture]], including the administrative system, architecture, philosophy, religion, literature of China, and even a general cultural outlook. Classical Chinese ([[Chữ Hán]]) was adopted as national writing system since the [[Triệu dynasty]]. Vietnamese merchants along with Chinese merchants had the important roles in spreading of Hanzi and Confucianism to the world. First Vietnamese reached the Persian shores in the late 1st century. Vietnam persistently identified itself in relation to China, regarding itself as the kingdom of the south as against China in the north, as seen in this line from a poem (in Classical Chinese) by General [[Lý Thường Kiệt]] (李常傑) (1019–1105): ''Nam Quốc sơn hà Nam Đế cư''. (南國山河南帝居), which means "Over mountains and rivers of the South reigns the Emperor of the South".

In adopting Chinese customs, the Vietnamese court also began to adopt Sinocentric world view during the expanding Later Lê and Nguyễn dynasties. "Trung Quốc" 中國 was used as a name for Vietnam by Emperor [[Gia Long]] in 1805.<ref name="Woodside1971">{{cite book |author=Alexander Woodside |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0LgSI9UQNpwC&pg=PA18 |title=Vietnam and the Chinese Model: A Comparative Study of Vietnamese and Chinese Government in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century |publisher=[[Harvard University Asia Center]] |year=1971 |isbn=978-0-674-93721-5 |pages=18– |language=en |access-date=3 April 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200218063744/https://books.google.com/books?id=0LgSI9UQNpwC&pg=PA18 |archive-date=18 February 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> It was said "Hán di hữu hạn" 漢夷有限 ("''the Vietnamese and the barbarians must have clear borders''") by the Gia Long Emperor (Nguyễn Phúc Ánh) when differentiating between Khmer and Vietnamese.<ref name="Wook2004">{{cite book |author=Choi Byung Wook |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=foZAdRgB-nwC&pg=PA34 |title=Southern Vietnam Under the Reign of Minh Mạng (1820-1841): Central Policies and Local Response |publisher=[[Cornell University Southeast Asia Program|SEAP Publications]] |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-87727-138-3 |pages=34– |language=en |access-date=22 June 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200215103955/https://books.google.com/books?id=foZAdRgB-nwC&pg=PA34 |archive-date=15 February 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> Minh Mang implemented an acculturation integration policy directed at minority non-Vietnamese peoples.<ref name="Wook2004 2">{{cite book |author=Choi Byung Wook |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=foZAdRgB-nwC&pg=PA136 |title=Southern Vietnam Under the Reign of Minh Mạng (1820-1841): Central Policies and Local Response |publisher=[[Cornell University Southeast Asia Program|SEAP Publications]] |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-87727-138-3 |edition=illustrated |pages=136– |language=en |access-date=22 June 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200214122729/https://books.google.com/books?id=foZAdRgB-nwC&pg=PA136 |archive-date=14 February 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> Thanh nhân 清人 was used to refer to ethnic Chinese by the Vietnamese while Vietnamese called themselves as Hán nhân 漢人 in Vietnam during the 1800s under Nguyễn rule.<ref name="Wook2004 3">{{cite book |author=Choi Byung Wook |title=Southern Vietnam Under the Reign of Minh Mạng (1820-1841): Central Policies and Local Response |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=foZAdRgB-nwC&pg=PA137 |year=2004 |publisher=[[Cornell University Southeast Asia Program|SEAP Publications]] |isbn=978-0-87727-138-3 |pages=137– |access-date=22 June 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200219111419/https://books.google.com/books?id=foZAdRgB-nwC&pg=PA137 |archive-date=19 February 2020 |url-status=live }}</ref> [[Cambodia]] was regularly called ''Cao Man Quốc'' (高蠻國), the country of "upper barbarians". In 1815, Gia Long claimed 13 countries as Vietnamese vassals, including [[Kingdom of Luang Phrabang|Luang Prabang]], [[Kingdom of Vientiane|Vientiane]], Burma, [[Muang Phuan|Tran Ninh]] in eastern Laos, and two countries called "Thủy Xá Quốc" and "Hỏa Xá Quốc", which were actually Malayo-Polynesian [[Jarai people|Jarai]] tribes living between Vietnam and Cambodia. Mirroring the Chinese model, the Vietnamese court attempted to regulate the presentation of tribute to the Vietnamese court, participation in New Year and emperor's birthday ceremonies, as well as the travel routes and size of tributary missions.<ref>''Vietnam and the Chinese Model'', Alexander Barton Woodside, Council on East Asian Studies Harvard, Cambridge (Massachusetts) and London 1988: P236-237</ref>

Vietnamese Nguyen Emperor [[Minh Mạng]] sinicized ethnic minorities such as Khmer and Cham, claimed the legacy of Confucianism and China's Han dynasty for Vietnam, and used the term Han people 漢人 (Hán nhân) to refer to the Vietnamese.<ref name="Owen2005">{{cite book|author=Norman G. Owen|title=The Emergence Of Modern Southeast Asia: A New History|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=py5Xh0-pw18C&q=minh+mang+han&pg=PA115|year=2005|publisher=University of Hawaii Press|isbn=978-0-8248-2890-5|pages=115–}}</ref> Minh Mang declared that "We must hope that their barbarian habits will be subconsciously dissipated, and that they will daily become more infected by Han [Sino-Vietnamese] customs."<ref name="Moses2008">{{cite book |author=A. Dirk Moses |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RBgoNN4MG-YC&q=minh+mang+han&pg=PA209 |title=Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History |date=1 January 2008 |publisher=[[Berghahn Books]] |isbn=978-1-84545-452-4 |pages=209– |language=en }}</ref> These policies were directed at the Khmer and hill tribes.<ref name="PeerenboomPetersen2006">{{cite book|author1=Randall Peerenboom|author2=Carole J. Petersen|author3=Albert H.Y. Chen|title=Human Rights in Asia: A Comparative Legal Study of Twelve Asian Jurisdictions, France and the USA|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2j6GNiMMc1oC&q=kinh+people+of+capital&pg=PA474 |date=27 September 2006|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-134-23881-1|pages=474–}}</ref> The Nguyen lord Nguyen Phuc Chu had referred to Vietnamese as "Han people" in 1712 when differentiating between Vietnamese and Chams.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://kyotoreview.cseas.kyoto-u.ac.jp/issue/issue4/article_353.html |title=Vietnam-Champa Relations and the Malay-Islam Regional Network in the 17th–19th Centuries |access-date=2019-02-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040617071243/http://kyotoreview.cseas.kyoto-u.ac.jp/issue/issue4/article_353.html |archive-date=17 June 2004 }}</ref> The Nguyen Lords established [[Tuntian#Other countries|đồn điền]] after 1790. It was said "Hán di hữu hạn" 漢夷有限 ("''the Vietnamese and the barbarians must have clear borders''") by the Gia Long Emperor (Nguyễn Phúc Ánh) when differentiating between Khmer and Vietnamese.<ref name="Wook2004"/> Minh Mang implemented an acculturation integration policy directed at minority non-Vietnamese peoples.<ref name="Wook2004 2"/> Thanh nhân 清人 or Đường nhân 唐人 were used to refer to ethnic Chinese by the Vietnamese while Vietnamese called themselves as Hán dân 漢民 and Hán nhân 漢人 in Vietnam during the 1800s under Nguyễn rule.<ref name="Wook2004 3"/>

Chinese style clothing was forced on Vietnamese people by the Nguyễn.<ref name="Woodside1971 3">{{cite book|author=Alexander Woodside|title=Vietnam and the Chinese Model: A Comparative Study of Vietnamese and Chinese Government in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0LgSI9UQNpwC&q=vietnamese+skirt+trousers+tunics&pg=PA134|year=1971|publisher=Harvard Univ Asia Center|isbn=978-0-674-93721-5|pages=134–}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Globalization: A View by Vietnamese Consumers Through Wedding Windows|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4bmbP5Pg5jAC&q=vietnamese+skirt+trousers+tunics&pg=PA34|year=2008|isbn=978-0-549-68091-8|pages=34–|last1=Nguyen|first1=Thuc-Doan T.|publisher=University of Utah}}{{Dead link|date=June 2024 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://angelasancartier.net/ao-dai-vietnams-national-dress |title=Vietnam's National Dress |work=angelasancartier.net |access-date=2019-02-02 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121182241/http://angelasancartier.net/ao-dai-vietnams-national-dress |archive-date=21 January 2016 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=Ashley Nguyen |url=http://beyondvictoriana.com/2010/03/14/beyond-victoriana-18-transcultural-tradition-of-the-vietnamese-ao-dai/ |title=#18 Transcultural Tradition of the Vietnamese Ao Dai |work=Beyond Victoriana |date=14 March 2010 |access-date=2019-02-02 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100323122205/http://beyondvictoriana.com/2010/03/14/beyond-victoriana-18-transcultural-tradition-of-the-vietnamese-ao-dai/ |archive-date=23 March 2010 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Marie |first=Ann |url=http://fashion-history.lovetoknow.com/clothing-types-styles/ao-dai |title=Ao Dai |work=Fashion-history.lovetoknow.com |date=4 October 2013 |access-date=2019-02-02 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160204032753/http://fashion-history.lovetoknow.com/clothing-types-styles/ao-dai |archive-date=4 February 2016 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tor.com/2010/10/20/ao-dai-and-i-steampunk-essay/ |title=The Ao Dai and I: A Personal Essay on Cultural Identity and Steampunk |work=Tor.com |date=20 October 2010 |access-date=2019-02-02 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160307004314/http://www.tor.com/2010/10/20/ao-dai-and-i-steampunk-essay/ |archive-date=7 March 2016 |url-status=live }}</ref> Trousers have been adopted by White H'mong.<ref>{{cite book|title=Vietnam|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0AI_AQAAIAAJ&q=vietnamese+skirt+trousers+tunics|year=2002|publisher=Michelin Travel Publications|page=200}}</ref> The trousers replaced the traditional skirts of the females of the White Hmong.<ref name="LeeTapp2010">{{cite book|author1=Gary Yia Lee|author2=Nicholas Tapp|title=Culture and Customs of the Hmong|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RZEFgIhfdJEC&q=vietnamese+skirt+trousers+tunics&pg=PA138|date=16 September 2010|publisher=ABC-CLIO|isbn=978-0-313-34527-2|pages=138–}}</ref> The tunics and trouser clothing of the Han Chinese on the Ming tradition was worn by the Vietnamese. The [[Áo dài]] was created when [[Tuck (sewing)|tucks]] which were close fitting and compact were added in the 1920s to this Chinese style.<ref name="Reid2015">{{cite book |author=[[Anthony Reid (academic)|Anthony Reid]] |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2TRPCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA285 |title=A History of Southeast Asia: Critical Crossroads |date=2 June 2015 |publisher=[[John Wiley & Sons]] |isbn=978-0-631-17961-0 |pages=285– |language=en}}</ref> Trousers and tunics on the Chinese pattern in 1774 were ordered by the [[Nguyễn Phúc Khoát]] to replace the sarong type Vietnamese clothing.<ref name="Reid1990">{{cite book |author=Anthony Reid|title=Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce, 1450-1680: The Lands Below the Winds|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lqyJViWXkVsC&q=vietnamese+skirt+trousers+tunics&pg=PA90|date=9 May 1990|publisher=Yale University Press|isbn=978-0-300-04750-9|pages=90–}}</ref> The Chinese clothing in the form of trousers and tunic were mandated by the Vietnamese Nguyen government. It was up to the 1920s in Vietnam's north area in isolated hamlets wear skirts were worn.<ref name="Rambo2005">{{cite book|author=A. Terry Rambo|title=Searching for Vietnam: Selected Writings on Vietnamese Culture and Society|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ippuAAAAMAAJ&q=In+their+place,+the+court+demanded+the+use+of+tunic+and+trousers+copied+from+the+then+current+fashion+in+the+Chinese+court.+...+the+wearing+of+skirts+their+use+continued+in+remote+villages+in+the+Northern+part+of+Vietnam+until+the+1920s.1+In+the+less+...|year=2005|publisher=Kyoto University Press|isbn=978-1-920901-05-9|page=64}}</ref> The Chinese Qin and Han dynasty state clothing was ordered to be adopted by Vietnamese military and bureaucrats since Vietnam under Triệu rule [[Triệu Đà]] (179 BC).<ref name="WernerWhitmore2012">{{cite book |author1=Jayne Werner |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZHD4Asj0FagC&q=vietnamese+skirt+trousers+tunics&pg=PA295 |title=Sources of Vietnamese Tradition |author2=John K. Whitmore |author3=George Dutton |date=21 August 2012 |publisher=[[Columbia University Press]] |isbn=978-0-231-51110-0 |pages=295– |language=en}}</ref>

Chinese influence waned as French influence rose in the 19th century, and Vietnam eventually abolished the [[Imperial examination]]s and stopped using [[Chữ Hán]] and the related [[Chữ Nôm]] script in the 20th century in official.

=== Japan ===
In [[Japan]], an ambivalent tone was set early in its relationship with China. [[Prince Shōtoku|Shōtoku Taishi]] (574–622), Prince Regent of Japan, is famous for having sent a letter to the Emperor of China starting with the words: "The Emperor of the land where the sun rises sends a letter to the Emperor of the land where the sun sets to ask if you are healthy" (日出處天子致書日沒處天子無恙云云). This is commonly believed as the origin of the name [[Nihon]] (source of the sun), although the actual characters for Nihon (日本) were not used.

Not long after this, however, Japan remodeled its entire state and administrative apparatus on the Chinese system under the [[Taika Reform]] (645), the beginning of a period of [[Chinese culture|Chinese influence]] on many aspects of [[Japanese culture]] until [[Imperial Japanese embassies to China]] were abolished in 894.

In 1401, during the [[Muromachi period]] (室町時代), the ''[[shōgun]]'' [[Ashikaga Yoshimitsu|Yoshimitsu]] (足利義満) restarted the lapsed tribute system (1401), describing himself in a letter to the Chinese Emperor as "Your subject, the King of Japan" while also a subject of the Japanese Emperor. The benefit of the tribute system was a profitable trade. The trade was called ''Kangō''<ref name="kango"/> trade (means tally trade<ref name="kango">{{Cite book|page=81 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dBlyAAAAMAAJ&q=Kango+tally | title=Japan's Renaissance: The Politics of the Muromachi Bakufu | isbn=9780674472518 | last1=Grossberg | first1=Kenneth A. | year=1981 | publisher=Council on East Asian Studies, Harvard University }}</ref>) and Japanese products were traded for Chinese goods. This relationship ended with the last envoy of Japanese monk [[Sakugen Shūryō]] in 1551,<ref>Page 80, [https://books.google.com/books?id=6WQnNqhDNhAC&dq=Kango++1551&pg=PA80 Tanegashima] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160603224641/https://books.google.com/books?id=6WQnNqhDNhAC&pg=PA80&dq=Kango++1551 |date=3 June 2016 }}, Olof G. Lidin</ref><ref>Page 1232, [https://books.google.com/books?id=xrGAXH_ne4IC&dq=sakugen+shuryo&pg=PA1232 Flow cytometry and cell sorting] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200210204346/https://books.google.com/books?id=xrGAXH_ne4IC&pg=PA1232&dq=sakugen+shuryo&as_brr=3 |date=10 February 2020 }}, Andreas Radbruch</ref> which was [[Ashikaga Yoshiteru]]'s era, including a 20 years suspension by [[Ashikaga Yoshimochi]].{{Clarify|date=February 2009}} These embassies were sent to China on 19 occasions.

During the [[Mongols|Mongol]]-led Yuan dynasty of China, Japan thought of China as no longer a genuine Chinese land.<ref name="Japan">{{cite book|last1=Fang|first1=Weigui|title=Modern Notions of Civilization and Culture in China|year=2019|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HheJDwAAQBAJ&q=sojunghwa+japan&pg=PA31|page=31|publisher=Springer |isbn=9789811335587}}</ref> Subsequently, Japan often used the names "China" and "[[Huaxia]]" to refer to itself.<ref name="Japan"/>

In the years 1592–1593, [[Toyotomi Hideyoshi]], having unified Japan, tried to [[Japanese invasions of Korea (1592–1598)|conquer Korea]] as a prelude to conquering Ming China. The attempt to conquer "[[all under heaven]]" (itself a sinocentric concept identifying China as "the world") ended in failure.

Japanese responses to Sinocentric concepts have not always been so straightforward. The [[Mongol invasions of Japan|Mongol invasions]] in 1274 and 1281 evoked a national consciousness of the role of the [[kamikaze]] (神風) in defeating the enemy. Less than fifty years later (1339–43), [[Kitabatake Chikafusa]] wrote the [[Jinnō Shōtōki]] (神皇正統記, 'Chronicle of the Direct Descent of the Divine Sovereigns') emphasizing the divine descent of the imperial line. The Jinnō Shōtōki provided a [[Shinto]] view of history stressing the divine nature of Japan and its spiritual supremacy over China and India.

In the [[Edo period|Tokugawa]] era, the study of [[Kokugaku]] ({{lang|ja|国学}}) arose as an attempt to reconstruct and recover the authentic native roots of Japanese culture, particularly Shinto, excluding later elements borrowed from China. In 1657, [[Tokugawa Mitsukuni]] established the [[Mitogaku|Mito School]], which was charged with writing a history of Japan as a perfect exemplar of a "nation" under Confucian thought, with the emphasis on unified rule by the emperors and respect for the imperial court and Shinto deities.

In an ironic affirmation of the spirit of Sinocentrism, claims were even heard that the Japanese, not the Chinese, were the legitimate heirs of Chinese culture. Reasons included that the Imperial House of Japan never died out comparing to the rise and fall of Chinese monarchs in the past, and that Japan was free of barbarism like Qing dynasty's forced adoption of Manchu queue and clothing on Han Chinese after 1644. Combined with Shinto, came the concept of "Shinkoku/the Divine Kingdom ({{lang|ja|神國}}). In the early Edo period, [[neo-ism|neo-Confucianist]] [[Yamaga Sokō]] asserted that Japan was superior to China in [[Confucian]] terms and more deserving of the name "''Chūgoku''". Other scholars picked this up, notably [[Aizawa Seishisai]], an adherent of the Mito School, in his political tract ''Shinron'' (新論 New Theses) in 1825.

As a country that had much to gain by eclipsing Chinese power in East Asia, Japan in more recent times has perhaps been most ardent in identifying and demolishing what it dismissively calls ''Chūka shisō'' (中華思想), loosely meaning "''[[Zhonghua minzu|Zhonghua]]'' ideology". One manifestation of Japanese resistance to Sinocentrism was the insistence for many years in the early 20th century on using the name ''[[Shina (word)|Shina]]'' ({{lang|zh|支那}}) for China, based on the Western word 'China', in preference to ''Chūgoku'' (中国 Central Country) advocated by the Chinese themselves.{{citation needed|date=November 2020}}

=== Burma ===
Unlike East Asian states, which communicated in written Chinese, [[Myanmar|Burma]] used a different written language in its communications with China. While China consistently regarded Burma as a vassal, Burmese records indicate that Burma considered itself as China's equal. Under the Burmese interpretation, Burma was the "younger brother" and China was the "elder brother".<ref>{{cite web |author=Laichen Sun |title=Suzerain and Vassal, or Elder and Younger Brothers: The Nature of the Sino-Burmese Historical Relationship |url=http://www.aasianst.org/absts/1997abst/seasia/sea43.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090217142314/http://www.aasianst.org/absts/1997abst/seasia/sea43.htm |archive-date=17 February 2009 |access-date=2006-01-03 |website=[[Association for Asian Studies]] |publication-place=[[University of Michigan]]}}</ref>

=== Thailand ===
[[Thailand]] was subordinate to China as a tributary state from the Sui dynasty until the [[Taiping Rebellion]] of the late Qing dynasty in the mid-19th century.<ref name=":1" /> The [[Sukhothai Kingdom]] established official relations with the Yuan dynasty during the reign of King [[Ram Khamhaeng]].<ref>{{cite book|last1=Chinvanno|first1=Anuson|title=Thailand's Policies towards China, 1949–54|publisher=Springer|isbn=9781349124305|page=24|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0vywCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA24|access-date=19 July 2016|language=en|date=18 June 1992|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170117062318/https://books.google.com/books?id=0vywCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA24|archive-date=17 January 2017|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Wei Yuan]], the 19th century Chinese scholar, considered Thailand to be the strongest and most loyal of China's Southeast Asian tributaries, citing the time when Thailand offered to directly attack Japan to divert the Japanese in their planned [[Japanese invasions of Korea (1592–98)|invasions of Korea]] and the Asian mainland, as well as other acts of loyalty to the Ming dynasty.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Leonard |first1=Jane Kate |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wQCm-bequYgC&pg=PA137 |title=Wei Yuan and China's Rediscovery of the Maritime World |publisher=[[Harvard University Asia Center]] |year=1984 |isbn=9780674948556 |pages=137–138 |language=en |access-date=19 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170117024026/https://books.google.com/books?id=wQCm-bequYgC&pg=PA137 |archive-date=17 January 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref> Thailand was welcoming and open to Chinese immigrants, who dominated commerce and trade, and achieved high positions in the government.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Gambe|first1=Annabelle R.|title=Overseas Chinese Entrepreneurship and Capitalist Development in Southeast Asia|publisher=LIT Verlag Münster|isbn=9783825843861|pages=100–101|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZUfNRG8IR44C&pg=PA101|access-date=19 July 2016|language=en|year=2000|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200216083701/https://books.google.com/books?id=ZUfNRG8IR44C&pg=PA101|archive-date=16 February 2020|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Sri Lanka ===
{{main|Ming–Kotte War}}
The last Sri Lankan kingdom, the [[Kingdom of Kandy]] (1469–1815), did not establish any significant relationships with imperial China. However, the preceding [[Kingdom of Kotte|Kotte kingdom]] (1412–1597) had significant interactions with Ming China. [[Parakramabahu VI of Kotte]], the founder of Kotte, established a significant alliance with Ming China during his reign, resulting in noteworthy political and economic consequences for the region. This alliance led to the removal of [[Vira Alakesvara of Gampola]] from the throne in favor of Parakramabahu VI, with documented details found in Chinese records.<ref name="southasiajournal.net">[http://southasiajournal.net/china-sri-lanka-two-millennia-of-mutually-enriching-relations/ ''China–Sri Lanka: Two Millennia of Mutually Enriching Relations'']</ref>

Historical accounts reveal that Parakramabahu VI's legitimacy was fortified through a selection process at the Ming court. He was nominated by the [[Yongle Emperor|Yongle Ming emperor]] and subsequently installed into power by Admiral Zheng He. This transition was ensured by the commanding presence of Zheng He's formidable fleet.<ref name="southasiajournal.net"/> This collaboration marked the beginning of an era characterized by increased economic interaction between the Ming dynasty and the Kotte kingdom. In order to strengthen these relations, Parakramabahu VI initiated several diplomatic missions, totaling at least five, to China. These missions aimed to affirm the cessation of sea piracy within the Sea of Kotte.<ref name="southasiajournal.net"/>

A notable legacy of Parakramabahu VI's reign is attributed to Admiral Zheng He, who made a lasting impact on Sri Lanka. This is exemplified by the installation of the Galle Trilingual inscription, serving as an artifact that attests to the interactions between the two nations during this historical period.<ref name="southasiajournal.net"/>
Sri Lanka, like Japan, was considered ''yuanyi'' (remote foreigners; 遠夷) in ''jueyu'' (remote territories; 絕域) under the [[Imperial Chinese Tributary System]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Lung |first1=Rachel |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Wa5xAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA44 |title=Interpreters in Early Imperial China - Rachel Lung - Google Books |date=7 September 2011 |publisher=[[John Benjamins Publishing]] |isbn=9789027284181 |pages=44 |language=en |access-date=2019-02-02 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180416200938/https://books.google.com.au/books?id=Wa5xAAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover |archive-date=16 April 2018 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=":3">[[Stephen R. Platt]], ''Imperial Twilight: the Opium War and the End of China's Last Golden Age'' (NY: [[Knopf]], 2018), 166-73. {{ISBN|9780307961730}}</ref>

=== Europe ===
One of the most historically well-known official encounter between Sinocentric attitudes and [[Europe]]ans was the [[Macartney Embassy]] of 1792–93, which sought to establish a permanent [[Kingdom of Great Britain|British]] presence in [[Beijing|Peking]] and establish official trade relations.<ref>Stephen R. Platt, ''Imperial Twilight: the Opium War and the End of China's Last Golden Age'' (NY: Knopf, 2018), 166-73. {{ISBN|9780307961730}}</ref> The rejection of the Chinese Emperor to the British overtures and the British refusal to [[kowtow]] to the Emperor has passed into legend in British and Chinese folklore. In response to the British request to recognise Macartney as official [[ambassador]], the Emperor wrote:<ref name=":3" />

<blockquote>The Celestial Empire, ruling all within the four seas, simply concentrates on carrying out the affairs of Government properly&nbsp;... We have never valued ingenious articles, nor do we have the slightest need of your country's manufactures, therefore O King, as regards to your request to send someone to remain at the capital, which it is not in harmony with the regulations of the Celestial Empire&nbsp;– we also feel very much that it is of no advantage to your country.</blockquote>

== Cultural Sinocentrism ==
{{Conservatism in China|Themes}}
In a cultural sense, Sinocentrism can refer to the tendency among both Chinese and foreigners to regard the [[culture of China]] as more ancient than or superior to other cultures. This often involves regarding neighboring countries as mere cultural offshoots of China. The geographical dimension of traditional Sinocentrism was highlighted by Chinese reactions to the publication of the first world map by the [[Society of Jesus|Jesuit]] [[missionary]] [[Matteo Ricci]] (1552–1610):
<blockquote>Lately Matteo Ricci utilized some false teachings to fool people, and scholars unanimously believed him...The Map of the World which he made contains elements of the fabulous and mysterious, and is a down right attempt to deceive people on things which they personally cannot go to verify for themselves...We need not discuss other points, but just take for example the position of China on the map. He puts it not in the center but slightly to the West and inclined to the north. This is altogether far from the truth, for China should be in the [[Middle Kingdom (China)|center of the world]], which we can prove by the single fact that we can see the [[North Star]] resting at the zenith of the heaven at midnight.<ref name=":0" /><ref>Wei Chün, On Ricci's Fallacies to Deceive the World (Li shuo huang-t'ang huo-shih p'ien), quoted in: George H. C. Wong, “China's Opposition to Western Science during Late Ming and Early Ch'ing”, ''Isis'', Vol. 54, No. 1. (Mar., 1963), pp. 29-49 (44)</ref></blockquote>

In the late Ming and Qing dynasties, there was a belief in Chinese cultural circles that knowledge entering China from the West had already existed in China in the past. This trend of thought was known in Chinese as ''xi xue zhong yuan'' ({{Zh|c={{linktext|西學|中|源}}|s=|t=|l=Western knowledge has Chinese origins|p=Xīxué Zhōng yuán}}). ''Xi xue zhong yuan'' was a way to not only enhance the prestige of ancient Chinese learning, but also that of [[Western learning]] and make it more acceptable to the Chinese at that time.<ref name=":3" />

One notable example was ''[[Chouren Zhuan]]'' ({{Zh|c={{linktext|疇人|傳}}|s=|t=|p=Chóurén zhuàn|l=Biographies of Astronomers and Mathematicians}}), a book by the Qing dynasty scholar [[Ruan Yuan]] which adopted the point of view that some Western sciences had an ancient Chinese origin. Scholars such as Ruan saw astronomy and mathematics as a key to deciphering the ancient classics. Until the [[First Sino-Japanese War|Sino-Japanese War]], some intellectuals believed that some of the sciences and technologies coming from Europe were actually lost ancient Chinese knowledge.  The Chinese have abandoned the idea of ''xi xue zhong yuan'' since the early 20th century.<ref name=":3" />

Cultural Sinocentrism was the political and cultural core of the region: traditional Chinese language and [[Chinese characters|writing system]], ideological frames of the [[Confucianism|Confucian]] social and familial order; legal and administrative systems; [[Buddhism]] and the art of historiography were used in [[Mainland China|China]], the [[Korean Peninsula|Korean peninsula]] ([[Korean Confucianism]]) and also [[Vietnam]].<ref name=":0">"... Cultural Sinocentrism was the basso ostinato of East Asia for more than a millennium: the classical Chinese language and writing system; ideological frames of the Confucian social and familial order; legal and administrative systems; Buddhism, which was transmitted to Korea, Vietnam, and China via Chinese translations of canonical texts and Chinese versions of Buddhist prac- tice; and the art of historiography itself" The Oxford History of Historical Writing. Volume 3. Jose Rabasa, Masayuki Sato, Edoardo Tortarolo, Daniel Woolf - 1400-1800, page 2.</ref>

=== Indigenous criticism ===

Followers of [[Chinese Buddhism]] were some of the fiercest critics of Sinocentrism, since they followed a [[religion]] that originated in [[India]], rather than China. The monk [[Zhiyi]] (538–597 CE) referred to China as "Zhendan" ({{Zh|c={{linktext|震旦}}|s=|t=|p=Zhèndàn|labels=no}}), rather than by any [[Names of China|epithet for China]] that emphasized China's centrality, such as [[Names of China#Zhongguo|Zhōngguó]] (the modern name of China, {{Zh|c=|s=中国|t={{linktext|中國}}|labels=no|p=Zhōngguó|first=t}}) or [[Zhonghua minzu|Zhonghua]] ({{Zh|c=|s=中华|t={{linktext|中華}} |first=t|labels=no|p=Zhōnghuá}}). "Zhendan" originated in a transcription of the [[Sanskrit]] word for China, {{Langx|sa|चीनस्थान| translit=cīnasthāna |label=none}}. Another anti-Sinocentric name for China used by Buddhists was "country of the [[Han Chinese|Han]]" ({{Zh|c=|s=汉国|t={{linktext|漢國}}|p=Hàn-guó|labels=no|first=t}}) or "region of the Han".<ref>{{cite book|title=Ethnic Identity in Tang China|first=Marc |last=Abramson |publisher=University of Pennsylvania Press|year=2011|page=76}}</ref> Reacting to an insecurity against [[Chinese folk religion|China's indigenous religions]] of Confucianism and [[Daoism]], Buddhists in China asserted{{When|date=December 2018}} that [[Confucius]] and [[Yan Hui (disciple of Confucius)|Yan Hui]] were [[avatar]]s of the Buddha, and that Confucianism was merely an offshoot of Buddhism.  When Buddhists had influence in the court, such as in the minority-led [[Yuan dynasty]], they successfully persuaded the imperial governments to censor and destroy [[Daozang|Daoist texts]]. They especially hated the ''[[Huahujing]]'', which made the opposite argument to that of the Buddhists; that Buddhism was an offshoot of Daoism.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|encyclopedia=The Encyclopedia of Taoism|editor1-first=Fabrizio|editor1-last=Pregadio|publisher=Psychology Press|year=2004|title=Huahu jing|page=494}}</ref>

[[Liu Ji (14th century)|Liu Ji]], one of the key advisors of the Ming-dynasty founder [[Hongwu Emperor|Zhu Yuanzhang]], generally supported the idea that while the Chinese and the non-Chinese are different, they are actually [[Social equality|equal]]. Liu was therefore arguing against the idea that the Chinese were and are superior to other people.<ref>Zhou Songfang, "Lun Liu Ji de Yimin Xintai" (On Liu Ji's Mentality as a Dweller of Subjugated Empire) in ''Xueshu Yanjiu'' no.4 (2005), 112-117.</ref>

Culturally, one of the most famous attacks on Sinocentrism and its associated beliefs was made by the author [[Lu Xun]] in ''[[The True Story of Ah Q]]'', in which the protagonist is humiliated and defeated; satirizing the ridiculous way in which he claimed "spiritual victories" in spite of this.<ref>Lu Xun [鲁迅] (1981), Lu Xun Quanji (鲁迅全集, Collected Works of Lu Xun), 16 volumes, Renmin Chubanshe, Beijing</ref>

== Today ==
The influence of the Sinocentric model of political relations and Sinocentric belief in cultural superiority (especially against the West) declined in the 19th century. The Sinocentric ideology suffered a further blow when [[Empire of Japan|Imperial Japan]], having undergone the [[Meiji Restoration]], defeated China in the First Sino-Japanese War. As a result, China adopted the [[Westphalian system]] of equal independent states.<ref name=":3" />

In modern [[Foreign policy of China|Chinese foreign policy]], the People's Republic of China has repeatedly stated that it will never seek to establish [[hegemony]] beyond its borders ({{Zh|c=永不称霸|s=|t=}}).<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.chinanews.com/gn/2011/06-11/3104748.shtml|title=胡锦涛：中国坚持和平发展,永不称霸永不搞扩张|publisher=China News|language=zh|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140717205131/http://www.chinanews.com/gn/2011/06-11/3104748.shtml|archive-date=17 July 2014|url-status=live}}</ref>  However, some historians, such as John Friend and Bradley Thayer believe there are individuals in the Chinese government who doggedly hold onto Sinocentric beliefs.<ref name="FriendThayer2018">{{cite book |author1=John M. Friend |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dS56DwAAQBAJ |title=How China Sees the World: Han-Centrism and the Balance of Power in International Politics |author2=Bradley A. Thayer |date=1 November 2018 |publisher=[[University of Nebraska Press]] |isbn=978-1-64012-137-9 |language=en |access-date=7 June 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200303120915/https://books.google.com/books?id=dS56DwAAQBAJ |archive-date=3 March 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> [[Chinese Communist Party]] (CCP) [[General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party|general secretary]] [[Xi Jinping]] has called for a 'pan-Asian security concept', which has been compared to [[Imperial Japan]] by commentators.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Hanson |first1=Victor Davis |title=China's New Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere |url=https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/11/23/chinas_new_greater_east_asia_co-prosperity_sphere_135602.html |accessdate=21 July 2020 |website=[[RealClearPolitics]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Chin |first1=Curtis |author-link=Curtis S. Chin |date=14 July 2014 |title=Xi Jinping's 'Asia for Asians' mantra evokes imperial Japan |url=https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1553414/xi-jinpings-asia-asians-mantra-evokes-imperial-japan |accessdate=21 July 2020 |website=[[South China Morning Post]]}}</ref>

== Related concepts ==
Successive peoples from the north, such as the [[Xianbei]], [[Jurchen people|Jurchens]], [[Mongols]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/bios/b3khankublai.htm |title=Kublai Khan |publisher=Hyperhistory.net |date=21 September 1999 |access-date=2011-04-11 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110607113832/http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/bios/b3khankublai.htm |archive-date=7 June 2011 }}</ref> or [[Manchu people|Manchus]], were quite willing to place themselves at the center of the model, although they were not always successful. The Xianbei empires during the [[Northern and Southern dynasties]], for example, regarded the [[Han Chinese|Han]] regimes of southern China as "barbarians" because they refused to submit to Xianbei rule. Similarly, the Manchu-led [[Qing dynasty]] regarded the Westerners they encountered in the mid-19th century as "barbarians" due to their "uncouth manners".<ref name=":3" />

Sinocentrism is not synonymous with [[Chinese nationalism]]. The successive dynasties in [[History of China|China's history]] were Sinocentric in the sense that {{Citation needed span|text=they regarded Chinese civilization to be universal in its reach and application.|date=December 2018|reason=}}  Chinese nationalism, in contrast, is a more modern concept ([[nationalism]]) focused primarily on the idea of a unified, cohesive, and powerful Chinese [[nation state]], as one of the nations of the world.{{citation needed|date=November 2020}}

== See also ==
{{Portal|China|History|Asia|Politics}}
* [[Adoption of Chinese literary culture]]
* [[Afrocentrism]]
* [[Chinese Century]]
* [[Chinese exceptionalism]]
* [[Chinese expansionism]]
* [[Chinese imperialism]]
* [[Emperor at home, king abroad]]
* [[Five thousand years of Chinese civilization]]
* [[Indocentrism]]
* [[Khan of Heaven]]
* ''[[Language Atlas of China]]''
* [[List of recipients of tribute from China]]
* [[List of tributary states of China]]
* [[Little China (ideology)]]
* ''[[Pax Sinica]]''
* [[Secession in China]]
* [[Sinology]]
* [[Eurocentrism]]

== References ==
=== Citations ===
{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}

=== Sources ===
{{refbegin}}
* Kang, David C. (2010). ''East Asia Before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute.'' New York : Columbia University Press. {{ISBN|9780231153188}}/{{ISBN|9780231526746}}; [https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/562768984 OCLC 562768984]
* [[Gideon Shelach-Lavi|Shelach, Gideon]] (1999). [https://books.google.com/books?id=n_-8NnuSwC8C Leadership Strategies, Economic Activity, and Interregional Interaction'']'': Social Complexity in Northeast China''. Springer. {{ISBN|0-306-46090-4}}, {{ISBN|978-0-306-46090-6}}
* [[Lothar von Falkenhausen|von Falkenhausen, Lothar]]. "The Waning of the Bronze Age: Material Culture and Social Developments, 770&ndash;481 B.C." In Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy (editors), [https://books.google.com/books?id=cHA7Ey0-pbEC ''The Cambridge History of Ancient China'']'': From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C.'', pp.&nbsp;450–544. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. {{ISBN|0-521-47030-7}}/{{ISBN|978-0-521-47030-8}}.
{{refend}}

==External links==
{{Wiktionary|Sinocentrism}}
{{Library resources box}}

*[https://web.archive.org/web/20060104202133/http://mcel.pacificu.edu/easpac/2005/tzuchiu.php3 Public Secrets: Geopolitical Aesthetics in Zhang Yimou's Hero]
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20050204140451/https://vwam.com/vets/history/vietnam.html Origin of Vietnam name] (archived February 5, 2005)
*{{cite web |last1=Arrighi |first1=Giovanni |title=The Rise of East Asia and the Withering Away of the Interstate System |url=http://jwsr.ucr.edu/archive/vol2/v2_nf.php |publisher=Binghamton University (Department of Sociology) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090217145944/http://jwsr.ucr.edu/archive/vol2/v2_nf.php |archive-date=February 17, 2009 |date=January 15, 1997}}<
*[http://www.rieti.go.jp/en/china/03080101.html Sinocentrism or Paranoia?]
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20090217142314/http://www.aasianst.org/absts/1997abst/seasia/sea43.htm Suzerain and Vassal, or Elder and Younger Brothers: The Nature of the Sino-Burmese Historical Relationship]

{{Ethnocentrism}}
{{Historiography}}
{{Authority control}}
[[Category:Chinese nationalism]]
[[Category:Culture of East Asia]]
[[Category:Ethnocentrism]]
[[Category:Asiacentrism]]
[[Category:Geocultural perspectives]]
[[Category:Han Chinese]]
[[Category:Political terminology]]